Appeal 2007-2217
Application 11/231,232
Schofield indicates, display 20 can be a variety of illuminated display
components, including, among other things, a flat panel LCD or plasma
display, a cathode ray tube, or an electroluminescent, light-emitting diode
display (Schofield, col. 8, ll. 42-46).
This “exterior light” in the form of a display is controlled, at least in
part, by ambient light input 104 that can be supplied with a signal developed
by one or more of the image capture devices 14, 16. This ambient light
signal is based upon an average intensity value sensed by some or all of the
pixels in the image capture device(s) (Schofield, col. 11, ll. 26-31). In our
view, detecting ambient light exterior to the vehicle reasonably indicates the
“status” of the ambient light (e.g., twilight or nighttime conditions). Since
the image capture devices are used for such indication, the resulting status
indicator signal would likewise be generated as a function of at least a
portion of the detected image. For this reason alone, representative claim 9
is fully met by Schofield.
But even if we construe the claimed controlled vehicle exterior light
as being limited to vehicle lights exterior to the body of the vehicle, we still
find Schofield fully meets representative claim 9. As indicated previously,
Schofield incorporates the disclosure of Schierbeek by reference (Schofield,
col. 11, ll. 15-20). It is well settled that “material not explicitly contained in
[a] single, prior art document may still be considered for purposes of
anticipation if that material is incorporated by reference into the document.”
That is, “material incorporated by reference is effectively part of the host
document as if it were explicitly contained therein.” Liebel-Flarsheim Co. v.
7
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 Next
Last modified: September 9, 2013