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 .
This is a non-final office action on the merits. Claims 1-5 are currently pending and are addressed below.
The examiner notes that the fundamentals of the rejection are based on the broadest reasonable interpretation of the claim language. Applicant is kindly invited to consider the reference as a whole. References are to be interpreted as by one of ordinary skill in the art rather than as by a novice. See MPEP 2141. Therefore, the relevant inquiry when interpreting a reference is not what the reference expressly discloses on its face but what the reference would teach or suggest to one of ordinary skill in the art.
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted on 07/18/2025 is in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statement is being considered by the examiner.
Claim Interpretation
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(f):
(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.
This application includes one or more claim limitations that do not use the word “means,” but are nonetheless being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, because the claim limitation(s) uses a generic placeholder that is coupled with functional language without reciting sufficient structure to perform the recited function and the generic placeholder is not preceded by a structural modifier. Such claim limitation(s) is/are: “acquisition unit” in claims 1-4.
Because these claim limitations are being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, they 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.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status.
The following is a quotation of the appropriate paragraphs of 35 U.S.C. 102 that form the basis for the rejections under this section made in this Office action:
A person shall be entitled to a patent unless –
(a)(2) the claimed invention was described in a patent issued under section 151, or in an application for patent published or deemed published under section 122(b), in which the patent or application, as the case may be, names another inventor and was effectively filed before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claims 1-5 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) as being anticipated by Endo Hiroki et al. (US20220063406A1), hereinafter referred to as Hiroki.
Regarding claim 1, Hiroki discloses: a display control device (see at least Hiroki, Fig.1, “on-board display device,” ¶¶ [0005]-[0006]) comprising:
an acquisition unit configured to acquire a detection result of a current position of a host vehicle and a detection result of a white line (see at least Hiroki, ¶¶ [0056]-[0058] which discloses an acquisition section from the autonomous driving ECU with capability to acquire lane information indicative of lane boundary lines (white line), for example, whether the lines merge, or branch)
a controller (see at least Hiroki, Fig.1, Item 44, “display control ECU”) configured to:
display a host vehicle image depicting the host vehicle and display the white line based on the detection result of the white line acquired by the acquisition unit (see at least Hiroki, Fig, 5A-B, which discloses examples of display on a HUD according to detection result of a lane boundary, white line, acquired by the acquisition unit; ¶¶ [0006]-[0007], [0056]-[0058], which discloses displaying a host vehicle image depicting the host vehicle and display the white line based on the detection result of the white line acquired by the acquisition unit)
to control display such that the white line is not displayed when the current position is a road other than an expressway or an arterial road (see at least Hiroki, ¶¶ [0043], discloses acquiring current position of the host vehicle; [0057], [0059]-[0060], [0062], which discloses to control the display to approximate a state of the vehicle (surrounding object information indicating the relative position, relative speed, importance level, and so on of each of the surrounding objects, etc.) and not display the white lines relative to the neighboring lanes on the left and right; the controller determines whether or not an event is underway during driving of the host vehicle based on the peripheral situation information that the acquisition section has acquired from the autonomous driving ECU, this means to control display such that the white line is not displayed when the current position is a road other than an expressway or an arterial road)
Regarding claim 2, Hiroki discloses: a display control device (see at least Hiroki, Fig.1, “on-board display device,” ¶¶ [0005]-[0006]) comprising:
an acquisition unit configured to acquire a detection result of a current position of a host vehicle and a detection result of a white line (see at least Hiroki, ¶¶ [0056]-[0058] which discloses an acquisition section from the autonomous driving ECU with capability to acquire lane information indicative of lane boundary lines (white line), for example, whether the lines merge, or branch)
a controller (see at least Hiroki, Fig.1, Item 44, “display control ECU”) configured to:
display a host vehicle image depicting the host vehicle and display the white line based on the detection result of the white line acquired by the acquisition unit (see at least Hiroki, Fig, 5A-B, which discloses examples of display on a HUD according to detection result of a lane boundary, white line, acquired by the acquisition unit; ¶¶ [0006]-[0007], [0056]-[0058], which discloses displaying a host vehicle image depicting the host vehicle and display the white line based on the detection result of the white line acquired by the acquisition unit)
and to control display such that the white line is not displayed when the current position is a non-public road excluding a parking lot (see at least Hiroki, ¶¶ [0043], discloses acquiring current position of the host vehicle; [0057], [0059]-[0060], [0062], which discloses to control the display to approximate a state of the vehicle (surrounding object information indicating the relative position, relative speed, importance level, and so on of each of the surrounding objects, etc.) and not display the white lines relative to the neighboring lanes on the left and right; the controller determines whether or not an event is underway during driving of the host vehicle based on the peripheral situation information that the acquisition section has acquired from the autonomous driving ECU, this means to control display such that the white line is not displayed when the current position is a non-public road excluding a parking lot)
Regarding claim 3, Hiroki discloses: the display control device (see at least Hiroki, Fig.1, “on-board display device,” ¶¶ [0005]-[0006]) according to claim 1, wherein:
the acquisition unit is configured to further acquire a detection result of another vehicle around the host vehicle (see at least Hiroki, ¶¶ [0007]-[0008], [0044]-[0045], which discloses the acquisition unit is configured to further acquire a detection result of another vehicle around the host vehicle)
and the controller is configured to display the other vehicle based on the detection result of the other vehicle (see at least Hiroki, Fig.6, Item 70 and 72, “first preceding vehicle,” and “other surrounding objects,” which discloses an example of displaying other vehicle based on the detection result; ¶¶ [0064]-[0065] which discloses the controller is configured to display the other vehicle based on the detection result of the other vehicle)
and permit a side-view display of the other vehicle with respect to the host vehicle when the white line is not displayed (see at least Hiroki, Fig.6, Item 70 and 72, “first preceding vehicle,” and “other surrounding objects,” which discloses an example of displaying other vehicle based on the detection result; ¶¶ [0064]-[0065] which discloses the controller is configured to display the other vehicle based on the detection result of the other vehicle; [0059]-[0060] which discloses permitting a side-view display of the other vehicle with respect to the host vehicle when the white line is not displayed)
Regarding claim 4, Hiroki discloses: the display control device (see at least Hiroki, Fig.1, “on-board display device,” ¶¶ [0005]-[0006]) according to claim 2, wherein:
the acquisition unit is configured to further acquire a detection result of another vehicle around the host vehicle (see at least Hiroki, ¶¶ [0007]-[0008], [0044]-[0045], which discloses the acquisition unit is configured to further acquire a detection result of another vehicle around the host vehicle)
and the controller is configured to display the other vehicle based on the detection result of the other vehicle (see at least Hiroki, Fig.6, Item 70 and 72, “first preceding vehicle,” and “other surrounding objects,” which discloses an example of displaying other vehicle based on the detection result; ¶¶ [0064]-[0065] which discloses the controller is configured to display the other vehicle based on the detection result of the other vehicle)
and permit a side-view display of the other vehicle with respect to the host vehicle when the white line is not displayed (see at least Hiroki, Fig.6, Item 70 and 72, “first preceding vehicle,” and “other surrounding objects,” which discloses an example of displaying other vehicle based on the detection result; ¶¶ [0064]-[0065] which discloses the controller is configured to display the other vehicle based on the detection result of the other vehicle; [0059]-[0060] which discloses permitting a side-view display of the other vehicle with respect to the host vehicle when the white line is not displayed)
Regarding claim 5, Hiroki discloses: a non-transitory storage medium storing a display control program (see at least Hiroki, Fig.1, “on-board display device,” ¶¶ [0005]-[0006]) that causes a computer to execute a process comprising:
acquiring a detection result of a current position of a host vehicle and a detection result of a white line (see at least Hiroki, ¶¶ [0056]-[0058] which discloses an acquisition section from the autonomous driving ECU with capability to acquire lane information indicative of lane boundary lines (white line), for example, whether the lines merge, or branch)
displaying a host vehicle image depicting the host vehicle and displaying the white line based on the detection result of the white line that is acquired (see at least Hiroki, Fig, 5A-B, which discloses examples of display on a HUD according to detection result of a lane boundary, white line, acquired by the acquisition unit; ¶¶ [0006]-[0007], [0056]-[0058], which discloses displaying a host vehicle image depicting the host vehicle and display the white line based on the detection result of the white line acquired by the acquisition unit)
controlling display such that the white line is not displayed when the current position is a road other than an expressway or an arterial road (see at least Hiroki, ¶¶ [0043], discloses acquiring current position of the host vehicle; [0057], [0059]-[0060], [0062], which discloses to control the display to approximate a state of the vehicle (surrounding object information indicating the relative position, relative speed, importance level, and so on of each of the surrounding objects, etc.) and not display the white lines relative to the neighboring lanes on the left and right; the controller determines whether or not an event is underway during driving of the host vehicle based on the peripheral situation information that the acquisition section has acquired from the autonomous driving ECU, this means to control display such that the white line is not displayed when the current position is a road other than an expressway or an arterial road)
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to KIRSTEN JADE M SANTOS whose telephone number is (571)272-7442. The examiner can normally be reached Monday: . 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, Rachid Bendidi can be reached at (571) 272-4896. 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.
/KIRSTEN JADE M SANTOS/Examiner, Art Unit 3664
/RACHID BENDIDI/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3664
Prosecution Insights