No, because there is prior art. I'm not even sure it would stand in the US.
It's been a while since I have not driven a car that has a flat mirror near side (cost cuts and relative driver position makes far side less of a problem. Still, they're often not exactly flat either).
Cars here (Europe) generally have an improved version, as the linear radius was giving too much of a fisheye, which breaks depth linearity. The improved version starts with a quasi-flat mirror for the 2/3rd near the car, while the remainder has an increasing radius (Here's a shot [0]). The result is (when properly seated and mirrors set up) basically enough for the passing car to pop up at the edge of my field of vision when it disappears from the mirror.
He would be able to patent all curved mirrors, just his particular implementation and design. He may have an optimal design that certainly would deserve patent protection.
The question that he has to worry about with the patents is whether or not his 2008 paper was published before or after the non-US patents were applied for. If I'm not mistaken, the US has a one year grace period between public display (publishing an academic paper) and filing for a patent. Whereas Europe et al. do not have a grace period.
Pretty much all cars where I live (Finland) already have non-flat mirrors.
The most common type of mirror on the driver's side in new cars seems to be one which has a flat part (to show objects in their "true size") and a curved part at (to show a wider field of view).
yeah my old polo from the 90s has a drivers mirror that has a flat part and then a second, differently angled section that lets you see the blind spot.
US patents are only valid in the US. He has to obtain a patent in each country separately (other than in the European union where it is possible to get a "European Patent").
