DETAILED ACTION
This is the first Office action drafted on the merits of the subject application. Claims 1-7 are pending. Claims 1-7 are rejected as cited below.
Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status
The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
Specification
The title of the invention is not descriptive. A new title is required that is clearly indicative of the invention to which the claims are directed. The following title is suggested: “DRIVER ASSISTANT APPARATUS, VEHICLE, AND METHOD FOR CASTING LASER PATTERN ON ROADWAY EDGE.”
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
The following is a quotation of the appropriate paragraphs of 35 U.S.C. 102 that form the basis for the rejections under this section made in this Office action:
A person shall be entitled to a patent unless –
(a)(2) the claimed invention was described in a patent issued under section 151, or in an application for patent published or deemed published under section 122(b), in which the patent or application, as the case may be, names another inventor and was effectively filed before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claims 1, and 4-7 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)2 as being anticipated by GUT (US Pub. 2024/0051455 A1; hereafter GUT).
Regarding claim 1, GUT teaches:
A driver assistant apparatus comprising a controller (At least ¶ [0025] “computing unit”) configured to provide driver assistance,
the controller is configured to:
derive, based on a position of a road surface shape estimation sign disposed at a position away from a road surface of a roadway (road signs 10, warning beacons 11, puddles 5”. A puddle may indicate the shape of a road based on reflections.), a casting position on the road surface (At least ¶ [0030] “individual regions 7 of the light pattern 3, preferably the lower light field 3.2, can be excluded … Camera images of the scene shown in the FIGURE are generated and evaluated to calculate the regions 7 to be excluded, for example” Excluding individual region 7 from the greater 3.2 region is analogous to deriving a casting position on a road surface.), the position of the road surface shape estimation sign being detected by a sensor (At least ¶ [0021] “Sensor signals additionally emitted by an ultrasound or radar system can thus also be combined with the sensor data of the vehicle camera and the laser scanner in addition to detect the road condition.”); and
control casting of visible laser light based on the derived casting position (At least ¶ [0028] “The headlights 9 emit light to generate a light pattern 3. The light pattern 3 consists of a top light field 3.1 and a bottom light field 3.2, the top light field 3.1 corresponding to high beam and the bottom light field 3.2 to low beam. In the FIGURE, the headlights 9 only project light to form the bottom light field 3.2.” and ¶ [0024] “A laser could also be used as a lighting means.”).
Regarding claim 4, GUT teaches:
The driver assistant apparatus according to claim 1, wherein
the controller is configured to control the casting of the visible laser light to cast linear or mesh-shaped light (At least ¶ [0024] “Using a matrix headlight, a direction in which the light pattern is cast in the environment can be particularly easily adjusted.” Additionally, see the Figure which shows a mesh-shaped region 3.2.).
Regarding claim 5, GUT teaches:
The driver assistant apparatus according to claim 1, wherein
the controller is configured to control one or more of a casting shape, a casting range, and a casting color of the visible laser light (At least ¶ [0003] “automatically adjust a lighting range and/or brightness regulation of the light emitted by the lighting device depending on sensor signals.” and ¶ [0030] “individual regions 7 of the light pattern 3, preferably the lower light field 3.2, can be excluded.” Excluding region 7 from region 3.2 is an example or controlling the shape of the light beam.), based on positional relation between the casting position and a vehicle to which the driver assistance is provided by the driver assistant apparatus, or magnitude of a distance from the casting position to the vehicle to which the driver assistance is provided by the driver assistant apparatus (At least ¶ [0030] “The further traffic participants 6 and the puddles 5 can thus be recognized, and spatial relationships between the traffic participants 6, the puddles 5 and the vehicle 8 or the headlights 9 can be calculated, which enables the regions 7 to be adaptively excluded.” Calculating the spatial relationship between the vehicle 8 and the puddle 5 in order to exclude region 7 is an example of controlling the shape of the light beam based on a positional relationship between the casting position and a vehicle.).
Claim 6 recites a vehicle which executes the limitations of claim 1, thus is rejected on the same basis. Additionally, GUT teaches a vehicle (vehicle 8).
Claim 7 recites a method which is performed by the apparatus detailed in claim 1, thus is rejected on the same basis.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 103 which forms the basis for all obviousness rejections set forth in this Office action:
A patent for a claimed invention may not be obtained, notwithstanding that the claimed invention is not identically disclosed as set forth in section 102, if the differences between the claimed invention and the prior art are such that the claimed invention as a whole would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which the claimed invention pertains. Patentability shall not be negated by the manner in which the invention was made.
The factual inquiries for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized as follows:
1. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art.
2. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue.
3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art.
4. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness.
Claims 2-3 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over GUT, in view of OTA et al. (US Pub. 2010/0250064 A1; hereafter OTA).
OTA was cited in the IDS dated 02/14/2025.
Regarding claim 2, GUT teaches The driver assistant apparatus according to claim 1.
GUT does not teach:
wherein
the road surface shape estimation sign comprises an arrow blade disposed above the road surface, and
the controller is configured to assume, as the casting position, a linear position including an intersection of a vertical line of the arrow blade and the road surface.
However, OTA, within the same field of endeavor, teaches:
wherein
the road surface shape estimation sign comprises an arrow blade disposed above the road surface (At least ¶ [0086] “a delineator which clearly indicates a shoulder of a road such as features of an arrow or a snow-pole installed on the shoulder of road is detected and this may estimate the road shape.”), and
the controller is configured to assume, as the casting position, a linear position including an intersection of a vertical line of the arrow blade and the road surface (At least ¶ [0104] “On the other hand, in a case where the white line is not detected but the structural object of the shoulder of the road is detected, the flow of step S21.fwdarw.step S23.fwdarw.step S24 is advanced. Thus, the line of shoulder of road is set in the form connecting the structural objects on the shoulder of the road. If the road shape is not viewed from the line of shoulder of road”).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified GUT with OTA. This modification would have been obvious as both GUT and OTA contain subject matter within the same field of endeavor (vehicle vision) and GUT ¶ [0009] notes that “…it is sometimes more difficult for a person driving a vehicle to recognize relevant road markings, which makes it more difficult for the person driving the vehicle to remain within their lane...”. Introducing OTA to the GUT system may help a driver of a vehicle remain in their lane. One of ordinary skill in the art would recognize that a vehicle system detecting roadside edge markers (e.g. snow poles, arrows, etc.) would help a vehicle driver maintain awareness of the spatial position of the vehicle. This may lead to increased safety for drivers using the GUT system, as well as those proximate to the host vehicle.
Regarding claim 3, GUT teaches The driver assistant apparatus according to claim 1.
OTA further teaches:
wherein
the road surface shape estimation sign comprises a snow pole disposed on a roadside, a road shoulder, or a sidewalk (At least ¶ [0086] “a delineator which clearly indicates a shoulder of a road such as features of an arrow or a snow-pole installed on the shoulder of road is detected and this may estimate the road shape.”), and
the controller is configured to assume, as the casting position, a linear position including a spot shifted toward the roadway by a predetermined distance from an estimated spot as a grounding point of the snow pole (At least ¶ [0098] “control unit ECU calculates a lateral positional deviation between the white line and the detected structural object on the shoulder of the road and complements the white line from the structural object of the shoulder of the road.”).
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Jonathan E Reinert whose telephone number is (571)272-1260. The examiner can normally be reached Mon - Thurs 7AM - 5PM EST.
Examiner interviews are available via telephone, in-person, and video conferencing using a USPTO supplied web-based collaboration tool. To schedule an interview, applicant is encouraged to use the USPTO Automated Interview Request (AIR) at http://www.uspto.gov/interviewpractice.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, James J Lee can be reached at (571) 270-5965. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300.
Information regarding the status of published or unpublished applications may be obtained from Patent Center. Unpublished application information in Patent Center is available to registered users. To file and manage patent submissions in Patent Center, visit: https://patentcenter.uspto.gov. Visit https://www.uspto.gov/patents/apply/patent-center for more information about Patent Center and https://www.uspto.gov/patents/docx for information about filing in DOCX format. For additional questions, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000.
/J.E.R./Examiner, Art Unit 3668
/BRIAN P SWEENEY/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3668
