DETAILED ACTION
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 .
Priority
Acknowledgment is made of applicant’s claim for foreign priority under 35 U.S.C. 119 (a)-(d). The certified copy has been filed in parent Application No. CN202211067501.2, filed on 2022.09.01.
CLAIM INTERPRETATION
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(f): (FP 7.30.03)
(f) ELEMENT IN CLAIM FOR A COMBINATION.—An element in a claim for a combination may be expressed as a means or step for performing a specified function without the recital of structure, material, or acts in support thereof, and such claim shall be construed to cover the corresponding structure, material, or acts described in the specification and equivalents thereof.
The following is a quotation of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph:
An element in a claim for a combination may be expressed as a means or step for performing a specified function without the recital of structure, material, or acts in support thereof, and such claim shall be construed to cover the corresponding structure, material, or acts described in the specification and equivalents thereof.
The claims in this application are given their broadest reasonable interpretation using the plain meaning of the claim language in light of the specification as it would be understood by one of ordinary skill in the art. The broadest reasonable interpretation of a claim element (also commonly referred to as a claim limitation) is limited by the description in the specification when 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is invoked.
As explained in MPEP 2181, subsection I, claim limitations that meet the following three-prong test will be interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph:
(A) the claim limitation uses the term “means” or “step” or a term used as a substitute for “means” that is a generic placeholder (also called a nonce term or a non-structural term having no specific structural meaning) for performing the claimed function;
(B) the term “means” or “step” or the generic placeholder is modified by functional language, typically, but not always linked by the transition word “for” (e.g., “means for”) or another linking word or phrase, such as "configured to" or "so that"; and
(C) the term “means” or “step” or the generic placeholder is not modified by sufficient structure, material, or acts for performing the claimed function.
Use of the word “means” (or “step”) in a claim with functional language creates a rebuttable presumption that the claim limitation is to be treated in accordance with 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph. The presumption that the claim limitation is interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is rebutted when the claim limitation recites sufficient structure, material, or acts to entirely perform the recited function.
Absence of the word “means” (or “step”) in a claim creates a rebuttable presumption that the claim limitation is not to be treated in accordance with 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph. The presumption that the claim limitation is not interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is rebutted when the claim limitation recites function without reciting sufficient structure, material or acts to entirely perform the recited function.
Claim limitations in this application that use the word “means” (or “step”) are being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, except as otherwise indicated in an Office action. Conversely, claim limitations in this application that do not use the word “means” (or “step”) are not being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, except as otherwise indicated in an Office action. (FP 7.30.05)
Such claim limitation(s) is/are:
a distance detection unit in Claim 8, 20, 21; output unit in Claim 17, 18; image acquisition unit in Claim 19;
Because this/these claim limitation(s) is/are being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, it/they is/are being interpreted to cover the corresponding structure described in the specification as performing the claimed function, and equivalents thereof.
If applicant does not intend to have this/these limitation(s) interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, applicant may: (1) amend the claim limitation(s) to avoid it/them being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph (e.g., by reciting sufficient structure to perform the claimed function); or (2) present a sufficient showing that the claim limitation(s) recite(s) sufficient structure to perform the claimed function so as to avoid it/them being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph. (FP 7.30.06)
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.
Claim(s) 1-3, 6-8, 10, 13, 15-20, 22 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kido (US 20110046850 A1, hereinafter Kido).
Regarding Claim 1: Kido teaches A presentation control method for in-vehicle glass of a vehicle, wherein the presentation control method comprises: (Kido, Paragraph [0048], "display glass panel 40 that is capable of displaying an image on the overall window section is provided in all the window sections of the vehicle 1"; Paragraph [0101], "image data of the surroundings of the vehicle 1 is generated by the drawing processor 39 of the in-vehicle unit 90"),
obtaining a physical parameter associated with the vehicle (Kido, Paragraph [0054], "The millimeter wave radar 12 uses millimeter wave (electric wave having a frequency of 30 to 300 GHz) to detect a distance between the irradiation source that irradiates the millimeter wave (here, the vehicle 1) and the object, and a relative velocity of the vehicle 1 with respect to the object"),
determining content presented on the in-vehicle glass according to the physical parameter (Kido, Paragraph [0057], "the CPU 30 instructs the drawing processor 39 to generate image data based on the detection data. The drawing processor 39 reads the detection data from the RAM 34 and generates image data based on the detection data. An image represented by the image data is displayed on the display glass panel 40").
Kido provided sensor-based detection of physical parameters (distance, position, size, relative velocity) of objects around the vehicle and drawing processing that generates image data based on those parameters for display on window glass panels. Although Kido discusses the detection and image generation across separate portions, Kido also provides an integrated workflow in which the drawing processor consumes the detection data and outputs image content in real time. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was made to use the physical parameter (distance/position/velocity/estimated identity) from Kido's detecting unit as the basis for determining which image content the drawing processor renders on the display glass panel, in order to provide a driver-relevant representation of the surroundings, as discussed by Kido in Paragraph [0101].
Regarding Claim 2, Kido teaches the invention in Claim 1.
Kido further teaches wherein the presentation control method further comprises: changing the content presented on the in-vehicle glass when the physical parameter changes (Kido, Paragraph [0052], "In each component, various data later described is detected per microscopic time Δt"; Kido, Paragraph [0076], "estimated data for the profile (in other words, size) and position after a predetermined time of the detected object can be generated based on the data representing the relative velocity detected by the millimeter radar 12. When displaying the image of the object on the display glass panel 40, an image of the object based on the estimated data may be displayed").
Kido provides continuous re-detection of the physical parameters per microscopic time Δt and repeats the drawing instruction / drawing process loop (S310–S540) whenever new detection data is received. Although Kido does not use the express phrase "changing the content...when the physical parameter changes," Kido describes the drawing process being repeatedly executed and the image being re-generated from updated detection data, plus generation of estimated size/position data from the changing relative velocity. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was made to update/change the displayed image content on the display glass panel whenever the detected physical parameters (distance, position, velocity, identified object) change, in order to keep the displayed representation of the surroundings synchronized with the real-world state, as discussed by Kido in Paragraph [0006]
Regarding Claim 3, Kido teaches the invention in Claim 1.
Kido further teaches wherein the presentation control method further comprises: determining a presentation direction of the content according to the physical parameter, wherein the presentation direction includes one of a direction presenting to the outside of the vehicle and a direction presenting to the inside of the vehicle (Kido, Paragraph [0029], "the display device is capable of displaying information on both inside and outside faces of the vehicle and the display control device makes the display device display an image different from the image represented by the image data generated by the image generating device on the outside face of the display device"; Kido, Paragraph [0092], "a message notifying the surroundings that the vehicle 1 carries a baby, a message of gratitude when a path is cleared, etc. are displayed on the outside face of the display glass panel 40").
Kido provided a display glass panel capable of showing content on either the inside face (image of surroundings for the driver — direction presenting to the inside) or the outside face (message directed at surrounding vehicles/passers-by — direction presenting to the outside), with the outside-face message being invoked based on detected/instructed events (e.g., when a path is cleared, the vehicle detects the state). Although Kido does not use the phrase "presentation direction determined according to the physical parameter" literally, Kido discloses the direction selection as tied to the driving/interaction context. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was made to select between the inside-face and outside-face presentation directions based on the physical parameter (e.g., presence and identity of a target object detected by the detecting unit), in order to route the appropriate content (surroundings image versus courtesy/warning message) to the appropriate viewer, as discussed by Kido in Paragraph [0093].
Regarding Claim 6, Kido teaches the invention in Claim 1.
Kido further teaches the physical parameter includes at least one of: a distance between the vehicle and a target object; a target object being located inside or outside the vehicle; whether an engine of the vehicle is in a starting state or not; and whether there is a driver or a passenger sitting on a corresponding seat of the vehicle or not (Kido, Paragraph [0054], "The millimeter wave radar 12 uses millimeter wave... to detect a distance between the irradiation source that irradiates the millimeter wave (here, the vehicle 1) and the object").
Regarding Claim 7, Kido teaches the invention in Claim 1.
Kido further teaches obtaining a physical parameter associated with the vehicle further comprises determining the physical parameter by means of a sensor disposed on the vehicle (Kido, Paragraph [0047], "a detecting unit 80 of the in-vehicle image display apparatus 5 for detecting the state of the surroundings of the vehicle 1 is provided at a plurality of positions outside the body of the vehicle 1"; Kido, Paragraph [0052], "The detecting unit 80 includes an infrared sensor 10, a millimeter wave radar 12, an ultrasonic wave sensor 14, and a microphone 18").
Regarding Claim 8, Kido teaches the invention in Claim 1.
Kido further teaches obtaining a physical parameter associated with the vehicle further comprises: measuring the distance between a target object and the vehicle by means of a distance detection unit [[ determining the physical parameter by means of image recognition technology; determining the physical parameters by means of a pressure sensor disposed in a seat of the vehicle; or determining the distance between an electronic device associated with the vehicle and the vehicle by means of a processor disposed on a body of the vehicle ]] (Kido, Paragraph [0054], "The millimeter wave radar 12 uses millimeter wave... to detect a distance between the irradiation source that irradiates the millimeter wave (here, the vehicle 1) and the object, and a relative velocity of the vehicle 1 with respect to the object").
Regarding Claim 10, Kido teaches the invention in Claim 1.
Kido further teaches determining the physical parameter by means of image recognition technology comprises: identifying the target object by means of the image recognition technology (Kido, Paragraph [0073], "the drawing processor 39 estimates what the object is based on data of the material and volume of the object in addition to data of the profile and shape of the object. For example, it is estimated that the object is a human, a tree, or a vehicle"; Kido, Paragraph [0112], "Imaging data (in other words, detection data) representing an image taken by the CCD camera 16 is transmitted to the in-vehicle unit 90 to be stored in the RAM 34 of the in-vehicle unit 90. The drawing processor 39 adds coloring data to the imaging data (detection data)").
Kido provided a CCD camera acquiring image data of the surroundings and a drawing processor that compares object-attribute data (profile, shape, material, volume) against pre-stored reference data in ROM to determine which category (human, tree, vehicle) the detected object belongs to. Although Kido does not use the express phrase "image recognition technology," the CCD-camera-captured image data combined with the drawing processor's pattern-matching comparison against a stored database is functionally the same as image recognition of a target object. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was made to characterize Kido's CCD-image-based object-identification pipeline as image recognition technology and to use it to identify the target object, in order to obtain a colored, recognizable rendering of the object for display, as discussed by Kido in Paragraph [0074].
Regarding Claim 13, Kido teaches the invention in Claim 1.
Kido further teaches the content is associated with a target object (Kido, Paragraph [0075], "in case that the object is a movable body such as a human, a vehicle, etc., the image of the object is highlighted and colored on the display glass panel 40 so as to be easily recognized by the driver"; Kido, Paragraph [0074], "if it is determined that the object indicated by the generated data is a tree, color data is extracted from data for a tree stored in the ROM 32. By adding the extracted color data to the generated data of the object, it is possible to display a colored image of the object"; it is noted displayed image content (colored/highlighted rendering of the detected object) is directly associated with and represents the identified target object in the surroundings).
Kido provided image content that is generated per-object (colored image of a tree, highlighted image of a human/vehicle), with the content specifically tied to the identity/type of the object detected by the sensors. Although Kido does not use the verbatim phrase "content associated with a target object," the image displayed for each detected object is derived from and rendered based on that object's identified attributes. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was made to treat Kido’s per-object rendered image (highlighted moving body, colored tree) as content associated with the target object, in order to give the driver an easily recognizable representation of what the object is, as discussed by Kido in Paragraph [0028].
Regarding Claim 15, Kido teaches the invention in Claim 1.
Kido further teaches the content includes a picture or a video (Kido, Paragraph [0077], "a so-called computer graphic (CG) image of the state of the surroundings of the vehicle 1 is generated based on the detection data from the detecting unit 80"; Kido, Paragraph [0080], "by using the recording medium recording a movie and a live image, the movie and the live image can be displayed on the display glass panel 40").
Regarding Claim 16, it recites limitations similar in scope to the limitations of claim 1, but in a device. As shown in the rejection, Kido disclose the limitations of claims 1. Additionally, Kido discloses an device that maps to Paragraph [0051] (Paragraph [0051], "a CPU 30 that executes various processes"; “a ROM 32 that stores programs (BIOS), etc. for a starting process executed by the CPU 30 when starting the in-vehicle unit 90; a RAM 34 that is used as a storage area when the CPU 30 performs various processes”). Thus, Claim 16 is met by Kido according to the mapping presented in the rejection of claims 1, given the method corresponds to the device.
Regarding Claim 17, Kido teaches the invention in Claim 1.
Kido further teaches the presentation control device further comprises an output unit configured to output the content (Kido, Paragraph [0048], "display glass panel 40 that is capable of displaying an image on the overall window section is provided in all the window sections of the vehicle 1"; Kido, Paragraph [0058], "The input/output section 95 includes the aforementioned display glass panel 40").
Regarding Claim 18, Kido teaches the invention in Claim 1.
Kido further teaches the output unit includes a projector and/or a display screen (Kido, Paragraph [0106], "On the display glass panel 40 in a state of the screen display mode, an image is projected by a projector 45"; Kido, Paragraph [0048], "This display glass panel 40 is designed to be switched between a display mode and an ordinary mode. The display mode functions as a liquid crystal display and allows display of an image").
Regarding Claim 19, Kido teaches the invention in Claim 1.
Kido further teaches the presentation control device further comprises: an image acquisition unit configured to acquire a picture or a video associated with the target object (Kido, Paragraph [0111], "The in-vehicle image display apparatus 5 of the present third embodiment is different from that of the first embodiment in that a CCD camera 16 is used instead of the detecting unit 80"; Kido, Paragraph [0113], "the state of the actual surroundings is imaged by the CCD camera 16").
Regarding Claim 20, Kido teaches the invention in Claim 1.
Kido further teaches the presentation control device further comprises: a distance detection unit configured to measure the distance between the target object and the vehicle (Kido, Paragraph [0054], "The millimeter wave radar 12 uses millimeter wave... to detect a distance between the irradiation source that irradiates the millimeter wave (here, the vehicle 1) and the object").
Regarding Claim 22: Kido teaches A vehicle, wherein the vehicle comprises the presentation control device according to claim 16 (Kido, Paragraph [0047], "FIG. 1 is an appearance diagram showing an appearance of a vehicle 1 provided with an in-vehicle image display apparatus 5"; Paragraph [0050], "the in-vehicle image display apparatus 5 of the present embodiment is composed of the aforementioned detecting unit 80, in-vehicle unit 90 and an input/output section 95 including the display glass panel 40").
Regarding Claim 23, it recites limitations similar in scope to the limitations of claim 1 and Kido teaches all the limitations as of Claim 1. And Kido discloses these features can be implemented on a computer-readable storage medium (Kido, Paragraph [0051], "a hard disk (hereinafter, referred to as HDD) 36 that stores information therein; a reader 37 that reads information recorded on a recording medium such as a CD-ROM/RAM, a DVD-ROM/RAM, etc."; [0066], “it is determined firstly in S410 whether the drawing instructions have been received from the CPU 30… The drawing instructions are transmitted from the CPU by the step of S330 in FIG. 2. When it is determined in S410 that the drawing instructions have not been received, the step of S410 is again executed”).
Claim(s) 4, 5, 9, 11, 14, 21 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kido (US 20110046850 A1, hereinafter Kido) as applied to Claim 1, 16 above respectively and in view of Lindemann et al. (US 20180089859 A1, hereinafter Lindemann).
Regarding Claim 4, Kido teaches the invention in Claim 1.
Kido further teaches determining the presentation direction of the content according to the physical parameter further comprises: detecting a relative position between a target object and the vehicle (Kido, Paragraph [0055], "The ultrasonic wave sensor 14 irradiates ultrasonic wave to the surroundings. The ultrasonic wave sensor 14 measures the position, size, shape and volume of the object from reflection wave of the irradiated ultrasonic wave"), and [[determining the presentation direction of the content according to the relative position]].
But Kido does not explicitly disclose determining the presentation direction of the content according to the relative position.
However, Lindemann teaches detecting a relative position between a target object and the vehicle (Lindemann, Paragraph [0050], "Camera 35 will make one or more measurements of target 102 and transmit signals to telematics unit 30 which can be used to provide an accurate understanding of the target location"), and determining the presentation direction of the content according to the relative position (Lindemann, Paragraph [0050], "telematics unit 30 will then determine and select the window considered closest to target 102 (in certain instances, a portion of the window is further selected). At this point, telematics unit will operate projector and rotate it so as to exhibit the representative image on the window 11 determined closest to target 102").
Kido and Lindemann are analogous since both concern displaying images on vehicle windows based on detected surrounding conditions. Kido provides a way of detecting object positions with sensors and displaying images on inside/outside faces of window glass. Lindemann provides a way of choosing which specific window (direction) to display a representative image based on the detected target location. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention was made to incorporate target-location-based window selection taught by Lindemann into modified invention of Kido such that the presentation direction (which window / which face) is selected based on the detected relative position of the target. The motivation is to ensure the displayed content is in the line of sight of the intended viewer as discussed by Lindemann in Paragraph [0051].
Regarding Claim 5, the combination of Kido and Lindemann teaches the invention in Claim 1.
The combination further teaches wherein determining the presentation direction of the content according to the relative position further comprises: when the target object is located outside the vehicle, the content is presented in a first area of the in-vehicle glass to present the content to the outside of the vehicle (Kido, Paragraph [0092], "a message notifying the surroundings that the vehicle 1 carries a baby, a message of gratitude when a path is cleared, etc. are displayed on the outside face of the display glass panel 40"; Kido, Paragraph [0093], "By displaying a message to a driver of other vehicle in this manner, mutual communication is achieved"), or when the target object is located inside the vehicle, the content is presented in a second area of the in-vehicle glass to present the content to the inside of the vehicle, wherein the second area is different from the first area (Kido, Paragraph [0048], "The display glass panel 40 displays the image of the surroundings of the vehicle 1 on a face corresponding to the inside of the vehicle 1 <read on second area> in order to allow viewing from the inside of the vehicle 1"; Kido, Paragraph [0029], "the display device is capable of displaying information on both inside and outside <read on first area >faces of the vehicle and the display control device makes the display device display an image different from the image represented by the image data generated by the image generating device on the outside face of the display device").
Regarding Claim 9, Kido teaches the invention in Claim 1.
Kido does not explicitly disclose but Lindemann teaches the electronic device includes a remote key of the vehicle (Lindemann, Paragraph [0019], "One of the networked devices that can communicate with the telematics unit 30 is a mobile computing device 57, such as a smart phone... having two-way communication capabilities"; Lindemann, Paragraph [0022], "Through implementation of telematics unit 30, mobile device 57 may be configured to control vehicle devices, for example, mobile device 57 may project images via projector 33"; Lindemann, Paragraph [0021], "mobile computing device 57 and telematics unit 30 (i.e., via antenna 56) may pair or link one with another when within a wireless range"; it is noted since mobile computing device can be paired with the vehicle within a wireless range, it acts as a "remote key" function, which is a portable electronic device that remotely communicates with the vehicle to control vehicle functions).
Kido and Lindemann are analogous since both deal with vehicle-window image display systems that respond to detected conditions in and around the vehicle. Kido provides the base method of obtaining physical parameters and displaying window-glass content. Lindemann provides a mobile device paired via SRWC to the vehicle that functions as a wireless remote controller of vehicle functions (including projecting images on the vehicle windows) which is a remote key of the vehicle. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to incorporate the paired mobile-key-type device taught by Lindemann into Kido such that the electronic-device-based distance/parameter determination uses a remote paired key device. The motivation is to provide keyless, wireless interaction and remote control of vehicle functions, as discussed by Lindemann in Paragraph [0022].
Regarding Claim 11, Kido teaches the invention in Claim 10.
Kido does not explicitly disclose but Lindemann teaches wherein determining the physical parameter by means of image recognition technology comprises: identifying the target object by means of the image recognition technology (Lindemann, Paragraph [0050], "telematics unit 30 will moreover operate vehicle camera 35 (i.e., a sensor) to monitor the vehicle environment target 102. Camera 35 will make one or more measurements of target 102 and transmit signals to telematics unit 30 which can be used to provide an accurate understanding of the target location"; Lindemann, Paragraph [0032], "digital memory device 54 may be equipped with one or more modules containing reflection study software that assists camera 35 and/or projector 33 to know where target may likely be located after certain semi-predictable target gestures"; Lindemann, Paragraph [0050], "Telematics unit 30 (processor 52) will then use the digital image information signals (and/or reflective study) to subsequently determine the specific location of target 102 in the vehicle's environment"; it is noted since the camera captures images of the target and the processor uses image-based signals together with reflection-study software modules to determine the target's specific location, and since a specific location relative to the vehicle inherently includes the distance component, this reads on determining the distance between the target object and the vehicle by means of image recognition and processing technology).
Kido and Lindemann are analogous since both are vehicle-window image display systems that use camera-based sensing of external targets. Kido provides camera-based imaging of the surroundings and pattern-matching against pre-stored templates to identify the target object. Lindemann provides a camera and image-processing/reflection-study modules that determine the specific target location relative to the vehicle. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to incorporate the camera-and-image-processing-based target-location determination taught by Lindemann into Kido such that the distance between the identified target object and the vehicle is determined by image recognition and processing technology using the same camera already used for target identification. The motivation is to leverage the same camera for both identification and distance determination, thereby simplifying the sensor complement, as discussed by Lindemann in Paragraph [0050].
Regarding Claim 14, Kido teaches the invention in Claim 1.
Kido further teaches the physical parameter includes a shortest distance between the vehicle and a target object located around the vehicle, determining whether the shortest distance is lower than a preset threshold, and when the shortest distance is lower than the preset threshold, the content includes alarm information (Kido, Paragraph [0095], "it is determined firstly in S610 whether the vehicle 1 is in a state that a collision with other vehicle is unavoidable, particularly based on the velocity and acceleration of the vehicle 1... the position, velocity or velocity relative to the vehicle 1 of other vehicle detected by the detecting unit 80, and various performance such as braking performance and turning performance of the vehicle 1"; Kido, Paragraph [0075], "the image of the object is highlighted and colored on the display glass panel 40 so as to be easily recognized by the driver. Colors which easily stimulate the driver into recognition by being highlighted may be fluorescent colors and primary colors"; Kido, Paragraph [0117], "information concerning danger of a collision with the object may be notified to the driver by voice"; it is noted the collision-unavoidable determination based on positions/velocities is a distance-threshold-based determination, and the fluorescent/primary-color highlighted image of the nearby moving object together with the collision-danger notification acts as alarm information presented to the driver).
Kido does not explicitly disclose the physical parameter as a shortest-distance-below-preset-threshold determination, but Lindemann teaches proximity-threshold-based target sensing (Lindemann, Paragraph [0033], "Sensory input unit 37 can sense objects in the vehicle environment which are located within a certain proximity of vehicle 12 (e.g., within 50 feet)"; Lindemann, Paragraph [0001], "A vehicle function that would help avert nefarious activity and provide the owner with a sense of security"; it is noted the "within a certain proximity" (e.g., within 50 feet) is a preset-threshold-based distance determination, and the resulting displayed image serves an alarm/deterrent function).
Kido and Lindemann are analogous since both are vehicle-window image display systems that respond to detected surrounding conditions. Kido provides threshold-based collision determination and highlight/warning content display. Lindemann provides an explicit preset proximity-threshold sensing scheme (e.g., within 50 feet). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to incorporate the preset-threshold-based proximity determination taught by Lindemann into Kido such that when the shortest distance between the vehicle and a surrounding target object falls below the preset threshold, the displayed window content includes alarm information (highlighted rendering / collision-danger warning). The motivation is to provide the driver with a timely visual alert on the window when a surrounding object becomes dangerously close, thereby inhibiting collisions and enhancing safety, as discussed by Kido in Paragraph [0101] and Lindemann in Paragraph [0001].
Regarding Claim 21, Kido teaches the invention in Claim 20.
Kido does not explicitly disclose but Lindemann teaches the distance detection unit is disposed on the A-pillar or B-pillar of the vehicle (Lindemann, Paragraph [0033], "sensory input unit 37 may be installed along one or both edges of the window 11 to adequately sense a target"; Lindemann, Paragraph [0033], "IR emitters and receivers may be installed along one or both edges of the window 11 to adequately sense a target"; it is noted an edge of a vehicle window is structurally defined by the adjacent pillar — the A-pillar bordering the front windshield / front-door window and the B-pillar between the front-door and rear-door windows — so a sensor "installed along one or both edges of the window" is disposed on the A-pillar or B-pillar).
Kido and Lindemann are analogous since both are vehicle-window image display systems that employ proximity/distance sensors on the vehicle body. Kido discloses the detecting unit at "a plurality of positions outside the body of the vehicle 1" without specifying pillar placement. Lindemann discloses installing the sensory input unit along the window edges of the vehicle. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to incorporate the window-edge sensor placement taught by Lindemann into Kido such that Kido's distance detection unit is disposed on the A-pillar or B-pillar of the vehicle. The motivation is to position the distance sensor along the window edge (i.e., on the adjacent pillar) for adequate line-of-sight target sensing and structural mounting, as discussed by Lindemann in Paragraph [0033].
Claim(s) 12 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kido (US 20110046850 A1, hereinafter Kido) as applied to Claim 10 above and in view of Han et al. (US 20180093619 A1, hereinafter Han).
Regarding Claim 12, Kido teaches the invention in Claim 10.
Kido does not explicitly disclose but Han teaches wherein the presentation control method further comprises: recognizing a motion posture of the target object by means of the image recognition technology (Han, Paragraph [0124], "the monitoring unit 165 may be a driver status monitoring camera (DSM) and photograph the inside of the vehicle to acquire a vehicle interior image"; Han, Paragraph [0168], "the objects in the sequentially acquired stereo images may be verified, motion or motion vectors of the verified objects may be calculated and motion of the objects may be tracked"; Han, Paragraph [0352], "The processor 170 may analyze the images... to accurately acquire information about a protruding degree of the person's arm"; it is noted DSM-camera imaging plus motion-vector-based tracking of a person's arm/body movement reads on recognizing a motion posture of the target object by means of the image recognition technology),
comparing the motion posture with a corresponding motion posture in the content (Han, Paragraph [0166], "The object verification unit 436 may compare the objects stored in the memory 140 and the detected object and verify the object"; it is noted the verification unit's comparison between the detected motion of the person and the reference objects/motions stored in memory associated with the displayed content reads on comparing the motion posture with a corresponding motion posture in the content),
and presenting prompt information according to a comparison result (Han, Paragraph [0170], "The application unit 450 may output a message indicating such information to the user as driver assistance information based on the calculated degree of risk"; it is noted the message output to the user based on the verification/comparison result reads on presenting prompt information according to a comparison result).
Han and Kido are analogous since all three are vehicle-display systems that use image-based sensing of targets in and around the vehicle to control what is displayed on vehicle windows/display units in response to sensed conditions. Kido provides the base method of obtaining physical parameters and displaying window-glass content. Han provides driver-status-monitoring-camera-based inside-vehicle image acquisition together with neural-network/SVM/AdaBoost/HOG-based image recognition, motion-vector-based motion tracking, memory-stored-reference object comparison, and message-based user feedback output. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to incorporate the DSM-camera-based motion recognition, memory-reference comparison, and message-based feedback taught by Han into the modified invention of Kido such that the target object's motion posture (e.g., driver/passenger arm or body position) is recognized via image recognition, compared against a corresponding stored motion posture reference associated with the displayed content, and used as a trigger to present prompt information (e.g., a feedback message) based on the comparison result. The motivation is to provide the user with real-time driver-assistance feedback that reflects the recognized motion of the target and helps the user act appropriately in response, as discussed by Han in Paragraph [0170].
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
US 20220185110 A1 AN INTERACTIVE SYSTEM FOR A VEHICLE
US 10576880 B1 Using an external vehicle display for vehicle communication
US 20190385573 A1 METHOD OF DISPLAYING INFORMATION AND DISPLAYING SYSTEM THEREOF
US 20130154816 A1 METHOD FOR CONTROLLING A DISPLAY DEVICE OF A MOTOR VEHICLE
US 8022836 B2 In-vehicle image display apparatus
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to YUJANG TSWEI whose telephone number is (571)272-6669. The examiner can normally be reached 8:30am-5:30pm 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, Kent Chang can be reached on (571) 272-7667. 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.
/YuJang Tswei/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2614
Prosecution Insights