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 .
Restriction
Applicants’ election without traverse of claims 1-15 of group I in the reply filed on 07/22/2026 is acknowledged.
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)(1) the claimed invention was patented, described in a printed publication, or in public use, on sale or otherwise available to the public before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
(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 applications the case maybe, names another inventor and was effectively filed before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claims 1 and 11 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Lu et.al. (US 2009/0074307) (Yan Lu).
Regarding Claim 1, Blank discloses a rearview mirror, comprising: a reflective assembly and a display assembly [See abstract and Paragraphs 4-6]; wherein states of the rearview mirror comprise a reflective state and a display state [See abstract and Paragraphs 59-60], in the reflective state, the reflective assembly is activated and configured to reflect ambient light to a field of view of a user [See Paragraphs 104-119], and in the display state, the display assembly is activated and configured to acquire ambient light and generate an environment image for display [See Paragraphs 126-132].
Regarding Claim 11, Blank discloses wherein a display image of the display assembly is an enlarged image of the environment image [See abstract and Paragraphs 72-80 and Figs. 9-17].
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.
Claims 2-10 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Blank et al. (US 2024/0064274) (Rondney K. Blank) in view of Ko et al. (US 2019/0161014) (Sung Chan Ko).
Regarding Claim 2, Blank discloses wherein the reflective assembly comprises reflective glass, and the display assembly comprises a display screen and an image collector; and the image collector is configured to acquire the ambient light and generate the environment image, and the display screen is configured to display the environment image [See abstract and Paragraphs 4-6 and 59-60];
Blank doesn’t explicitly disclose a light-exiting side of the display screen is a side of the display screen facing away from the reflective glass, the image collector is located between the display screen and the reflective glass, and the display screen and the reflective glass are turned over by taking a central rotation axis as a base point; in the reflective state, the reflective glass is turned to a side to face the ambient light and face the user; and in the display state, the display screen is turned to a side to face the ambient light and face the user.
However, Ko discloses a light-exiting side of the display screen is a side of the display screen facing away from the reflective glass, the image collector is located between the display screen and the reflective glass, and the display screen and the reflective glass are turned over by taking a central rotation axis as a base point [See abstract and Paragraphs 5-15]; in the reflective state, the reflective glass is turned to a side to face the ambient light and face the user [See abstract and Paragraphs 5-15, 68-87 and Figs, 1-7 ]; and in the display state, the display screen is turned to a side to face the ambient light and face the user [See Paragraphs 68-90 and Figs, 1-7].
It would have been obvious to the person of ordinary skill in the art at time of invention to modify the system disclosed by Blank to add the teachings in Ko as above, to provide a system that an algorithm without moving the electronic side mirror to the inside of the vehicle [See Ko abstract].
Regarding Claim 3, Blank doesn’t explicitly disclose wherein turning modes of the reflective assembly and the display assembly comprise a first mode and a second mode, in the first mode, the display screen and the reflective glass are automatically turned by 180° by taking a central rotation axis as a base point; and in the second mode, the display screen and the reflective glass are manually turned clockwise by a first angle by taking a central rotation axis as a base point, the first angle being less than or equal to 90°.
However, Ko discloses wherein turning modes of the reflective assembly and the display assembly comprise a first mode and a second mode, in the first mode, the display screen and the reflective glass are automatically turned by 180° by taking a central rotation axis as a base point; and in the second mode, the display screen and the reflective glass are manually turned clockwise by a first angle by taking a central rotation axis as a base point, the first angle being less than or equal to 90° [see Figs. 1-8].
It would have been obvious to the person of ordinary skill in the art at time of invention to modify the system disclosed by Blank to add the teachings in Ko as above, to provide a system that an algorithm without moving the electronic side mirror to the inside of the vehicle [See Ko abstract].
Regarding Claim 4, Blank doesn’t explicitly disclose wherein the reflective glass comprises a curved surface, the display screen comprises a planar surface, and the reflective glass protrudes towards a direction away from the display screen
However, Ko discloses wherein the reflective glass comprises a curved surface, the display screen comprises a planar surface, and the reflective glass protrudes towards a direction away from the display screen [see Paragraphs 68-90 and Figs, 1-7].
It would have been obvious to the person of ordinary skill in the art at time of invention to modify the system disclosed by Blank to add the teachings in Ko as above, to provide a system that an algorithm without moving the electronic side mirror to the inside of the vehicle [See Ko abstract].
Regarding Claim 5, Blank doesn’t explicitly disclose wherein each of the reflective glass and the display screen comprises a curved surface, the reflective glass protrudes towards a direction away from the display screen, and the display screen protrudes towards a direction away from the reflective glass
However, Ko discloses wherein each of the reflective glass and the display screen comprises a curved surface, the reflective glass protrudes towards a direction away from the display screen, and the display screen protrudes towards a direction away from the reflective glass [see Paragraphs 107-142 and Figs. 11A-16].
It would have been obvious to the person of ordinary skill in the art at time of invention to modify the system disclosed by Blank to add the teachings in Ko as above, to provide a system that an algorithm without moving the electronic side mirror to the inside of the vehicle [See Ko abstract].
Regarding Claim 6, Blank doesn’t explicitly disclose wherein a radius of curvature of the display screen is less than or equal to a radius of curvature of the reflective glass
However, Ko discloses wherein a radius of curvature of the display screen is less than or equal to a radius of curvature of the reflective glass [see Figs, 1-5].
It would have been obvious to the person of ordinary skill in the art at time of invention to modify the system disclosed by Blank to add the teachings in Ko as above, to provide a system that an algorithm without moving the electronic side mirror to the inside of the vehicle [See Ko abstract].
Regarding Claim 7, Blank doesn’t explicitly disclose wherein a display area of the display screen is greater than or equal to a reflective area of the reflective glass.
However, Ko discloses wherein a display area of the display screen is greater than or equal to a reflective area of the reflective glass.
It would have been obvious to the person of ordinary skill in the art at time of invention to modify the system disclosed by Blank to add the teachings in Ko as above, to provide a system that an algorithm without moving the electronic side mirror to the inside of the vehicle [See Ko abstract].
Regarding Claim 8, Blank doesn’t explicitly disclose wherein the reflective assembly comprises reflective glass, the display assembly comprises a display screen and an image collector, the display screen comprises a transparent display screen, and transparency of the transparent display screen is adjustable; in the reflective state, the transparent display screen is turned off, the transparency of the transparent display screen is first transparency, and the reflective glass reflects ambient light to the field of view of the user; and in the display state, the transparent display screen is turned on, the transparency of the transparent display screen is second transparency, the image collector is configured to acquire ambient light and generate an environment image, the transparent display screen is configured to display the environment image, and the second transparency is less than the first transparency.
However, Ko discloses wherein the reflective assembly comprises reflective glass, the display assembly comprises a display screen and an image collector, the display screen comprises a transparent display screen, and transparency of the transparent display screen is adjustable; in the reflective state, the transparent display screen is turned off, the transparency of the transparent display screen is first transparency, and the reflective glass reflects ambient light to the field of view of the user; and in the display state, the transparent display screen is turned on, the transparency of the transparent display screen is second transparency, the image collector is configured to acquire ambient light and generate an environment image, the transparent display screen is configured to display the environment image, and the second transparency is less than the first transparency [See Paragraphs 120-160].
It would have been obvious to the person of ordinary skill in the art at time of invention to modify the system disclosed by Blank to add the teachings in Ko as above, to provide a system that an algorithm without moving the electronic side mirror to the inside of the vehicle [See Ko abstract].
Regarding Claim 9, Blank doesn’t explicitly disclose wherein a light-exiting side of the transparent display screen is a side of the transparent display screen facing away from the reflective glass; and the transparent display screen at least partially overlaps with the reflective glass, and the image collector is located at an edge position of the transparent display screen and does not overlap with the reflective glass.
However, Ko discloses wherein a light-exiting side of the transparent display screen is a side of the transparent display screen facing away from the reflective glass; and the transparent display screen at least partially overlaps with the reflective glass, and the image collector is located at an edge position of the transparent display screen and does not overlap with the reflective glass [See Figs. 1-8].
It would have been obvious to the person of ordinary skill in the art at time of invention to modify the system disclosed by Blank to add the teachings in Ko as above, to provide a system that an algorithm without moving the electronic side mirror to the inside of the vehicle [See Ko abstract].
Regarding Claim 10, Blank doesn’t explicitly disclose wherein in the display state, the transparent display screen moves to a light path of ambient light reflected by the reflective glass to the field of view of the user.
However, Ko discloses wherein in the display state, the transparent display screen moves to a light path of ambient light reflected by the reflective glass to the field of view of the user [See abstract and Paragraphs 10-15 and 54-59].
It would have been obvious to the person of ordinary skill in the art at time of invention to modify the system disclosed by Blank to add the teachings in Ko as above, to provide a system that an algorithm without moving the electronic side mirror to the inside of the vehicle [See Ko abstract].
Claims 12-15 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Blank et al. (US 2024/0064274) (Rondney K. Blank) in view of Ko et al. (US 2019/0161014) (Sung Chan Ko), and further in view of Pastrick et al. (US 2013/0002876) (Todd W Pastrick).
Regarding Claim 12, Blank and Ko don’t explicitly disclose wherein an activation mode of the display assembly is a manual mode or an automatic mode the rearview mirror further comprises a lux meter and at least one processor, and the lux is configured to acquire lux of the ambient light; in the manual mode, the at least one processor is configured to activate the display state based on an activation signal; and in the automatic mode, the at least one processor is configured to activate the display state upon determining that the lux of ambient light is lower than a threshold based on the lux of the ambient light.
However, Pastrick discloses wherein an activation mode of the display assembly is a manual mode or an automatic mode; the rearview mirror further comprises a lux meter and at least one processor, and the lux is configured to acquire lux of the ambient light; in the manual mode, the at least one processor is configured to activate the display state based on an activation signal; and in the automatic mode, the at least one processor is configured to activate the display state upon determining that the lux of ambient light is lower than a threshold based on the lux of the ambient light [See abstract and Paragraphs 130-141].
It would have been obvious to the person of ordinary skill in the art at time of invention to modify the system disclosed by Blank and Ko to add the teachings in Pastrick as above, to provide a system that increases the security and safety of vehicle occupants [See Ko Paragraphs 3-4].
Regarding Claim 13, Blank and Ko don’t explicitly disclose wherein in the display state, the at least one processor is further configured to adjust display brightness of the ambient image on the display screen based on a comparison relationship between the lux of the ambient light and brightness of the display assembly.
However, Pastrick discloses wherein in the display state, the at least one processor is further configured to adjust display brightness of the ambient image on the display screen based on a comparison relationship between the lux of the ambient light and brightness of the display assembly [See abstract and Paragraphs abstract and Paragraphs 130-141].
It would have been obvious to the person of ordinary skill in the art at time of invention to modify the system disclosed by Blank and Ko to add the teachings in Pastrick as above, to provide a system that increases the security and safety of vehicle occupants [See Ko Paragraphs 3-4].
Regarding Claim 14, Blank doesn’t explicitly disclose wherein in the automatic mode, the at least one processor is further configured to activate or turn off the display state based on fixed time.
However, Ko discloses wherein in the automatic mode, the at least one processor is further configured to activate or turn off the display state based on fixed time [See abstract and Paragraphs 57-60, and 94-107].
It would have been obvious to the person of ordinary skill in the art at time of invention to modify the system disclosed by Blank and Ko to add the teachings in Pastrick as above, to provide a system that increases the security and safety of vehicle occupants [See Ko Paragraphs 3-4].
Regarding Claim 15, Blank doesn’t explicitly disclose wherein the rearview mirror further comprises a temperature detection assembly, and the temperature detection assembly is provided at a side of the display assembly and configured to acquire an ambient temperature and a temperature of the display assembly; and in the display state, the at least one processor is further configured to turn off the display assembly upon determining that the ambient temperature is greater than or equal to the temperature of the display assembly
However, Ko discloses wherein the rearview mirror further comprises a temperature detection assembly, and the temperature detection assembly is provided at a side of the display assembly and configured to acquire an ambient temperature and a temperature of the display assembly; and in the display state, the at least one processor is further configured to turn off the display assembly upon determining that the ambient temperature is greater than or equal to the temperature of the display assembly [See abstract and Paragraphs 57-60, and 94-107].
It would have been obvious to the person of ordinary skill in the art at time of invention to modify the system disclosed by Blank and Ko to add the teachings in Pastrick as above, to provide a system that increases the security and safety of vehicle occupants [See Ko Paragraphs 3-4].
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to TSION B OWENS whose telephone number is (571)272-3934. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 8:00-4:00.
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, David Czekaj can be reached at 571-272-7327. 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.
/TSION B OWENS/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2487
