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 .
Continued Examination Under 37 CFR 1.114
A request for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, including the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e), was filed in this application after final rejection. Since this application is eligible for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114. Applicant's submission filed on 2/23/2026 has been entered. Claims 1 – 3, 5 – 9, 11, 14 – 24, 26 – 28, 30, 33 – 40 are pending; claims 4, 10, 12 – 13, 25, 29 and 31 – 32 have been cancelled.
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 (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) 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 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, 5-9, 17, 21-24, 26-28, 36 and 40 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Sammut et al. (US 2005/0021282 A1) in view of Means et al. (US 9,605,926 B1) and Kedairy (US 2017/0176141 A1).
Re claims 1, 22:
1. Sammut teaches [A] method of training a person in the aiming of firearms at moving targets (Sammut, Abstract) including the steps of:
providing at least one moving target (Sammut, [0025]);
calculating, by the control computing device (Sammut, [0158]; [0161]), a correct lead for the at least one target; and (Sammut, [0184])
displaying, on a display computing device (Sammut, fig. 40; [0107]), a visualisation of the correct lead to the person before a shot is fired (Sammut, figs. 17A – 17C, “Lead Adj”; [0025]; [0184], “This information is used to calculate a lead adjustment in the aiming point so that the user can hold the correct aiming point on the moving target so as to discharge the bullet towards the place where the target”; [0220]);
wherein the step of calculating the correct lead is based on any of the location of the target, the velocity of the target, the acceleration of the target, or the direction of travel of the target (Sammut, figs. 17A – 17C; [0184]; [0205]; [0218]; [0098], “term "target acquisition device" refers to an apparatus used by the shooter to select, identify or monitor a target … The target acquisition device may rely on visual observation of the target, or, for example, on infrared (IR), ultraviolet (UV), radar, thermal, microwave, or magnetic imaging, radiation including X-ray, gamma ray, isotope and particle radiation, night vision, vibrational receptors including ultra-sound, sound pulse, sonar, seismic vibrations, magnetic resonance, gravitational receptors, broadcast frequencies including radio wave, television and cellular receptors, or other image of the target”; [0012], “”Laser rangefinders require a reflective target to achieve consistently accurate range”; [0181], “the distance from the shooter to the target is provided by a peripheral device, for example a laser rangefinder”; the infrared, light, x-ray, sound, microwave, radio wave … are signals emitted (reflected) from the target are detectable by the target acquisition device (i.e., laser rangefinder) of the shooter; furthermore, a shooter estimates (input) the distance, velocity and acceleration, direction of the target using the target acquisition device (or laser rangefinder)) and received by the computing device (Sammut, fig. 40; [0027]; [0107]);
the visualization includes a representation of the target (Sammut, fig. 18f; [0218], “if a conventional telescopic gunsight was initially selected, the PDA displays the number of clicks the elevation and windage knobs on the scope needed to turned so that the intersection between the vertical and horizontal cross-hairs can be used as the aiming point to hit the target. As shown in FIG. 18g, if a target acquisition device employing a reticle of the present invention was initially selected, the exact position of the aiming point for this target on the reticle is identified”; [0110], “view the target via a target image acquisition device, for example, a thermal imaging device, that projects an image on a video monitor or glasses, goggles, an eye-piece, a contact lens, a headset, or on the retina of the viewer”);
the representation of the target includes a visual indication of a distance to the target (Sammut, figs. 17A – 17C; [0172]; fig. 17A shows a target grid).
22. Sammut teaches [A] system for training persons in the aiming of firearms (Sammut, Abstract) including:
at least one target which is arranged to move about an area (Sammut, [0025]);
a control computing device (Sammut, [0158]; [0161]) configured to calculate a correct lead for the at least one target (Sammut, [0184]); and
a display screen of a display computing device (Sammut, fig. 40; [0107]) configured to display a visualisation of the correct lead before a shot is fired (Sammut, figs. 17A – 17C, “Lead Adj”; [0025]; [0184], “This information is used to calculate a lead adjustment in the aiming point so that the user can hold the correct aiming point on the moving target so as to discharge the bullet towards the place where the target”; [0220]);
wherein the control computing device is further configured to calculate the correct lead based on any of the location of the target, the velocity of the target, the acceleration of the target or the direction of travel of the target (Sammut, figs. 17A – 17C; [0184]; [0205]; [0218]; [0098], “term "target acquisition device" refers to an apparatus used by the shooter to select, identify or monitor a target … The target acquisition device may rely on visual observation of the target, or, for example, on infrared (IR), ultraviolet (UV), radar, thermal, microwave, or magnetic imaging, radiation including X-ray, gamma ray, isotope and particle radiation, night vision, vibrational receptors including ultra-sound, sound pulse, sonar, seismic vibrations, magnetic resonance, gravitational receptors, broadcast frequencies including radio wave, television and cellular receptors, or other image of the target”; [0012], “”Laser rangefinders require a reflective target to achieve consistently accurate range”; [0181], “the distance from the shooter to the target is provided by a peripheral device, for example a laser rangefinder”; the infrared, light, x-ray, sound, microwave, radio wave … are signals emitted (reflected) from the target are detectable by the target acquisition device (i.e., laser rangefinder) of the shooter; furthermore, a shooter estimates (input) the distance, velocity and acceleration, direction of the target using the target acquisition device (or laser rangefinder)) and received by the computing device (Sammut, fig. 40; [0027]; [0107]);
the visualization includes a representation of the target (Sammut, fig. 18f; [0218], “if a conventional telescopic gunsight was initially selected, the PDA displays the number of clicks the elevation and windage knobs on the scope needed to turned so that the intersection between the vertical and horizontal cross-hairs can be used as the aiming point to hit the target. As shown in FIG. 18g, if a target acquisition device employing a reticle of the present invention was initially selected, the exact position of the aiming point for this target on the reticle is identified”; [0110], “view the target via a target image acquisition device, for example, a thermal imaging device, that projects an image on a video monitor or glasses, goggles, an eye-piece, a contact lens, a headset, or on the retina of the viewer”);
the representation of the target includes a visual indication of a distance to the target (Sammut, figs. 17A – 17C; [0172]; fig. 17A shows a target grid).
Sammut does not explicitly disclose providing at least one moving target, wherein the target comprises a target computing device which controls movements of the target …
Means et al. (US 9,605,926 B1) teaches a target-shooting simulation system, a master control unit issues flight control instructions to a flight-capable drone to cause the drone to fly along a predetermined flight path and receives GPS coordinates transmitted by a control unit of the drone as the drone flies along the predetermined flight path (Means, Abstract).
Means teaches a providing at least one moving target, wherein the target comprises a target computing device which controls movements of the target (Means, col. 6, line 41 – col. 7, line 10, “all of the pre-flight actions/specifications without master guidance in alternative embodiments or system configurations), the master controller plots a flight-plan (or terrestrial motion profile) for each target at 309 to complete the session setup”; col. 6, lines 4 – 40, “predefined motion profiles ( e.g., straight up and then back down, or up, over and down to allow backyard system testing), custom target behaviors and so forth may optionally 25 be selected and/or specified by the user”). Therefore, in view of Means, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to modify the method/system described in Sammut, by remote controlling the target (drone) as taught by Means, in order to a user to define motion profiles ( e.g., straight up and then back down, or up, over and down to allow backyard system testing), custom target behaviors and so forth may optionally 25 be selected and/or specified by the user (Means, col. 6, lines 4 – 40).
Sammut does not explicitly disclose receiving, by a control computing device from the target computing device, an information stream wirelessly transmitted by the target computing device …
Means further teaches providing at least one moving target, wherein the target comprises a target computing device; receiving, by a control computing device from the target computing device, an information stream wirelessly transmitted by the target computing device, wherein the information stream comprises information relating to any of a location of the target, a velocity of the target, an acceleration of the target, or a direction of travel of the target (Means, fig. 1; col. 3, line 30 – col. 5, line 29; col. 8, lines 4 – 30, “relative to arrival at the destination specified by the current waypoint pointer before advancing to the next waypoint in the list and transmitting the kinetic/positional data therein to the drone”). Therefore, in view of Means, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to modify the method/system described in Sammut, by receiving positions of the target as taught by Means, since the firing emulator additionally receives and timestamps post-launch drone position data as shown at 423 (e.g. GPS data transmitted by the drone to the master controller in response to pre-progrannning or fix-by-fix polling by the 60 master), logging the positioning data within a flight database to enable firing-time determination of drone trajectory (Means, col. 9, lines 57 - 67).
Sammut does not explicitly disclose the distance to the target is indicated by the size of the representation of the target.
Kedairy (US 2017/0176141 A1) teaches a reticle of a projectile weapon aiming system, such as a scope for a rifle, includes a ranging system using a predetermined theoretical target image (51, 53) in circular form and size such as to represent a target, such as an animal, wherein the target images would represent the size of that target at different multiple distances (Kedairy, Abstract). Kedairy teaches the distance to the target is indicated by the size of the representation of the target (Kedairy, [0008], “the reticle of the invention includes a ranging system using a predetermined theoretical target image in circular form and size such as to represent a target, such as an animal, wherein the target images would represent the size of that target at different multiple distances”; figs 3 – 5). Therefore, in view of Kedairy, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to modify the method/system described in Sammut, by changing the size of the target based on distance as taught by Kedairy, since it was known in the art that object appears larger when it’s closer to the scope of the rifle and smaller when it’s farther to the scope of the rifle.
Re claims 2 – 3, 23 - 24:
2. The method according to claim 1 wherein the steps of calculating and displaying are carried out repeatedly to provide an ongoing near real-time visualisation of the correct lead (Sammut, [0184]; [0220]). 23. The system according to claim 22 which is arranged to repeatedly carry out the steps of calculating and displaying to provide an ongoing near real-time visualisation of the correct lead (Sammut, [0184]; [0220]).
3. The method according to claim 1 wherein the location of the target includes an elevation of the target (Sammut, [0013]; [0006]; [0218]). 24. The system according to claim 22 wherein the location of the target includes an elevation of the target (Sammut, [0013]; [0006]; [0218]).
Re claims 5 – 6, 26 – 27:
5. The method according to claim 1 wherein the step of calculating the correct lead is based on a location of the person. 26. The system according to claim 22 which is arranged to calculate the correct lead based on a location of a person (Sammut, [0184]).
6. The method according to claim 5 wherein the location of the person includes an elevation of the person. 27. The system according to claim 26 wherein the location of the person includes an elevation of the person (Sammut, [0013]; [0006]; [0209]; [0218]).
Re claims 7 – 8:
7. The method according to claim 5 wherein the location of the person is determined from a sensor such as a GPS sensor placed on or near the person (Sammut, fig. 42; [0164]). 8. The method according to claim 5 wherein the location of the person is obtained from a previously configured control system (Sammut, [0095], “The shooter is able to position the firearm in one location, and move to a second location for target image acquisition and aiming”; [0209]).
Re claims 9, 28:
9. The method according to claim 1 wherein the calculation of the correct lead is based on wind speed. 28. The system according to claim 22 wherein the calculation of the correct lead is based on wind speed (Sammut, [0184]).
Re claims 17, 36:
17. The method according to claim 1 further including the step of providing an indication to the person of the accuracy of at least one shot which they fired. 36. The system according to claim 22 which is further arranged to provide an indication to the person of the accuracy of at least one shot which they fired (Sammut, figs. 17A – 17C; [0218], “If the target is moving from right to left (with the wind), the correct aggregate windage/lead adjustment would be 2.78 right (lead)-1.89 left (wind)=0.89 right (or almost one vertical mark to the right of the primary vertical crosshair)”).
Re claims 21, 40:
21. The method according to claim 1 wherein the visual indication is displayed by overlaying it in a weapon-sight. 40. The system according to claim 22 wherein the visual indication is displayed by overlaying it in a weapon-sight (Sammut, figs. 17A – 17C).
Claims 18 – 19 and 37 – 38 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Sammut, Means and Kedairy as applied to claims 17 or 36 above, and further in view of Bell (US 2016/0069644 A1).
Re claims 18 – 19, 37 – 38:
18. The method according to claim 17 wherein the indication includes an indication of whether the shot was leading the target. 37. The system according to claim 36 wherein the indication includes an indication of whether the shot was leading the target. 19. The method according to claim 17 wherein the indication includes an indication of by how much the shot was leading the target. 38. The system according to claim 36 wherein the indication includes an indication of by how much the shot was leading the target (Sammut, figs. 17A – 17C; [0218], “If the target is moving from right to left (with the wind), the correct aggregate windage/lead adjustment would be 2.78 right (lead)-1.89 left (wind)=0.89 right (or almost one vertical mark to the right of the primary vertical crosshair)”).
Sammut does not explicitly disclose the indication includes an indication of whether the shot was leading or lagging the target; nor disclose the indication includes an indication of by how much the shot was leading or lagging the target.
Bell teaches a remote controlled projectile sighting and launching system (Bell, Abstract). Bell further teaches the limitation the indication includes an indication of whether the shot was leading or lagging the target; nor disclose the indication includes an indication of by how much the shot was leading or lagging the target (Bell, fig. 14D, 696A – 696D, “+ 1MOA” – lead; “-2 MOA” lag; [0242] - [0243]). Therefore, in view of Bell, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to modify the method/system described in Sammut, by providing lagging indicator as taught by Bell, since it was known in the art that a target offset can be either positive or negative (ahead or behind).
Claims 11, 14 – 16, 30 and 33 – 35 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Sammut, Means and Kedairy as applied to claims 1, 10, 29 above, and further in view of Bay (US 2014/0110482 A1).
Re claims 11, 14 – 16, 30, 33 – 35:
Sammut does not explicitly disclose 11. The method according to claim 10 wherein the representation of the target includes a visual indication of the direction of travel of the target relative to the person's line of sight. 30. The system according to claim 29 wherein the representation of the target includes a visual indication of the direction of travel of the target relative to the person's line of sight. Bay teaches a method and system for automatically calculating a trajectory of a projectile launched from a weapon includes receiving environmental conditions and determining a distance to a potential target (Bay, Abstract). Bay further teaches 11. The method according to claim 10 wherein the representation of the target includes a visual indication of the direction of travel of the target relative to the person's line of sight. 30. The system according to claim 29 wherein the representation of the target includes a visual indication of the direction of travel of the target relative to the person's line of sight. 14. The method according to claim 1 wherein the visualisation includes a visual indication of the velocity of the target. 15. The method according to claim 14 wherein the visual indication of the velocity of the target includes a moving background image which moves to indicate the component of the velocity of the target in a direction orthogonal to the direction from the person to the target. 16. The method according to claim 14 wherein the visual indication of the velocity of the target includes visual cues in the form of arm or leg movements or leaning of the representation of the target. 33. The system according to claim 29 wherein the visualisation includes a visual indication of the velocity of the target. 34. The system according to claim 33 wherein the visual indication of the velocity of the target includes a moving background image which moves to indicate the component of the velocity of the target in a direction orthogonal to the direction from the person to the target. 35. The system according to claim 33 wherein the visual indication of the velocity of the target includes visual cues in the form of arm or leg movements or leaning of the representation of the target (Bay, fig. 17, 43, “2 MPH”; [0259] – [0261]). Therefore, in view of Bay, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to modify the method/system described in Sammut, by providing direction indicator as taught by Bay, since Bay suggests that dashed arrows have been provided to indicate the movement of the potential targets (Bay, [0260]).
Claims 20 and 39 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Sammut, Means and Kedairy as applied to claims 17 or 36 above, and further in view of Sensey (US 3,633,285).
Re claims 20, 39:
Sammut does not explicitly disclose acoustic sensors. Sensey teaches a laser transmitting device for marksmanship training (Sensey, Abstract). Sensey further teaches 20. The method according to claim 17 wherein the indication of the accuracy shot is calculated based on the output of acoustic sensors. 39. The system according to claim 36 wherein the target includes acoustic sensors and the indication of the accuracy shot is calculated based on the output of the acoustic sensors (Sensey, col. 2, line 65 – col. 3, line 3). Therefore, in view of Sensey, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to modify the method/system described in Sammut, by providing acoustic transducer as taught by Sensey, since Sensey suggests that acoustic firing mechanism prevent false triggering of the device by extraneous sounds (Sensey, Abstract).
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to claim(s) 1 – 3, 5 – 9, 11, 14 – 24, 26 – 28, 30 and 33 – 40 have been considered but are moot because the new ground of rejection does not rely on any reference applied in the prior rejection of record for any teaching or matter specifically challenged in the argument.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to JACK YIP whose telephone number is (571)270-5048. The examiner can normally be reached Monday thru Friday; 9:00 AM - 5:00 PM EST.
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, XUAN THAI can be reached at (571) 272-7147. 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.
/JACK YIP/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3715
Prosecution Insights