DETAILED ACTION
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, 8-9 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Karafin (US PG Publication 2020/0290513) in view of Bongwald (US PG Publication 2015/0232030).
Regarding Claim 1, Karafin (US PG Publication 2020/0290513) discloses a surround view system (light field display system [0027]) for a vehicle (implemented in a vehicle [0027]) comprises:
one or more cameras (cameras as part of the LF display modules [0031]; vehicle 1010 includes cameras that capture images of a local area surrounding the vehicle 1010 [0185]) mounted on the vehicle (LF display modules part of an exterior surface of the vehicle [0028]) and configured to capture one or more images (capture images [0031]) of a surrounding environment of the vehicle (of a local area surrounding the vehicle [0031], [0185]);
a driver monitoring unit (tracking system that tracks the position of the viewers [0081]-[0082]; tracking system 580 [0102]; LF display system may track actual physical positions of one or more of occupants [0196]) configured to determine a [] direction (tracking system tracks the position of the viewer or the position of the eyes of the viewer [0081] relative to the tracking system [0083]) of a driver of the vehicle (determine the position, movement, characteristics of viewers within a target area [0102] viewer is the driver [0027]);
and a plurality of holographic projection units arranged at different positions inside the vehicle (LF display modules part of an interior surface of a vehicle [0029], e.g., windows, seats, door panels, roof, dash, floor [0161]), wherein
each of the plurality of holographic projection units (LF display modules [0161]) is configured to generate a holographic image (project holographic content to change the appearance of the interior of the vehicle [0029]) on a different one of a plurality of surfaces (LF display modules are formed into panels that are specific to different locations of the interior, e.g., windows, seats, door panels, roof, dash, floor [0161]) inside the vehicle (interior of the vehicle [0029]), and
the surround view system (at least a portion of the vehicle between the driver 1020 and the blind spot appears to be transparent [0185]) is configured to select, …, at least one surface (LF display system 400 may present one or more holographic objects [0084]) of the plurality of surfaces (display modules are formed into panels that are specific to different locations of the interior, e.g., windows, seats, door panels, roof, dash, floor [0161]; modify how the vehicle appears to it users [0162]) on which to cause a holographic image to be generated (project holographic content [0162]), wherein the holographic image represents a section of the surrounding environment within the viewing direction of the driver (at least a portion of the vehicle between the driver 1020 and the blind spot appears to be transparent [0185]) and is generated based on the one or more images captured by the one or more cameras (the LF display system uses the captured images to generate holographic content [0031], [0185]).
Karafin does not disclose, but Bongwald (US PG Publication 2015/0232030) teaches select, based on the viewing direction determined by the driver monitoring unit (according to the determined driver's gaze [0040]), at least one surface of the plurality of surfaces (activating the appropriate display according to the determined driver's gaze [0040]).
One of ordinary skill in the art before the application was filed would have been motivated to turn off displays in Karafin that are not being looked at because Bongwald teaches that activating a display that the driver is not intending to look at would potentially block the driver’s view [0028]; in addition, activating a display that the driver is not intending to look at could distract the driver and place the vehicle occupants at risk.
Regarding Claim 2, Karafin (US PG Publication 2020/0290513) discloses the surround view system of claim 1, wherein the holographic image is [] generated on one or more surfaces of the plurality of surfaces that lie within the viewing direction (LF display system 400 may present one or more holographic objects that are customized to each viewer based in part on the tracking information [0084]).
Karafin does not disclose but Bongwald (US PG Publication 2015/0232030) teaches wherein the [] image is only generated on … surfaces that lie within the viewing direction (when the driver is focusing on the display area then activate the display, otherwise do not activate the display [0028]).
One of ordinary skill in the art before the application was filed would have been motivated to turn off displays in Karafin that are not being looked at because Bongwald teaches that activating a display that the driver is not intending to look at would potentially block the driver’s view [0028]; in addition, activating a display that the driver is not intending to look at could distract the driver and place the vehicle occupants at risk.
Regarding Claim 3, Karafin (US PG Publication 2020/0290513) discloses the surround view system of claim 1, wherein the at least one surface comprises one or more of a windscreen, a left front side window, a right front side window, a left rear side window, a right rear side window, and a rear window (windows, seats, door panels, roof, dash, floor [0161]).
Regarding Claim 8, Karafin (US PG Publication 2020/0290513) discloses the surround view system of claim 1, wherein the driver monitoring unit comprises one or more inward facing cameras (tracking devices include a camera assembly to track viewers in target area [0102]), and wherein, when the [] direction of the driver changes, the surround view system is configured to cause a different holographic image to be generated (LF display system 400 may present one or more holographic objects that are customized to each viewer based in part on the tracking information [0084]).
Karafin does not disclose but Bongwald (US PG Publication 2015/0232030) teaches when the viewing direction of the driver changes (according to the determined driver's gaze [0040]) … image to be generated on one or more different surfaces of the plurality of surfaces (activating the appropriate display according to the determined driver's gaze [0040]).
One of ordinary skill in the art before the application was filed would have been motivated to turn off displays in Karafin that are not being looked at because Bongwald teaches that activating a display that the driver is not intending to look at would potentially block the driver’s view [0028]; in addition, activating a display that the driver is not intending to look at could distract the driver and place the vehicle occupants at risk.
Regarding Claim 9, Karafin (US PG Publication 2020/0290513) discloses the surround view system of claim 1.
Karafin does not disclose, but Bongwald (US PG Publication 2015/0232030) teaches wherein the driver monitoring unit is configured to determine the viewing direction of the driver by means of facial recognition or eye tracking techniques (eye tracking system [0028]).
One of ordinary skill in the art before the application was filed would have been motivated to turn off displays in Karafin that are not being looked at because Bongwald teaches that activating a display that the driver is not intending to look at would potentially block the driver’s view [0028]; in addition, activating a display that the driver is not intending to look at could distract the driver and place the vehicle occupants at risk.
Claim(s) 4-5 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Karafin (US PG Publication 2020/0290513) in view of Bongwald (US PG Publication 2015/0232030) and Zhao (WO 2016/018320 A1).
Regarding Claim 4, Karafin (US PG Publication 2020/0290513) discloses the surround view system of claim 3.
Karafin does not disclose but Zhao (WO 2016/018320 A1) teaches wherein the at least one surface further comprises one or more pillars of the vehicle (a projector 44 projects the image 42 onto the screen 40. The screen 40 may be placed on the A-pillar 22 [0013], Fig. 2).
One of ordinary skill in the art before the application was filed would have been motivated to project obstacles outside the vehicle of Karafin onto it’s a-pillar, as taught by Zhao, because Zhao teaches that the obstruction caused by the frame pillars of the vehicle hinders the driver’s ability to focus on those objects [0002], and the display system improves the driver’s visibility [0012], also improving safety.
Regarding Claim 5, Karafin (US PG Publication 2020/0290513) discloses the surround view system of claim 4.
Karafin does not disclose but Zhao (WO 2016/018320 A1) teaches wherein the pillars (a projector 44 projects the image 42 onto the screen 40. The screen 40 may be placed on the A-pillar 22 [0013], Fig. 2) are covered with a reflective material (holographic foil 46 receives the incoming light 68 from the projector 44 [0017]).
One of ordinary skill in the art before the application was filed would have been motivated to project obstacles outside the vehicle of Karafin onto it’s a-pillar, as taught by Zhao, because Zhao teaches that the obstruction caused by the frame pillars of the vehicle hinders the driver’s ability to focus on those objects [0002], and the display system improves the driver’s visibility [0012], also improving safety.
Claim(s) 6-7 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Karafin (US PG Publication 2020/0290513) in view of Bongwald (US PG Publication 2015/0232030) and Bi (US PG Publication 2017/0078653 A1).
Regarding Claim 6, Karafin (US PG Publication 2020/0290513) discloses the surround view system of claim 1.
Karafin does not disclose, but Bi (US PG Publication 20170078653 A1) teaches wherein each of the one or more cameras has a viewing angle of between 30° and 180° or of more than 180° (angle of view between approximately 100 and 240 degrees [0063]).
One of ordinary skill in the art before the application was filed would have been motivated to arrange the cameras of Karafin as in Bi because Bi teaches that the camera arrangement enables the accurate processing of depth information [003]-[004], which would help drivers perceive information about obstacles [0096], improving safety.
Regarding Claim 7, Karafin (US PG Publication 2020/0290513) discloses the surround view system of claim 1.
Karafin does not disclose, but Bi (US PG Publication 20170078653 A1) teaches wherein at least one of the one or more cameras is a spherical camera that is configured to capture 360° images (two hemi-ellipsoid fisheye lenses arranged to make a 360°, spheric image, Fig. 5).
One of ordinary skill in the art before the application was filed would have been motivated to arrange the cameras of Karafin as in Bi because Bi teaches that the camera arrangement enables the accurate processing of depth information [003]-[004], which would help drivers perceive information about obstacles [0096], improving safety.
Claim(s) 10, 12-13 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Karafin (US PG Publication 2020/0290513) in view of Bongwald (US PG Publication 2015/0232030) and Hendricks (US PG Publication 2008/0192312).
Regarding Claim 10, Karafin (US PG Publication 2020/0290513) discloses the surround view system of claim 1.
Karafin does not disclose but Hendricks (US PG Publication 2008/0192312) teaches wherein each of the plurality of holographic projection units (holographic information display [0030]) comprises a light source (coherent light source laser [0031]), an adjustable (diffractive patel delays the light in a locally different manner [0032]) diffractive unit (spatially resolved diffractive panel [0032]), a control unit (control device 5 [0032]), and a data processing unit (data processing device 9 [0033]),
wherein the light source is configured to illuminate the adjustable diffractive unit (light source 1 illuminates a spatially-resolved diffractive panel 2 [0032]),
the adjustable diffractive unit deflects light from the light source (light is incident from a direction 18 onto the diffractive panel [0037]) onto the at least one surface (the hologram is adapted to the surface contour [0041]) and into the visual range (the driver sees an undistorted virtual display [0041]) of the driver (observer, for example the driver of a vehicle [0034]),
the control units configured to provide different control patterns (control device 5 specifies which regions of the surface 6 the diffractive panel 2 delays the reflected light [0032]) to generate different holograms (spatially-resolved phase delay reproduces a hologram [0033]) via the diffractive unit (the diffractive panel 2 delays the reflected light [0032]), and
the data processing unit is configured to generate or store a plurality of different control patterns (hologram is preferably determined by the data processing device 9 [0033]), and to select one or more pre-calculated control patterns for respective holograms (holograms may be loaded from a memory of the data processing device 9, typical texts or pictograms to be superimposed are already stored in the memory [0033]) based on the image to be displayed by the holographic projection unit (holograms [0033]).
One of ordinary skill in the art before the application was filed would have been motivated to implement the LF display modules of Karafin using the diffractive panel of Hendricks because Hendricks teaches that the contrast and sharpness of the displayed element correlates with the accuracy of the phase delay cells [0019], and the combination results in producing a higher quality image for the viewer.
Regarding Claim 12, Karafin (US PG Publication 2020/0290513) discloses the surround view system of claim 10.
Karafin does not disclose but Hendricks (US PG Publication 2008/0192312) teaches wherein the diffractive unit (diffractive panel 2, 10 [0032], [0036]) comprises a plurality of phase retarding elements (electrodes 12 divide the panel 10 into cells 13 [0036], ), wherein each of the plurality of phase retarding elements (layer 15 of liquid crystal in the panel, incident light undergoes a phase delay when traversing the liquid crystal layer 15. The phase delay is adjusted by applying an electric potential to the electrodes 12. [0036]-[0037]) delays the phase of light reflected or transmitted by a defined amount (stepped voltage levels can be applied at the electrodes 12 so relative phase delays of fractions of 180 degrees [0039]).
One of ordinary skill in the art before the application was filed would have been motivated to implement the LF display modules of Karafin using the diffractive panel of Hendricks because Hendricks teaches that the contrast and sharpness of the displayed element correlates with the accuracy of the phase delay cells [0019], and the combination results in producing a higher quality image for the viewer.
Regarding Claim 13, Karafin (US PG Publication 2020/0290513) discloses the surround view system of claim 12.
Karafin does not disclose but Hendricks (US PG Publication 2008/0192312) teaches wherein the defined amount of phase delay is individually controlled (stepped voltage levels can be applied at the electrodes 12 so relative phase delays of fractions of 180 degrees [0039]) for each phase retarding element (individually activatable electrodes 12, which divide the panel 10 into cells 13 [0036]; phase delay is adjusted by applying electric potential to the electrodes 12 [0037]) by means of the control unit (control device 5 specifies in which regions of the surface 6 the diffractive panel 2 delays the reflected light 4 and how strongly [0032]).
One of ordinary skill in the art before the application was filed would have been motivated to implement the LF display modules of Karafin using the diffractive panel of Hendricks because Hendricks teaches that the contrast and sharpness of the displayed element correlates with the accuracy of the phase delay cells [0019], and the combination results in producing a higher quality image for the viewer.
Claim(s) 11 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Karafin (US PG Publication 2020/0290513) in view of Bongwald (US PG Publication 2015/0232030), Hendricks (US PG Publication 2008/0192312), and Hua (CN 107656690 A).
Regarding Claim 11, Karafin (US PG Publication 2020/0290513) discloses the surround view system of claim 10.
Karafin does not disclose but Hua (CN 107656690 A) teaches wherein the light source is a brightness controllable light source (the projection module adjusted according to ambient environment adjusts the emission intensity of laser, p. 5 middle).
One of ordinary skill in the art before the application was filed would have been motivate to adjust the projection intensity of the holographic image of Karafin based on ambient light, as in Hua, because the person of ordinary skill knows that vehicles are driven at all times of day, and ambient light varies based on time of day and weather, and having a display that is useable by the driver in all driving conditions is more useful and convenient to the driver.
Claim(s) 14 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Karafin (US PG Publication 2020/0290513) in view of Lee (KR 102263725).
Regarding Claim 14, Karafin (US PG Publication 2020/0290513) discloses a method comprising capturing one or more images (cameras that capture images [0185]) of a surrounding environment of a vehicle (area surrounding the vehicle 1010 [0185]) by means of one or more cameras mounted on the vehicle (cameras as part of the LF display modules [0031]; vehicle 1010 includes cameras that capture images of a local area surrounding the vehicle 1010 [0185]);
determining a [] direction (tracking system tracks the position of the viewer or the position of the eyes of the viewer [0081] relative to the tracking system [0083]) of a driver (determine the position, movement, characteristics of viewers within a target area [0102] viewer is the driver [0027]) of the vehicle by means of a driver monitoring unit (tracking system that tracks the position of the viewers [0081]-[0082]; tracking system 580 [0102]; LF display system may track actual physical positions of one or more of occupants [0196]); and
generating a holographic image (project holographic content to change the appearance of the interior of the vehicle [0029]) on at least one of a plurality of surfaces inside the vehicle (LF display modules part of an interior surface of a vehicle [0029], e.g., windows, seats, door panels, roof, dash, floor [0161]) by means of a plurality of holographic projection units (LF display module 300A [0059]) arranged at different positions inside the vehicle (LF display modules part of an interior surface of a vehicle [0029], e.g., windows, seats, door panels, roof, dash, floor [0161]), wherein the holographic image is generated (project holographic content [0029]) on at least one surface inside the vehicle (LF display modules part of an interior surface of a vehicle [0029], e.g., windows, seats, door panels, roof, dash, floor [0161]) within the viewing direction determined by the driver monitoring unit (LF display system 400 may present one or more holographic objects that are customized to each viewer based in part on the tracking information [0084]), wherein the holographic image is generated based on the one or more images captured by the one or more cameras (LF display system uses the captured images to generate holographic content [0185]), wherein the holographic image is generated (generating the holograph as in [0122]-[0126]) … wherein the holographic image is a computer generated hologram (CGH) (processing engine generates the 4D rasterized format… causes the LF display to present holographic content [0122]) generated from the depth map (RGBA+depth [0126]).
Karafin does not disclose, but Lee (KR 102263725) teaches viewing direction (driver's gaze detection, page 1);
wherein the holographic image is generated (image output unit 500 outputs an image based on the viewpoint of the driver and the depth information, page 1) by generating a depth map from the one or more images (light field camera 300 photographs one side of the vehicle and outputs the image to the depth information calculating unit 400, page 1).
One of ordinary skill in the art before the application was filed would have been motivated to supplement Karafin with the teachings of Lee because Lee teaches that it can provide images of objects in the driver's blind spot specific to the direction in which the driver is concentrating, p. 2, improving safety.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s remarks filed 22 July 2026 have been considered but are unpersuasive.
Applicant argues that Karafin does not select at least one display surface based on the viewing direction of the driver. Remarks at 8. Because Karafin displays a hologram based on the position of the driver, at least one display surface is selected. I.e., more-than-zero display surfaces are selected. Amended Claim 1 does not require non-displaying surfaces, as claimed in Claim 2 or 8. A new secondary reference Bongwald (US PG Publication 2015/0232030) teaches selecting the display based on gaze direction.
Applicant argues that portions of Karafin are separate embodiments. Remarks at 9. This is not persuasive. The reference as a whole is related to the installation of the light field display system in a vehicle. Karafin at [0002]-[0006], [0027]-[0031], and Figs. 6-12. Applicant has highlighted discussions related to the display (Fig. 4A), and distinguished it from the display installed in the vehicle (Figs. 6-12). This is not persuasive. Likewise, the controller of the display, Fig. 5, is not a separate embodiment from the display (Fig. 4A) or the display installed in the vehicle (Figs. 6-12). These are pieces of the system used together in the augmented vehicle of the disclosure. If the light field display of Fig. 4A has a person-tracker, and that light field display is installed in the vehicle of Fig. 10, then the vehicle of Fig. 10 has a person-tracker. This is not a combination of embodiments; it is one embodiment.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure:
US 10981507 B1 – holographic pedestrian on pillar of car
US 20240160025 A1 – head-up display with surround view of vehicle
THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a).
A shortened statutory period for reply to this final action is set to expire THREE MONTHS from the mailing date of this action. In the event a first reply is filed within TWO MONTHS of the mailing date of this final action and the advisory action is not mailed until after the end of the THREE-MONTH shortened statutory period, then the shortened statutory period will expire on the date the advisory action is mailed, and any nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) pursuant to 37 CFR 1.136(a) will be calculated from the mailing date of the advisory action. In no event, however, will the statutory period for reply expire later than SIX MONTHS from the mailing date of this final action.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to SHADAN E HAGHANI whose telephone number is (571)270-5631. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 9AM - 5PM.
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, Jay Patel can be reached at 571-272-2988. 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.
/SHADAN E HAGHANI/ Examiner, Art Unit 2485
Prosecution Insights