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 .
Double Patenting
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 1-20 are rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claim1-19 of U.S. Patent No. 12441188. Although the claims at issue are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other.
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.
Claim(s) 1-20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Gautier US Pg. Pub. No. (2020/0262294) referred to hereinafter as Gautier.
As per claim 1, Gautier teaches a system for a vehicle (see at least Para 17, 25), comprising: a first display configured to display driver content (see at least Para 18, 20-21); a second display configured to display at least user content (see at least Para19, 22-24); and a processing unit in communication with the first display and the second display (see at least Para 25), the processing unit comprising a processor configured to: provide the driver content to the first display (see at least Para 21, 25), detect that the first display is temporarily or at least partially inoperable (see at least Para 17,35), determine a portion of the driver content for display on the second display (see at least Para 17, 40), and provide the portion of the driver content to the second display (see at least Para 36, 40).
As per claim 2, Gautier teaches a system according to claim 1, wherein the first display comprises an instrument display and the second display comprises an infotainment display (see at least Para 18, 20-21).
As per claim 3, Gautier teaches a system according to claim 1, wherein to detect that the first display is temporarily or at least partially inoperable comprises: detect that the first display is in a power off mode; detect that the first display is semi-malfunctional; or detect that the first display has one or more regions of pixels that have pixel values below a dark pixel value or above a bright pixel value (see at least Para 17, 35).
As per claim 4, Gautier teaches a system according to claim 1, wherein the portion of the driver content comprises safety-related content or vehicle-related content (see at least Para 20-21, 39-42).
As per claim 5, Gautier teaches a system according to claim 4, wherein the portion of the driver content comprises at least one of a vehicle speed, a vehicle battery charge level, a vehicle charge range, a vehicle fuel level, a vehicle fuel range, a vehicle tire pressure, a vehicle energy efficiency, a transmission gear indication, or a map (see at least Para 17, 20, 36-42).
As per claim 6, Gautier teaches a system according to claim 4, wherein the processor is further configured to always display the portion of the driver content on the first display or the second display (see at least Para 17, 36-40).
As per claim 7, Gautier teaches a system according to claim 1, wherein the processor is further configured to provide the user content to the second display (see at least Para 19, 22-24).
As per claim 8, Gautier teaches a system according to claim 7, wherein the processor is further configured to provide only the portion of the driver content for display on the second display (see at least Para 39, 52).
As per claim 9, Gautier teaches a system according to claim 7, wherein the processor is further configured to provide the portion of the driver content and the user content for concurrent display on the second display (see at least Para 37).
As per claim 10, Gautier teaches a system according to claim 9, wherein the processor is further configured to provide the portion of the driver content as an overlay pane for display on the second display (see at least Para 37).
As per claim 11, Gautier teaches a system according to claim 10, wherein the overlay pane comprises a user-repositionable floating window (see at least Para 37-38, 50).
As per claim 12, Gautier teaches a system according to claim 9, wherein the portion of the driver content is displayed in a first window, the user content is displayed in a second window, and the first window and the second window are distinct contiguous windows (see at least Para 37).
As per claim 13, Gautier teaches a system according to claim 12, wherein the first window and the second window are displayed in a side-by-side layout or a top-to-bottom layout (see at least Para 40-42).
As per claim 14, Gautier teaches a system according to claim 12, wherein the second window is configured to be collapsed or minimized (see at least Para 17, 25, 39-42).
As per claim 15, Gautier teaches a system according to claim 12, wherein the processor is further configured to adjust an aspect ratio, a resolution, or a viewable screen size of the distinct contiguous windows (see at least Para 40-42).
As per claim 16, Gautier teaches a system according to claim 1, wherein the user content comprises infotainment content (see at least Para 19, 22-24).
As per claim 17, Gautier teaches a system according to claim 16, wherein the infotainment content comprises at least one of notifications, maps, entertainment media, or user personal data (see at least Para 19, 22-23).
As per claims 18-20, the limitations of claims 18-20 are similar to the limitations of claims 1-17, therefore they are rejected based on the same rationale.
Conclusion
Please refer to from 892 for cited references.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to MUSSA A SHAAWAT whose telephone number is (313)446-6592. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 9am-5pm.
Examiner interviews are available via telephone, in-person, and video conferencing using a USPTO supplied web-based collaboration tool. To schedule an interview, applicant is encouraged to use the USPTO Automated Interview Request (AIR) at http://www.uspto.gov/interviewpractice.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Erin Piateski can be reached on 571-270-7429. 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.
/MUSSA A SHAAWAT/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3669
Prosecution Insights