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 .
Response to Amendment
2. Applicant’s amendment filed on July 7, 2026 has been entered. Claim 8 has been amended. Claim 19 has been cancelled. Claims 1-18 are pending in this application.
Response to Arguments
3. Applicant's arguments filed July 7, 2026 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
On pages 6-7 of the Response, the Applicant argues that the combination of Day and Weber changes the principle of operation of Day and the Office has not articulated a proper motivation to combine. The Examiner respectfully disagrees.
First, the Applicant’s argument that the proposed combination of Day and Weber changes the principle of operation of Day is not persuasive. Day’s photodiodes are used as proximity sensors for detecting presence of an object by utilizing reflections off the object ([0191]). Weber’s photoelectric sensor elements are also used as proximity sensors for detecting presence of an object and obtaining three-dimensional measurement of the object based on reflected irradiation pattern ([0009], [0032], [0058], [0061]). Thus, the only feature of Day to be modified is replacing the photodiodes with Weber’s photoelectric sensor elements. Day would otherwise retain all of its operational features.
Second, Weber teaches a proximity sensor that provides an improvement over Day’s proximity sensor by sensing an object from a distinct distance and obtaining a three-dimensional measurement of the object, e.g., the sensor device 1 is sensitive to the object 9 just beginning at a distinct distance (see paragraphs [0054], [0058], [0061]). Thus, one of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to use the proximity sensor suggested by Weber in the invention of Day to detect the presence of an object by obtaining three-dimensional information of an object.
Therefore, the rejection is maintained.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
4. 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.
5. Claim(s) 1, 3-6, 8-9, 11-12 and 15-18 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over DAY (US 2020/0269815) in view of Weber (US 2019/0078934).
Regarding claim 1, Day discloses a monitoring system for monitoring a space inside and/or outside a motor vehicle (Fig. 18; [0253], [0255]-[0260], [0283] e.g., one or more of sensors 173, 175, 177 can be configured as contact/proximity sensor for sensing an object inside a vehicle) comprising a plurality of photoelectric sensor elements adapted to detect objects in a space (Fig. 7; [0191], [0260], [0282], e.g., a plurality of photodiodes 11 adapted to detect proximity of objects),
sensor elements (Fig. 7; [0141]-[0142], [0170], e.g., photodiodes 11) being electrically connected to a substantially transparent carrier layer (Figs 1-2, [0141]-[0149], [0155], e.g., electrically connected to an optically transparent substrate 3) adapted to be disposed between first and second substantially transparent layers ([0171], e.g., between first and second substantially transparent layers 51 and 52) to form a substantially transparent laminate structure for use in one or more windows and/or roof panel of said motor vehicle ([0140], [0275], [0282]-[0283], e.g., use in one or more window of the vehicle).
Day does not specifically disclose wherein the plurality of photoelectric sensor elements are adapted to generate a 3-dimensional mapping of objects in the space.
However, Weber discloses an optoelectronic sensor device (Fig. 1; [0046], e.g., device 1) comprising a plurality of photoelectric sensor elements adapted to generate a 3-dimensional mapping of objects in a space (Fig. 4; [0009], [0011], [0046]-[0047], [0058], e.g., a plurality of photodetectors 3 are used to generate three-dimensional mapping of objects 9 in the space).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective fling date of the invention to use the teachings of Weber in the invention of Day for generating a 3D mapping of objects in a space by using a plurality of photoelectric sensors in order to provide a device for monitoring a space inside and/or outside of a vehicle for a presence of an object ([0009], [0020] of Weber).
Regarding claim 3, Day further discloses a monitoring system according to claim 1, wherein said carrier layer is flexible ([0141], e.g., the substrate 3 is flexible).
Regarding claim 4, Day in view of Weber further discloses a monitoring system according to claim 1, wherein said sensor elements are configured to monitor a space using at least one of triangulation, structured light and time-of- flight (Weber, [0009], [0022], [0054], e.g., infrared-emitting semiconductor lasers and/or infrared-emitting LEDs can be used preferably for time-of-flight, proximity or other methods of three-dimensional detection or presence detection).
Regarding claim 5, Day in view of Weber further discloses a monitoring system according to claim 1, wherein said sensor elements, when mounted in said laminate structure in a motor vehicle, are arranged to generate a three- dimensional detection zone inside and/or outside said motor vehicle (Day, [0209], [0283]. [0020] of Weber, e.g., generate a three-dimensional detection zone inside and/or outside of the vehicle).
Regarding claim 6, Day further discloses a monitoring system according to claim 1, wherein said sensor elements are mounted on said carrier layer (see Figs 1-2; [0142], e.g., the photodiode 11 is mounted on the substrate 3).
Regarding claim 8, Day further discloses a monitoring system according to claim 1, wherein a bonding layer is provided between said carrier layer and at least one of said first and second substantially transparent layers (Fig. 7; [0176], e.g., a bonding layer 54 is provided between the carrier layer 3 and the first pane of glass 51).
Regarding claim 9, Day further discloses a monitoring system according to claim 1, wherein said carrier layer comprises wiring for power supply and signal carrier of said sensors (Fig. 1; [0152]-[0153]).
Regarding claim 11, Day in view of Weber further discloses a monitoring system according to claim 1, wherein said sensors comprise photoelectric emitter elements and photoelectric detector elements ([0154] and [0260] of Day e.g., each proximity sensor comprises one photoelectric emitter element and one photoelectric detector element. Weber, Fig. 4 and [0067], e.g., a plurality of laser diodes 2 and photodiodes 3).
Regarding claim 12, Day in view of Weber further discloses a monitoring system according to claim 11, wherein each said photoelectric emitter element and said photoelectric detector element comprises at least one lens adapted to provide a directional field of view (Bay, Fig. 1; [0142], e.g., the LED 9 comprises a lens assembly 10 for directing the beam of light in the required direction. Fig. 3 of Weber, e.g., lens 71).
Regarding claim 15, Day in view of Weber further a monitoring system according to claim 1, wherein said sensors operate in infrared wavelengths (Day, [0143]. [0009] of Weber).
Regarding claim 16, Day in view of Weber further discloses a transparent laminate structure for use in the windows and/or roof panel of a motor vehicle comprising a monitoring system according to claim 1 (Day, Fig. 18; [0255], [0260], e.g., the windscreen 170 comprises the sensing system. [0020] of Weber).
Regarding claim 17, Day further discloses a vehicle comprising a transparent laminate structure according to claim 16 (see Fig. 18).
Regarding claim 18, Day further discloses a vehicle according to claim 17, wherein said transparent laminate structure is comprises in at least two of a side window, a rear window, a front window and a roof panel of said motor vehicle (Fig. 18; [0275], e.g., a side window and a front window).
6. Claim(s) 2 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Day (US 2020/0269815) in view of Weber (US 2019/0078934), and further in view of Mattes et al. (US 2014/0236454).
Regarding claim 2, Day in view of Weber does not specifically disclose a monitoring system according to claim 1, wherein said sensor elements are disposed on said carrier layer in a 2- dimensional arrangement.
However, Mattes discloses a monitoring system comprising a plurality of sensor elements disposed on a carrier layer in a 2-dimensional arrangement (Fig. 4; [0053], claim 25, e.g., photoelectric sensors 14 can be arranged on a circuit board in a 2-dimensional arrangement).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to use the teachings of Mattes in the invention of Day in view of Weber for disposing sensor elements on a carrier layer in a 2- dimensional arrangement in order to determine a three-dimensional position of an object.
7. Claim(s) 7 and 14 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Day (US 2020/0269815) in view of Weber (US 2019/0078934), and further in view of Chen et al. (US 2016/0041663).
Regarding claim 7, Day in view of Weber does not specifically disclose a monitoring system according to claim 1, wherein said sensor elements are embedded in said carrier layer.
However, Chen discloses a device wherein sensor elements are embedded in a carrier layer (Fig. 14; [0058], e.g., light detectors 94B are embedded within a substrate 24).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to use the teachings of Chen in the invention of Day in view of Weber for providing sensor elements formed from light sensors embedded within a carrier layer because as taught by Chen the light sensors can be used to implement a three-dimensional scanning system for detecting three-dimensional scans of people or objects (see [0059] of Chen).
Regarding claim 14, Day in view of Weber does not specifically disclose a monitoring system according to claim 1, wherein said sensors have dimensions no greater than 500µm, and preferably no greater than 200µm.
However, Chen discloses a device wherein sensors have dimensions no greater than 500µm, and preferably no greater than 200µm (Fig. 14; [0043], [0053], [0058], e.g., the lateral size W of light-emitting diodes 30 may be about 1-500 microns, 2-50 microns, 5-30 microns, less than 30 microns, 3-7 microns, more than 2 microns, or other suitable size. Photodetectors 80 have sizes comparable to light-emitting diodes 30).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to use the teachings of Chen in the invention of Day in view of Weber for providing sensor elements having sizes no greater than 200µm so that the overall size of sensor elements is minimized.
8. Claim(s) 10 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Day (US 2020/0269815) in view of Weber (US 2019/0078934), and further in view of Costello et al. (US 2017/0160427).
Regarding claim 10, Day in view of Weber does not specifically disclose a monitoring system according to claim 9, wherein said sensors are bonded to carrier layer via said wiring. 17
However, Costello discloses an optical device (Fig. 1; [0020], e.g., device 100) wherein a photosensor is bonded to carrier layer via wiring ([0021], [0023]-[0024], e.g., the photodetector 116 is bonded to a substrate 104 via wiring).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to use the teachings of Costello in the invention of Day in view of Weber for bonding sensors to a carrier layer via wiring in order to minimize the overall size of a sensing device (see [0023] of Costello).
9. Claim(s) 13 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Day (US 2020/0269815) in view of Weber (US 2019/0078934), and further in view of Costello et al. (US 2017/0160427) and Mattes et al. (US 2014/0236454).
Regarding claim 13, Day in view of Weber and Costello does not specifically disclose a monitoring system according to claim 10, wherein said sensors further comprise image processing and control circuitry for controlling at least one photoelectric emitter element and/or photoelectric detector element.
However, Mattes discloses a monitoring system comprising image processing and control circuitry for controlling at least one photoelectric emitter element and/or photoelectric detector element (Fig. 1; [0045], [0050]-[0053], e.g., the evaluation unit 16 controls at least one photoelectric emitter element 12 and/or photoelectric detector element 14 and determined a three-dimensional position of the object by means of a transmission time of the signal).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to use the teachings of Mattes in the invention of Day in view of Weber and Costello for providing image processing and control circuitry for controlling at least one photoelectric emitter element and/or photoelectric detector element in order to determine a three-dimensional position of the finger.
Conclusion
10. 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 HONG ZHOU whose telephone number is (571)270-5372. The examiner can normally be reached 9:00-5:00 PM.
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, BENJAMIN C LEE can be reached at 571-272-2963. 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.
/HONG ZHOU/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2629
Prosecution Insights