DETAILED ACTION
Claims 1-10 received on 08/15/2025 are considered in this office action. Claims 1-10 are pending for examination.
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 .
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted on 08/15/2025 is being considered by the examiner.
Claim Objections
Claims 2, 7 and 9-10 are objected to because of the following informalities: the object should read the at least one object. Appropriate correction is required.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(b):
(b) CONCLUSION.—The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph:
The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the applicant regards as his invention.
Claim 4 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor (or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the applicant), regards as the invention.
Claim 4 recites the limitation "the car in front", “the current distance” and “the safety distance”. There is insufficient antecedent basis for these limitations in the claim.
DOUBLE PATENTING
A rejection based on double patenting of the “same invention” type finds its support in the language of 35 U.S.C. 101 which states that “whoever invents or discovers any new and useful process... may obtain a patent therefor...” (Emphasis added). Thus, the term “same invention,” in this context, means an invention drawn to identical subject matter. See Miller v. Eagle Mfg. Co., 151 U.S. 186 (1894); In re Vogel, 422 F.2d 438, 164 USPQ 619 (CCPA 1970); In re Ockert, 245 F.2d 467, 114 USPQ 330 (CCPA 1957).
A statutory type (35 U.S.C. 101) double patenting rejection can be overcome by canceling or amending the claims that are directed to the same invention so they are no longer coextensive in scope. The filing of a terminal disclaimer cannot overcome a double patenting rejection based upon 35 U.S.C. 101.
Claims 1-2 and 7 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 101 as claiming the same invention as that of claim 5 of prior U.S. Patent No. 12409730. This is a statutory double patenting rejection.
Table has been created to compare claims 1-2 and 7 of the instant application and claims 1 and 4-5 of U.S. Patent No. 12409730 side-by-side.
Instant Application (App. No. 19/301,554)
U.S. Patent No. 12409730
1. A vehicle safety support system comprising:
a vehicle;
a projector disposed on the vehicle;
a sensor configured to generate object identification information by identifying at least one object located around the vehicle and to generate object location information that corresponds to a location of the identified object;
a processor configured to generate a guide image in consideration of the object identification information; and
a rear display disposed at least at the rear of the vehicle,
wherein the projector is configured to project the guide image on a bottom surface on which the at least one object is located in response to the object location information,
wherein the processor is configured to display, on the rear display, at least one of information related to an operation state of the vehicle, traffic state information of a road on which the vehicle is driven, and signal information of a road on which the vehicle is driven.
1. A vehicle safety support system comprising:
a vehicle;
a projector disposed on the vehicle;
a sensor configured to generate object identification information by identifying at least one object located around the vehicle and to generate object location information that corresponds to a location of the identified object;
a processor configured to generate a guide image in consideration of the object identification information;
4. a rear display disposed at least at the rear of the vehicle
1. wherein the projector is configured to project the guide image on a bottom surface on which the at least one object is located in response to the object location information,
5. wherein the processor is configured to display, on the vehicle display, at least one of information related to an operation state of the vehicle, traffic state information of a road on which the vehicle is driven, and signal information of a road on which the vehicle is driven.
2. The system of claim 1, wherein the sensor is configured to generate object movement information by determining whether the object moves,
wherein the projector is configured to adjust a projection location of the guide image so that the guide image tracks the object in accordance with the object movement information.
1. […] wherein the sensor is configured to generate object movement information by determining whether the object moves in real time,
wherein the projector is configured to make the guide image be continuously located on the bottom surface on which the object is located by adjusting a projection location of the guide image so that the guide image tracks the object in accordance with the object movement information,
7. The system of claim 1, wherein the system further includes an external display disposed in a getting-on/off area of the vehicle,
wherein the external display is configured to generate object touch information by recognizing contact with the object,
wherein the processor is configured to further generate an assistive guide image in consideration of the object identification information,
wherein the external display is configured to be controlled to display the assistive guide image in consideration of the object touch information
1. an external display disposed in a getting-on/off area of the vehicle […] wherein the external display is configured to generate object touch information by recognizing contact with the object,
wherein the processor is configured to further generate an assistive guide image in consideration of the object identification information, and
wherein the external display is configured to be controlled to display the assistive guide image in consideration of the object touch information
All matching elements of the claim limitations appear in bold while non-matching elements of the claim limitations are not bolded. However, the nonmatching elements of displaying on a rear display and on a vehicle display which includes rear display are identical in scope.
The nonstatutory double patenting rejection is based on a judicially created doctrine grounded in public policy (a policy reflected in the statute) so as to prevent the unjustified or improper timewise extension of the “right to exclude” granted by a patent and to prevent possible harassment by multiple assignees. A nonstatutory double patenting rejection is appropriate where the conflicting claims are not identical, but at least one examined application claim is not patentably distinct from the reference claim(s) because the examined application claim is either anticipated by, or would have been obvious over, the reference claim(s). See, e.g., In re Berg, 140 F.3d 1428, 46 USPQ2d 1226 (Fed. Cir. 1998); In re Goodman, 11 F.3d 1046, 29 USPQ2d 2010 (Fed. Cir. 1993); In re Longi, 759 F.2d 887, 225 USPQ 645 (Fed. Cir. 1985); In re Van Ornum, 686 F.2d 937, 214 USPQ 761 (CCPA 1982); In re Vogel, 422 F.2d 438, 164 USPQ 619 (CCPA 1970); In re Thorington, 418 F.2d 528, 163 USPQ 644 (CCPA 1969).
A timely filed terminal disclaimer in compliance with 37 CFR 1.321(c) or 1.321(d) may be used to overcome an actual or provisional rejection based on nonstatutory double patenting provided the reference application or patent either is shown to be commonly owned with the examined application, or claims an invention made as a result of activities undertaken within the scope of a joint research agreement. See MPEP § 717.02 for applications subject to examination under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA as explained in MPEP § 2159. See MPEP § 2146 et seq. for applications not subject to examination under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA . A terminal disclaimer must be signed in compliance with 37 CFR 1.321(b).
The filing of a terminal disclaimer by itself is not a complete reply to a nonstatutory double patenting (NSDP) rejection. A complete reply requires that the terminal disclaimer be accompanied by a reply requesting reconsideration of the prior Office action. Even where the NSDP rejection is provisional the reply must be complete. See MPEP § 804, subsection I.B.1. For a reply to a non-final Office action, see 37 CFR 1.111(a). For a reply to final Office action, see 37 CFR 1.113(c). A request for reconsideration while not provided for in 37 CFR 1.113(c) may be filed after final for consideration. See MPEP §§ 706.07(e) and 714.13.
The USPTO Internet website contains terminal disclaimer forms which may be used. Please visit www.uspto.gov/patent/patents-forms. The actual filing date of the application in which the form is filed determines what form (e.g., PTO/SB/25, PTO/SB/26, PTO/AIA /25, or PTO/AIA /26) should be used. A web-based eTerminal Disclaimer may be filled out completely online using web-screens. An eTerminal Disclaimer that meets all requirements is auto-processed and approved immediately upon submission. For more information about eTerminal Disclaimers, refer to www.uspto.gov/patents/apply/applying-online/eterminal-disclaimer.
Claims 3 is rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claim 5 of U.S. Patent No. 12409730.
Regarding claim 3, ‘730 teaches the system of claim 1. ‘730 further teaches wherein the processor is configured to further generate rear vehicle guide information related to a vehicle that travels from the rear of the vehicle, and wherein the processor is configured to further display the rear vehicle guide information on the rear display (Claim 5: “wherein the processor is configured to display, on the vehicle display, at least one of information related to an operation state of the vehicle, traffic state information of a road on which the vehicle is driven, and signal information of a road on which the vehicle is driven”, wherein “traffic state information of a road” indicates generate rear vehicle guide information related to a vehicle that travels from the rear of the vehicle, and wherein the processor is configured to further display the rear vehicle guide information on the rear display)
Claim 4 is rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claim 5 of U.S. Patent No. 12409730 (hereinafter ‘730) in view of TERUHISA (JPH10989A).
The Espacenet English translation of description of TERUHISA referenced by the Examiner is attached.
Regarding claim 4, ‘730 teaches the system of claim 3, but fails to specifically teach wherein the rear vehicle guide information comprises the current distance from the car in front and the safety distance, wherein the current distance is shorter than the safety distance, the distance from the car in front may be displayed in red color as warning.
However, TERUHISA teaches wherein the rear vehicle guide information comprises the current distance from the car in front and the safety distance (FIG. 3; para. [0009]: “means includes a distance sensor for measuring the inter-vehicle distance to the preceding vehicle”; para. [0011]: “Figure 3 is a diagram showing a vehicle-to-vehicle distance display by the information display system to the rear vehicle of one embodiment of the present invention,”; para. [0017]: “At risk perceive is displayed in a different display color of the bar chart showing the inter-vehicle distance as shown in FIG. 3 (e) to red”, wherein when vehicle-to-vehicle distance reaching a threshold to turn red, indicates the safety distance),
wherein the current distance is shorter than the safety distance, the distance from the car in front may be displayed in red color as warning (FIG. 3; para. [0017]: “Next, we describe the inter-vehicle distance display example. The radar device 12 and vehicle speed meter 13 displays on the display unit 31 the measured inter-vehicle distance. In this case, the normal will show inter-vehicle distance as in FIG. 3 (a), when danger perceive FIG. 3 (b), and displayed in different display colors and font size of the inter-vehicle distance as described (c). Further, instead of displaying the inter-vehicle distance with a letter (number), display may be performed by a graph (meter). For example, normal time is displayed with a green bar graph inter-vehicle distance as in Figure 3 (d). At risk perceive is displayed in a different display color of the bar chart showing the inter-vehicle distance as shown in FIG. 3 (e) to red. Vehicle distance numbers are displayed in a graph or the like, also, since at risk perceive will display as draw more attention, following vehicle, it is determined that there is a possibility that the vehicle is slam on the brakes, with care beforehand rear-end collisions can be prevented because the operation”).
TERUHISA is considered to be analogous to the claimed invention because it is in the same field of using projectors to objects in the surrounding of the vehicle. Therefore, it would have been obvious to someone of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified ’730 to incorporate the teachings of TERUHISA and display inter-vehicle distance and warn using colors based on urgency. Doing so would provide information on the vehicle itself, the road ahead and the vehicle conditions, thus preventing rear-end collision or the like from occurring (TERUHISA, para. [0001]-[0004]).
Claims 5-6 are rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claim 5 of U.S. Patent No. 12409730 (hereinafter ‘730) in view of Reiley (US20190196482A1).
Reiley is cited in the IDS received on 08/15/2025.
Regarding claim 5, ‘730 teaches the system of claim 1, but fails to specifically teach wherein the vehicle is a vehicle in which a driving mode can be switched between an autonomous driving mode and a manual driving mode, wherein the processor is configured to display current driving mode information of the vehicle on the rear display.
However, Reiley further teaches wherein the vehicle is a vehicle in which a driving mode can be switched between an autonomous driving mode and a manual driving mode (para. [0033]: “while operating in the fully-autonomous driving mode […] in this implementation, the autonomous vehicle can transition into a manual driving mode responsive to an input by an occupant of the vehicle”),
wherein the processor is configured to display current driving mode information of the vehicle on the rear display (FIG. 5; para. [0032]: “In one variation shown in FIG. 5, the autonomous vehicle indicates its current driving mode by updating a color (or “hue”) rendered on the rear- and/or forward-facing displays. For example, the autonomous vehicle can transition a background rendered on each display: to a blue hue when entering a fully-autonomous driving mode; to an orange hue when entering a semi-autonomous driving mode; and to a white hue when entering a fully-manual driving mode.”).
Reiley is considered analogous to the claimed invention because it is reasonably pertinent to the problem of informing surrounding vehicles. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify ’730 and incorporate the driving mode indicator displaying on the rear-display of Reiley. Doing so would allow the autonomous vehicle to inform the state of the vehicle and its intent and/or information ahead of the vehicle to its rear vehicles, thus enhancing safety (Reiley, Abstract).
Regarding claim 6, ’730 in view of Reiley teaches the system of claim 5. Reiley further teaches wherein the processor is configured to further display, on the rear display, autonomous driving level information of the autonomous driving mode together with the current driving mode information in case that the vehicle is in the autonomous driving mode (FIG. 5; para. [0032]: “blue hue when entering a fully-autonomous driving mode”; para. [0039]: “once the autonomous vehicle determines that an object of interest (e.g., a pedestrian or other road vehicle) has exited the intersection and/or determined that a traffic signal is indicating that the autonomous vehicle has the right of way in Block S122, the autonomous vehicle can update the rear-facing display to render this animated arrow in a “green” hue to indicate that the intersection ahead is clear to enter in Block S124”; para. [0036]: “The autonomous vehicle can also update the display with emojis representing: a happy emotion when the autonomous vehicle is cruising on a highway with minimal traffic; confused or “frazzled” emotion when a confidence score for a next navigation action is low; a patient emotion; a determined emotion; a submissive emotion when following another vehicle is heavy traffic; and”).
Claim 8 is rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claim 9 of U.S. Patent No. 12409730 (hereinafter ‘730), in view of Reiley (US20190196482A1).
Instant Application (App. No. 19/301,554)
U.S. Patent No. 12409730
1. A vehicle safety support system comprising:
a vehicle;
a projector disposed on the vehicle;
a sensor configured to generate object identification information by identifying at least one object located around the vehicle and to generate object location information that corresponds to a location of the identified object;
a processor configured to generate a guide image in consideration of the object identification information; and
a rear display disposed at least at the rear of the vehicle,
wherein the projector is configured to project the guide image on a bottom surface on which the at least one object is located in response to the object location information,
wherein the processor is configured to display, on the rear display, at least one of information related to an operation state of the vehicle, traffic state information of a road on which the vehicle is driven, and signal information of a road on which the vehicle is driven.7. The system of claim 1, wherein the system further includes an external display disposed in a getting-on/off area of the vehicle,
wherein the external display is configured to generate object touch information by recognizing contact with the object,
wherein the processor is configured to further generate an assistive guide image in consideration of the object identification information,
wherein the external display is configured to be controlled to display the assistive guide image in consideration of the object touch information.
8. The system of claim 7, wherein the processor is configured to generate the guide image and the assistive guide image based on the object identification information and a template image, and
wherein the processor is further configured to provide a user environment in which the template image can be generated or selected.
9. A vehicle safety support system comprising:
a vehicle;
a projector disposed on the vehicle;
a sensor configured to generate object identification information by identifying at least one object located around the vehicle and to generate object location information that corresponds to a location of the identified object;
a processor configured to generate a guide image in consideration of the object identification information,
wherein the projector is configured to project the guide image on a bottom surface on which the at least one object is located in response to the object location information,[…]
wherein the system further includes an external display disposed in a getting-on/off area of the vehicle,
wherein the external display is configured to generate object touch information by recognizing contact with the object,
wherein the processor is configured to further generate an assistive guide image in consideration of the object identification information,
wherein the external display is configured to be controlled to display the assistive guide image in consideration of the object touch information,
wherein the processor is configured to generate the guide image and the assistive guide image based on the object identification information and a template image, and
wherein the processor is further configured to provide a user environment in which the template image can be generated or selected.
However, Reiley teaches a rear display disposed at least at the rear of the vehicle (FIGs. 1-6; Abstract: “One variation of a method for communicating state, intent, and context of an autonomous vehicle includes: at a first time, displaying a first icon representing a current state of a vehicle on a rear-facing visual display arranged on the vehicle”; para. [0026]: “In this implementation, the rear-facing display can be mounted to a rear decklid, rear door or hatch, or rear tailgate, etc. of the vehicle, mounted to roof of the vehicle, mounted to or facing outwardly from a rear window of the vehicle, etc.”) and wherein the processor is configured to display, on the rear display, at least one of information related to an operation state of the vehicle, traffic state information of a road on which the vehicle is driven, and signal information of a road on which the vehicle is driven (FIG. 3 and 6; para. [0048]-[0052]: “Block S122, the autonomous vehicle can update the rear-facing display to indicate the nature of this obstruction to the trailing vehicle. For example, if the autonomous vehicle detects a pedestrian in the crosswalk ahead of the autonomous vehicle, the autonomous vehicle can update the rear-facing display to render an image of a pedestrian (e.g., a “stick figure”), such as an animated image of a pedestrian moving at a rate corresponding to a velocity of a slowest pedestrian currently detected in the intersection […] The autonomous vehicle can implement similar methods and techniques to collect data broadcast by other vehicles and/or static sensor systems nearby (e.g., a traffic signal or other infrastructure) and can update the rear- and/or forward-facing displays to render these data for drivers, passengers, and pedestrians, etc. outside of the vehicle to visually access addition data related to the scene around the vehicle […] methods and techniques to indicate presence of stopped traffic ahead of the autonomous vehicle to another driver or vehicle behind the autonomous vehicle if the autonomous vehicle detects rapid deceleration of a vehicle ahead. For example, the autonomous vehicle can update the rear-facing display to show a rapidly flashing “red” representation of a line of stopped vehicles (and/or text) to indicate that the autonomous vehicle intends to rapidly decelerate and that the autonomous vehicle is approaching heavy traffic.”, wherein the rear-facing display relays the information ahead of the autonomous vehicle which may not be available to the vehicles behind).
Reiley is considered analogous to the claimed invention because it is reasonably pertinent to the problem of informing surrounding vehicles. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify ’730 and incorporate the rear-display of Reiley. Doing so would allow the autonomous vehicle to inform of its intent and/or information ahead of the vehicle to its rear vehicles, thus enhancing safety (Reiley, Abstract).
Claims 9 is rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claim 5 of U.S. Patent No. 12409730 (hereinafter ‘730) in view of ROY (US11926344B1).
Regarding claim 9, ‘730 teaches the system of claim 1, but fails to specifically teach wherein the object identification information comprises size information of the identified object, and wherein the processor is configured to define a protection area of the object in accordance with the size information of the object and to generate the guide image so that a border of the protection area is changed in shape or color
ROY teaches wherein the object identification information comprises size information of the identified object, and wherein the processor is configured to define a protection area of the object in accordance with the size information of the object and to generate the guide image so that a border of the protection area is changed in shape or color (FIG. 6; FIG. 7; FIG. 9; FIG. 13; col 9 lines 4-15: “In this example, the first light projector 20 illuminates the ground beneath a first pedestrian 30 and the second light projector 22 illuminates the ground beneath a second pedestrian 32. […] The first and second illuminated shapes 60, 62 may be of different shapes and/or different sizes. The first and second beams of light 40, 42 may be the same color or different colors.”, wherein FIG. 6 and FIG. 7 show illuminating the ground beneath a pedestrian and cyclist, which have different size, thus indicating object identification information comprises size information of the identified object, and wherein the processor is configured to define a protection area of the object in accordance with the size information of the object and to generate the guide image, as the illumination is based on sensor data).
ROY is considered to be analogous to the claimed invention because it is in the same field of using projectors to objects in the surrounding of the vehicle. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify ’730 and incorporate the teachings of ROY and project a boarder around the object based on shape. Doing so would enhance safety by visually notify the object that the autonomous vehicle is presently tracking the object (ROY, Abstract).
Claims 10 is rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claim 5 of U.S. Patent No. 12409730 (hereinafter ‘730) in view of ROY (US11926344B1), and further in view of KAMHI (US20190106050A1).
Regarding claim 10, ‘730 in view of ROY teaches the system of claim 9. ROY further teaches wherein the sensor is configured to generate the object location information and the object identification information by identifying the object that gets off the vehicle and to be activated in response to opening of a door of the vehicle (ROY col 14 lines 3-18: “one variant, the AV projects the warning 180 only in response to determining that the door is imminently going to be opened. This determination may be based on arrival at a destination coupled with knowledge of where the driver or passenger is sitting. The determination may be made based on a user unlocking the door and/or pulling on an internal door lever to open the door”; FIGs. 6-24; col 7 lines 32-40: “The autonomous vehicle (AV) 10 includes a sensor 15 supported by the body 14 for detecting an object in a vicinity of the autonomous vehicle 10. The object may be a pedestrian or cyclist”, wherein object in the vicinity comprises of object that gets off the vehicle).
However, in the same field of endeavor, KAMHI teaches wherein the at least one object is in a state of getting off the vehicle (KAMHI FIG. 3; KAMHI Abstract: “A method of augmented projection for vehicle passengers includes sensing that the passenger is within, or about to enter, a drop zone, and sensing one or more static obstacles within the drop zone.”), and
wherein the sensor is configured to generate the object location information and the object identification information by identifying the object that gets off the vehicle and to be activated in response to opening of a door of the vehicle (KAMHI FIG. 3; KAMHI para. [0036]: “FIG. 3 shows additional features or functions the vehicle 10 may use to assist the passenger 12, who is illustrated within the drop zone 20. The vehicle 10 may be configured to determine and project a recommended or suggested pathway 46 for the passenger 12. The suggested pathway 46 is configured to, most likely or probably, according to the processor or control system, avoid any sensed static obstacles, and possibly dynamic obstacles. As shown in FIG. 3, the suggested pathway 46 avoids both the first obstacle 22 and the second obstacle 24.”).
KAMHI is considered to be analogous to the claimed invention because it is in the same field of using projectors to objects in the surrounding of the vehicle. Therefore, it would have been obvious to someone of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified ‘730 in view of ROY to incorporate the teachings of KAMHI and project guidance images in response to a passenger exiting the vehicle. Doing so would aid the passenger and/or objects in alerting obstacles based on their significance level (KAMHI para. [0031]), and combination resulting in projecting image on the pedestrian as well.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
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 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 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.
The text of those sections of Title 35, U.S. Code not included in this action can be found in a prior Office action.
The factual inquiries for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized as follows:
1. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art.
2. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue.
3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art.
4. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness.
Claims 1-3, 5-6 and 9 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over ROY (US11926344B1), in view of Reiley (US20190196482A1).
Regarding claim 1, ROY teaches a vehicle safety support system comprising:
a vehicle (FIG. 6 element 10: “autonomous vehicle”);
a projector disposed on the vehicle (FIGs. 6-24; col 7 lines 61-62: “In the embodiment depicted in FIG. 6 , the AV 10 further includes a light projector 20 supported by the body”);
a sensor configured to generate object identification information by identifying at least one object located around the vehicle and to generate object location information that corresponds to a location of the identified object (FIGs. 6-24; col 7 lines 32-40: “The autonomous vehicle (AV) 10 includes a sensor 15 supported by the body 14 for detecting an object in a vicinity of the autonomous vehicle 10. The object may be a pedestrian or cyclist. The sensor 15 generates sensor data (e.g. image data) for the object. The sensor may be a camera, LIDAR, RADAR or any equivalent sensor. The AV 10 may have multiple sensors 15. The expression “in a vicinity” of the vehicle means generally within sensor range, e.g. within LIDAR range, camera range or RADAR range”; col 13 lines 58-61: “the AV 10 only projects the warning if a notification criterion is met. The notification criterion may be based on relative position (i.e. close how the cyclist 31 is to the vehicle 10) and/or their relative velocities and directions of travel.”, wherein sensor data comprise of object location information as indicated by “relative position/velocities/directions of travel”);
a processor (FIG. 6; col 7 lines 46-47: “the autonomous vehicle (AV) 10 includes a processor 25 communicatively coupled to the sensor 15”) configured to generate a guide image in consideration of the object identification information (FIGs. 6-24; col 7 lines 52-60: “The processor 25 is further configured to determine if a road surface beneath the pedestrian 30 or cyclist is to be illuminated and, upon determining that the road surface beneath the pedestrian 30 or cyclist is to be illuminated, to output an illumination signal. The illumination signal causes a light, light source or illumination source (referred to herein as a “light projector”) to illuminate the road surface beneath the pedestrian 30 or cyclist”; col 8 lines 3-8: “the beam of light forms an illumination, e.g. an illuminated circle 60, beneath the pedestrian 30. The shape of the illumination may be circular, annular, star-shaped, elliptical, oblong, polygonal (e.g. triangular, square, rectangular, pentagonal, hexagonal, octagonal, etc.)”, wherein shape indicates guide image);
wherein the projector is configured to project the guide image on a bottom surface on which the at least one object is located in response to the object location information (FIGs. 6-24; col 7-8 lines 64-8: “wherein the light projector 20, in response to receiving the illumination signal, projects a beam of light 40 onto the road surface 50 beneath the pedestrian 30 or cyclist to visually notify the pedestrian 30 or cyclist that the autonomous vehicle 10 is presently tracking (i.e. is aware of) the pedestrian 30 or cyclist. In the embodiment depicted in FIG. 6 , the beam of light forms an illumination, e.g. an illuminated circle 60, beneath the pedestrian 30. The shape of the illumination may be circular, annular, star-shaped, elliptical, oblong, polygonal (e.g. triangular, square, rectangular, pentagonal, hexagonal, octagonal, etc.).”), but fails to specifically teach a rear display disposed at least at the rear of the vehicle and wherein the processor is configured to display, on the rear display, at least one of information related to an operation state of the vehicle, traffic state information of a road on which the vehicle is driven, and signal information of a road on which the vehicle is driven.
However, Reiley teaches a rear display disposed at least at the rear of the vehicle (FIGs. 1-6; Abstract: “One variation of a method for communicating state, intent, and context of an autonomous vehicle includes: at a first time, displaying a first icon representing a current state of a vehicle on a rear-facing visual display arranged on the vehicle”; para. [0026]: “In this implementation, the rear-facing display can be mounted to a rear decklid, rear door or hatch, or rear tailgate, etc. of the vehicle, mounted to roof of the vehicle, mounted to or facing outwardly from a rear window of the vehicle, etc.”) and wherein the processor is configured to display, on the rear display, at least one of information related to an operation state of the vehicle, traffic state information of a road on which the vehicle is driven, and signal information of a road on which the vehicle is driven (FIG. 3 and 6; para. [0048]-[0052]: “Block S122, the autonomous vehicle can update the rear-facing display to indicate the nature of this obstruction to the trailing vehicle. For example, if the autonomous vehicle detects a pedestrian in the crosswalk ahead of the autonomous vehicle, the autonomous vehicle can update the rear-facing display to render an image of a pedestrian (e.g., a “stick figure”), such as an animated image of a pedestrian moving at a rate corresponding to a velocity of a slowest pedestrian currently detected in the intersection […] The autonomous vehicle can implement similar methods and techniques to collect data broadcast by other vehicles and/or static sensor systems nearby (e.g., a traffic signal or other infrastructure) and can update the rear- and/or forward-facing displays to render these data for drivers, passengers, and pedestrians, etc. outside of the vehicle to visually access addition data related to the scene around the vehicle […] methods and techniques to indicate presence of stopped traffic ahead of the autonomous vehicle to another driver or vehicle behind the autonomous vehicle if the autonomous vehicle detects rapid deceleration of a vehicle ahead. For example, the autonomous vehicle can update the rear-facing display to show a rapidly flashing “red” representation of a line of stopped vehicles (and/or text) to indicate that the autonomous vehicle intends to rapidly decelerate and that the autonomous vehicle is approaching heavy traffic.”, wherein the rear-facing display relays the information ahead of the autonomous vehicle which may not be available to the vehicles behind).
ROY is considered to be analogous to the claimed invention because it is in the same field of using projectors to objects in the surrounding of the vehicle. Reiley is considered analogous to the claimed invention because it is reasonably pertinent to the problem of informing surrounding vehicles. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify ROY and incorporate the rear-display of Reiley. Doing so would allow the autonomous vehicle to inform of its intent and/or information ahead of the vehicle to its rear vehicles, thus enhancing safety (Reiley, Abstract).
Regarding claim 2, ROY in view of Reiley teaches the system of claim 1, wherein the sensor is configured to generate object movement information by determining whether the object moves (FIGs. 6-24; col 7 lines 35-40: “The sensor 15 generates sensor data (e.g. image data) for the object. The sensor may be a camera, LIDAR, RADAR or any equivalent sensor. The AV 10 may have multiple sensors 15. The expression “in a vicinity” of the vehicle means generally within sensor range, e.g. within LIDAR range, camera range or RADAR range.”; col 8 lines 10-13: “The illumination 60 may be used to illuminate the ground beneath the pedestrian 30 or the cyclist 31 whether the pedestrian 30 or the cyclist 31 is stationary or moving”, wherein the sensor data is generated for objects that are both static and dynamic),
wherein the projector is configured to adjust a projection location of the guide image so that the guide image tracks the object in accordance with the object movement information (FIGs. 6-24; col 8 lines 8-13: “As depicted by way of example in FIG. 7 , the light projector 20 of the AV 10 projects an illuminated circle 60 beneath a cyclist 31. The illumination 60 may be used to illuminate the ground beneath the pedestrian 30 or the cyclist 31 whether the pedestrian 30 or the cyclist 31 is stationary or moving. In the latter case, the light projector 20, in at least some embodiments, dynamically adjusts or moves the position or placement of the illumination 60 so it remains beneath the moving the pedestrian 30 or the cyclist 31 as the pedestrian or cyclist is moving.”).
Regarding claim 3, ROY in view of Reiley teaches the system of claim 1. Reiley further teaches wherein the processor is configured to further generate rear vehicle guide information related to a vehicle that travels from the rear of the vehicle, and wherein the processor is configured to further display the rear vehicle guide information on the rear display (FIG. 5; FIG. 6; para. [0010]: “detecting proximity of the vehicle to an intersection in Block S120, detecting a current state of the intersection ahead of the vehicle in Block S122, and rendering a second representation of the current state of the intersection on the rear-facing visual display in Block S124”; para. [0039]: “In this example, the autonomous vehicle can also trigger the rear-facing display to render this animated arrow in a “red” hue to indicate that the intersection ahead of the autonomous vehicle is not yet safe to enter in Block S124 (described below); once the autonomous vehicle determines that an object of interest (e.g., a pedestrian or other road vehicle) has exited the intersection and/or determined that a traffic signal is indicating that the autonomous vehicle has the right of way in Block S122, the autonomous vehicle can update the rear-facing display to render this animated arrow in a “green” hue to indicate that the intersection ahead is clear to enter in Block S124”, wherein displaying in the rear-display indicates generate rear vehicle guide information)
Regarding claim 5, ROY in view of Reiley teaches the system of claim 1. Reiley further teaches wherein the vehicle is a vehicle in which a driving mode can be switched between an autonomous driving mode and a manual driving mode (para. [0033]: “while operating in the fully-autonomous driving mode […] in this implementation, the autonomous vehicle can transition into a manual driving mode responsive to an input by an occupant of the vehicle”),
wherein the processor is configured to display current driving mode information of the vehicle on the rear display (FIG. 5; para. [0032]: “In one variation shown in FIG. 5, the autonomous vehicle indicates its current driving mode by updating a color (or “hue”) rendered on the rear- and/or forward-facing displays. For example, the autonomous vehicle can transition a background rendered on each display: to a blue hue when entering a fully-autonomous driving mode; to an orange hue when entering a semi-autonomous driving mode; and to a white hue when entering a fully-manual driving mode.”).
Regarding claim 6, ROY in view of Reiley teaches the system of claim 5. Reiley further teaches wherein the processor is configured to further display, on the rear display, autonomous driving level information of the autonomous driving mode together with the current driving mode information in case that the vehicle is in the autonomous driving mode (FIG. 5; para. [0032]: “blue hue when entering a fully-autonomous driving mode”; para. [0039]: “once the autonomous vehicle determines that an object of interest (e.g., a pedestrian or other road vehicle) has exited the intersection and/or determined that a traffic signal is indicating that the autonomous vehicle has the right of way in Block S122, the autonomous vehicle can update the rear-facing display to render this animated arrow in a “green” hue to indicate that the intersection ahead is clear to enter in Block S124”; para. [0036]: “The autonomous vehicle can also update the display with emojis representing: a happy emotion when the autonomous vehicle is cruising on a highway with minimal traffic; confused or “frazzled” emotion when a confidence score for a next navigation action is low; a patient emotion; a determined emotion; a submissive emotion when following another vehicle is heavy traffic; and”).
Regarding claim 9, ROY in view of Reiley teaches the system of claim 1. ROY further teaches wherein the object identification information comprises size information of the identified object, and wherein the processor is configured to define a protection area of the object in accordance with the size information of the object and to generate the guide image so that a border of the protection area is changed in shape or color (FIG. 6; FIG. 7; FIG. 9; FIG. 13; col 9 lines 4-15: “In this example, the first light projector 20 illuminates the ground beneath a first pedestrian 30 and the second light projector 22 illuminates the ground beneath a second pedestrian 32. […] The first and second illuminated shapes 60, 62 may be of different shapes and/or different sizes. The first and second beams of light 40, 42 may be the same color or different colors.”, wherein FIG. 6 and FIG. 7 show illuminating the ground beneath a pedestrian and cyclist, which have different size, thus indicating object identification information comprises size information of the identified object, and wherein the processor is configured to define a protection area of the object in accordance with the size information of the object and to generate the guide image, as the illumination is based on sensor data).
Claim 4 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over ROY, in view of Reiley, and further in view of TERUHISA (JPH10989A).
The Espacenet English translation of description of TERUHISA referenced by the Examiner is attached.
Regarding claim 4, ROY in view of Reiley teaches the system of claim 3, but fails to specifically teach wherein the rear vehicle guide information comprises the current distance from the car in front and the safety distance, wherein the current distance is shorter than the safety distance, the distance from the car in front may be displayed in red color as warning.
However, TERUHISA teaches wherein the rear vehicle guide information comprises the current distance from the car in front and the safety distance (FIG. 3; para. [0009]: “means includes a distance sensor for measuring the inter-vehicle distance to the preceding vehicle”; para. [0011]: “Figure 3 is a diagram showing a vehicle-to-vehicle distance display by the information display system to the rear vehicle of one embodiment of the present invention,”; para. [0017]: “At risk perceive is displayed in a different display color of the bar chart showing the inter-vehicle distance as shown in FIG. 3 (e) to red”, wherein when vehicle-to-vehicle distance reaching a threshold to turn red, indicates the safety distance),
wherein the current distance is shorter than the safety distance, the distance from the car in front may be displayed in red color as warning (FIG. 3; para. [0017]: “Next, we describe the inter-vehicle distance display example. The radar device 12 and vehicle speed meter 13 displays on the display unit 31 the measured inter-vehicle distance. In this case, the normal will show inter-vehicle distance as in FIG. 3 (a), when danger perceive FIG. 3 (b), and displayed in different display colors and font size of the inter-vehicle distance as described (c). Further, instead of displaying the inter-vehicle distance with a letter (number), display may be performed by a graph (meter). For example, normal time is displayed with a green bar graph inter-vehicle distance as in Figure 3 (d). At risk perceive is displayed in a different display color of the bar chart showing the inter-vehicle distance as shown in FIG. 3 (e) to red. Vehicle distance numbers are displayed in a graph or the like, also, since at risk perceive will display as draw more attention, following vehicle, it is determined that there is a possibility that the vehicle is slam on the brakes, with care beforehand rear-end collisions can be prevented because the operation”).
TERUHISA is considered to be analogous to the claimed invention because it is in the same field of using projectors to objects in the surrounding of the vehicle. Therefore, it would have been obvious to someone of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified ROY in view of Reiley to incorporate the teachings of TERUHISA and display inter-vehicle distance and warn using colors based on urgency. Doing so would provide information on the vehicle itself, the road ahead and the vehicle conditions, thus preventing rear-end collision or the like from occurring (TERUHISA, para. [0001]-[0004]).
Claim 10 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over ROY in view of Reiley, and further in view of KAMHI (US20190106050A1).
Regarding claim 10, ROY in view of Reiley teaches the system of claim 9. ROY further teaches wherein the sensor is configured to generate the object location information and the object identification information by identifying the object that gets off the vehicle and to be activated in response to opening of a door of the vehicle (ROY col 14 lines 3-18: “one variant, the AV projects the warning 180 only in response to determining that the door is imminently going to be opened. This determination may be based on arrival at a destination coupled with knowledge of where the driver or passenger is sitting. The determination may be made based on a user unlocking the door and/or pulling on an internal door lever to open the door”; FIGs. 6-24; col 7 lines 32-40: “The autonomous vehicle (AV) 10 includes a sensor 15 supported by the body 14 for detecting an object in a vicinity of the autonomous vehicle 10. The object may be a pedestrian or cyclist”, wherein object in the vicinity comprises of object that gets off the vehicle).
However, in the same field of endeavor, KAMHI teaches wherein the at least one object is in a state of getting off the vehicle (KAMHI FIG. 3; KAMHI Abstract: “A method of augmented projection for vehicle passengers includes sensing that the passenger is within, or about to enter, a drop zone, and sensing one or more static obstacles within the drop zone.”), and
wherein the sensor is configured to generate the object location information and the object identification information by identifying the object that gets off the vehicle and to be activated in response to opening of a door of the vehicle (KAMHI FIG. 3; KAMHI para. [0036]: “FIG. 3 shows additional features or functions the vehicle 10 may use to assist the passenger 12, who is illustrated within the drop zone 20. The vehicle 10 may be configured to determine and project a recommended or suggested pathway 46 for the passenger 12. The suggested pathway 46 is configured to, most likely or probably, according to the processor or control system, avoid any sensed static obstacles, and possibly dynamic obstacles. As shown in FIG. 3, the suggested pathway 46 avoids both the first obstacle 22 and the second obstacle 24.”).
KAMHI is considered to be analogous to the claimed invention because it is in the same field of using projectors to objects in the surrounding of the vehicle. Therefore, it would have been obvious to someone of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified ROY in view of Reiley to incorporate the teachings of KAMHI and project guidance images in response to a passenger exiting the vehicle. Doing so would aid the passenger and/or objects in alerting obstacles based on their significance level (KAMHI para. [0031]), and combination resulting in projecting image on the pedestrian as well.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 7-8 would be allowable if rewritten to overcome the double patenting rejections set forth in this Office action and to include all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Somuah (US20050134441A1) teaches a digital message display for vehicles which detects a tailgater and automatically flashes a warning message, directed to the tailgater, on a message display that is located in the rear window of the vehicle in view of following traffic.
Badillo (US20160207448A1) teaches projecting warning signal by the projector onto pavement laterally adjacent a motor vehicle when the sliding door is opened in order to warn oncoming drivers that someone could potentially be leaving the vehicle through the open sliding door.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ANDREW S KIM whose telephone number is (571)272-7356. The examiner can normally be reached Mon - Fri 8AM - 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, James J Lee can be reached on (571) 270-5965. 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.
/ANDREW SANG KIM/Examiner, Art Unit 3668
Prosecution Insights