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 . Claims 1-20 are pending and examined below. This action is in response to the claims filed 9/15/25.
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.
Claims 6-7 and 14-15 are 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 pre-AIA the applicant regards as the invention.
Claims 6-7 and 14-15 recite the limitation “an angle between the direction defining an orientation of the front camera and a boundary line of the emitted light on the projection surface” however, it us unclear as to how an angle can be determined between a direction and a boundary line of light projected on a surface. The element is attempting to determine an angle between a projected boundary on a surface and a direction of a camera which intersects the entire surface at one point. It is further unclear as to what defines a boundary line of emitted light on the projection surface as headlights do not tend to project perfectly bounded outlines, and even if the maximum extent of light could be finitely determined, it is unclear as to how the boundary line of this undetermined two-dimensional shape could form an angle with a direction defined by the orientation of the front camera.
The Applicant’s Specification states “a boundary line (e.g. a horizontal or vertical boundary line) of the emitted light on the projection surface.” (¶38) but does not provide any further detail regarding how horizontal or vertical boundary lines are determined based on light projected on a surface.
Without a finite definition as to what determines a boundary line of the emitted light on the projection surface as well as two explicitly defined lines with which an angle can be formed, the claims are indefinite.
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 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.
(a)(1) the claimed invention was patented, described in a printed publication, or in public use, on sale or otherwise available to the public before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
(a)(2) the claimed invention was described in a patent issued under section 151, or in an application for patent published or deemed published under section 122(b), in which the patent or 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, 8-13, and 16-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) and (a)(2) as being clearly anticipated by Salter et al. (US 2018/0001814).
Regarding claim 1, Salter discloses a vehicle headlamp alignment system including a headlight leveling apparatus comprising: interface circuitry; machine readable instructions; programmable circuitry to execute the machine readable instructions to (Abstract and ¶22):
based on at least one image captured by a front camera of a vehicle, determine a geometric relationship between an output light emitting direction of a headlight and a direction defining a current orientation of the front camera (¶19-23 and Fig. 8 – based on images/video captured by a camera oriented to capture images forward of the vehicle corresponding to the recited based on at least one image captured by a front camera of a vehicle, determining beam aim corresponding to the recited geometric relationship based on the position of the camera and the distance between the vehicle and the wall based on the triangulation corresponding to the recited direction defining a current orientation of the front camera using the images capturing the generated beam direction corresponding to the recited output light emitting direction of a headlight);
determine a current pitch angle of the front camera based on images captured by the front camera; and control a vertical light emission angle of the headlight based on the geometric relationship and the current pitch angle of the front camera (¶19-23 and Fig. 8 – element 116 corresponding to the recited determine a current pitch angle of the front camera based on images captured by the front camera and element 118 corresponding to the recited control a vertical light emission angle of the headlight based on the geometric relationship and the current pitch angle of the front camera).
Regarding claim 2, Salter further discloses wherein the vertical light emission angle of the headlight is controlled with respect to a camera-based current horizon line (¶20 and Fig. 5 – vertical adjustment corresponding to the recited vertical light emission angle of the headlight is controlled with respect to a camera-based current horizon line).
Regarding claim 3, Salter further discloses wherein the geometric relationship is determined based on an image of emitted light of the headlight onto a projection surface captured by the front camera (¶19-23 and Fig. 8 –determining beam aim corresponding to the recited geometric relationship based on beam patterns projected onto the wall as captured by the camera).
Regarding claim 4, Salter further discloses wherein the projection surface is a screen or a wall (¶19 - The vehicle headlamp alignment system 60 may process the captured images containing the headlamp beams projected onto the wall to determine the current aim of the headlamps during the alignment process. The “or” claim element only requires one of the grouping to be present to disclose the invention as claimed.).
Regarding claim 5, Salter further discloses wherein a distance of the projection surface from the front camera is determined (¶21 - The directional aim may be computed based on the position of the camera 30 and the distance between the vehicle and the wall based on the triangulation).
Regarding claim 8, Salter further discloses wherein a correction angle of the vertical light emission angle of the headlight is calculated based on a horizontal distance and a vertical distance of the headlight from the front camera and a distance of the headlight or the front camera to a projection screen (¶19-23 and Fig. 8 – adjustment angle is determined utilizing triangulation between headlights, camera, and the wall, corresponding to the recited projection screen, where triangulation between the three points includes horizontal and vertical distances between each point).
Regarding claim 9, Salter further discloses wherein the current pitch angle of the front camera is determined based on data captured by the front camera (¶19-23 and Fig. 8 – vertical angle corresponding to the recited current pitch angle is determined based on image data captured by the front camera).
Regarding claim 10, Salter further discloses a method for controlling a horizontal angle of light emission of a headlight of a vehicle comprising (Abstract and ¶22):
based on at least one image captured by a front camera of the vehicle, determining a geometric relationship between an output light emitting direction of a front headlight and a direction defining a current orientation of the front camera (¶19-23 and Fig. 8 – based on images/video captured by a camera oriented to capture images forward of the vehicle corresponding to the recited based on at least one image captured by a front camera of a vehicle, determining beam aim corresponding to the recited geometric relationship based on the position of the camera and the distance between the vehicle and the wall based on the triangulation corresponding to the recited direction defining a current orientation of the front camera using the images capturing the generated beam direction corresponding to the recited output light emitting direction of a headlight),
determining a current yaw angle of the front camera with respect to a longitudinal axis of the vehicle based on an image captured by the front camera, controlling a horizontal light emission angle of the front headlight based on the geometric relationship and the current yaw angle of the front camera (¶19-23 and Fig. 8 – element 116 corresponding to the recited determine a current yaw angle of the front camera based on images captured by the front camera and element 118 corresponding to the recited control a horizontal light emission angle of the headlight based on the geometric relationship and the current yaw angle of the front camera).
Regarding claim 11, Salter further discloses wherein the geometric relationship is determined based on an image of emitted light of the front headlight onto a projection surface captured by the front camera (¶19-23 and Fig. 8 –determining beam aim corresponding to the recited geometric relationship based on beam patterns projected onto the wall as captured by the camera).
Regarding claim 12, Salter further discloses wherein the projection surface is a screen or a wall (¶19 - The vehicle headlamp alignment system 60 may process the captured images containing the headlamp beams projected onto the wall to determine the current aim of the headlamps during the alignment process. The “or” claim element only requires one of the grouping to be present to disclose the invention as claimed.).
Regarding claim 13, Salter further discloses wherein a distance of the projection surface from the front camera is determined (¶21 - The directional aim may be computed based on the position of the camera 30 and the distance between the vehicle and the wall based on the triangulation).
Regarding claim 16, Salter further discloses wherein a correction angle of the horizontal light emission angle of the headlight is calculated based on a horizontal distance and a vertical distance of the front headlight from the front camera and a distance of the front headlight or the front camera to a projection screen (¶19-23 and Fig. 8 – adjustment angle is determined utilizing triangulation between headlights, camera, and the wall, corresponding to the recited projection screen, where triangulation between the three points includes horizontal and vertical distances between each point).
Regarding claim 17, Salter further discloses wherein the horizontal light emission angle of the headlight is controlled with respect to a camera-based current vertical reference line or reference plane (¶20 and Fig. 4 – horizontal adjustment corresponding to the recited horizontal light emission angle of the headlight is controlled with respect to a camera-based current vertical reference line or reference plane).
Regarding claim 18, Salter further discloses wherein the current yaw angle of the front camera is determined based on data captured by the front camera (¶19-23 and Fig. 8 – horizontal angle corresponding to the recited current yaw angle is determined based on image data captured by the front camera).
Regarding claim 19, Salter further discloses a vehicle comprising (Fig. 1):
a headlight (¶16-17 and Fig. 1 – headlamp corresponding to the recited headlight);
an electric motor coupled to the headlight (¶16-17 and Fig. 1);
a camera (¶19); and
a controller configured to (¶22):
determine a geometric relationship between an output light emitting direction of the headlight and a direction defining a current orientation of the camera based on at least one image captured by the camera (¶19-23 and Fig. 8 – based on images/video captured by a camera oriented to capture images forward of the vehicle corresponding to the recited based on at least one image captured by a front camera of a vehicle, determining beam aim corresponding to the recited geometric relationship based on the position of the camera and the distance between the vehicle and the wall based on the triangulation corresponding to the recited direction defining a current orientation of the front camera using the images capturing the generated beam direction corresponding to the recited output light emitting direction of a headlight);
determine a current pitch angle of the camera based on the at least one image captured by the camera; and cause the motor to adjust a vertical light emission angle of the headlight based on the geometric relationship and the current pitch angle of the camera (¶19-23 and Fig. 8 – element 116 corresponding to the recited determine a current pitch angle of the front camera based on images captured by the front camera and element 118 corresponding to the recited control a vertical light emission angle of the headlight based on the geometric relationship and the current pitch angle of the front camera).
Regarding claim 20, Salter further discloses wherein the geometric relationship is determined further based on an image of emitted light of the headlight onto a projection surface (¶19-23 and Fig. 8 –determining beam aim corresponding to the recited geometric relationship based on beam patterns projected onto the wall as captured by the camera).
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 6-7 and 14-15 would be allowable if rewritten to overcome the rejections under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), 2nd paragraph, set forth in this Office action and to include all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
Regarding claims 6 and 14, none of the art either alone or in combination discloses determining an angle between a front camera direction and a boundary line of emitted light on a projection surface with which the camera is facing.
Additional References Cited
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Kim (US 2025/0026260) discloses a headlamp auto-leveling control system including utilizing headlamp projecting onto a wall (¶62 and Fig. 4).
Mueller et al. (US 2020/0198525) discloses a system for mechanical adjustment of a headlamp based on determined parameters and correction angles as well as a displacement projection (¶61).
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Matthew J Reda whose telephone number is (408)918-7573. The examiner can normally be reached on Monday - Friday 7-4 ET.
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, Hunter Lonsberry can be reached on (571) 272-7298. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300.
Information regarding the status of an application may be obtained from the Patent Application Information Retrieval (PAIR) system. Status information for published applications may be obtained from either Private PAIR or Public PAIR. Status information for unpublished applications is available through Private PAIR only. For more information about the PAIR system, see https://ppair-my.uspto.gov/pair/PrivatePair. Should you have questions on access to the Private PAIR system, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative or access to the automated information system, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000.
/MATTHEW J. REDA/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3665
Prosecution Insights