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 .
Response to Amendment
This is a Final Office action in response to communications filed on January
22, 2026. Applicant amended claims 1, 3-6, 10, 16, and 19-20. Applicant added claims 21-22. Claims 1, 3-16, and 18-22 remain pending in this application.
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 (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 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.
Claims 1, 3-8, 10-16, and 18-22 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102 as being unpatentable under US 20190083739 A1 (“Jeannin”).
In regards to claim 1, Jeannin discloses
A system for displaying an artificial horizon in an enclosed space, the system comprising: a first plurality of visual effect sources ([0025], “lighting column can be … a linear array of Light Emitting Diodes (LEDs)” Examiner notes in claimed invention, “visual effect sources … may be … light emitting diodes (LED)” [0029]) located in the enclosed space ([0013], “lighting columns are arranged on … a space that is … enclosed”) and configured to generate a first visual effect of the artificial horizon ([0030], “the system … illuminates the lighting columns … so as to form an artificial horizon”) consistent with an orientation detected by an orientation sensor ([0024], “each location is controlled by a controller … based on inputs from a sensor …, for example an inertial sensor” Examiner notes that an inertial sensor is an orientation sensor.);
and a second plurality of visual effect sources separate from the first plurality of visual effect sources ([0024], “In the system … a first … lighting column … is arranged at a left side … and a second … lighting column … is arranged at a right side”; [0025], “Each lighting column can be … a linear array of Light Emitting Diodes (LEDs)”) and located in the enclosed space ([0013], “lighting columns are arranged on … a space that is … enclosed”) and configured to generate a second visual effect of the artificial horizon different from the first visual effect ([0030], “the system … illuminates the lighting columns … so as to form an artificial horizon”) consistent with the orientation detected by the orientation sensor ([0024], “each location is controlled by a controller … based on inputs from a sensor …, for example an inertial sensor” Examiner notes that an inertial sensor is an orientation sensor.);
and a controller configured to ([0013], “a controller illuminates points on … lighting columns to define an angle relative to the horizontal reference”): determine a configuration for a display of the artificial horizon ([0030], “the system … illuminates the lighting columns … so as to form an artificial horizon”) consistent with the orientation detected by the orientation sensor ([0013], “A sensor detects a roll angle of the structure”);
and send a plurality of signals to the first plurality of visual effect sources and the second plurality of visual effect sources, each signal of the plurality of signals for a respective visual effect source in the first plurality of visual effect sources and the second plurality of visual effect sources ([0013], “and a controller illuminates points on the first and second lighting columns” Examiner notes that the sensor can send signals to a controller that may consequently activate illumination.), wherein each signal in the plurality of signals indicates at least one of a color tint, color hue, or filtering, to be executed by a respective one of the first plurality of visual effect sources or a respective one of the second plurality of visual effect sources ([0025], “Each lighting column can be … Light Emitting Diodes (LEDs), but the disclosure is not limited thereto, and other types of lighting can be used” Examiner notes that a lighting column can inherently include color hue, color tint, and filtering).
In regards to claim 3, Jeannin discloses
wherein the controller modifies at least one of the first visual effect or the second visual effect based on an acceleration of the enclosed space ([0024], “position of each location is controlled by a controller …, based on inputs from … an accelerometer”).
In regards to claim 4, Jeannin discloses
wherein each signal in the plurality of signals further indicates at least one of brightness or shuttering to be executed by the respective one of the first plurality of visual effect sources or the respective one of the second plurality of visual effect sources ([0025], “Each lighting column can be … illuminated at a lower brightness” Examiner notes that the sensor can send signals to affect brightness.).
In regards to claim 5, Jeannin discloses
further comprising: the orientation sensor electrically coupled to the controller and configured to detect the orientation, wherein the orientation is consistent with an environment outside the enclosed space ([0028], “The sensor … is … configured to sense a roll angle of a structure … enclosing a space … The sensor … may perform other functions in the structure”).
In regards to claim 6, Jeannin discloses
further comprising: a visual effect modulator electrically coupled to the controller and configured to receive the plurality of signals from the controller and configured to adjust one or more of the plurality of signals based on a type of a respective one of the first plurality of visual effect sources or a respective one of the second plurality of visual effect sources ([0024], “In the system … each location is controlled by a controller … based on inputs from a sensor” Examiner notes that a controller may include internal electronic modulators to generate signals.).
In regards to claim 7, Jeannin discloses
wherein each visual effect source in the first plurality of visual effect sources and the second plurality of visual effect sources are at least one of a projector, a light strip, light emitting diodes (LED), or an organic light-emitting diode (OLED) display ([0025], “Each lighting column can be … a linear array of Light Emitting Diodes (LEDs)”).
In regards to claim 8, Jeannin discloses
wherein the enclosed space is void of any external cues ([0032], “FIG. 3 illustrates an embodiment … of the enclosed space” Examiner notes an enclosed space can be made void of external cues.).
In regards to claim 10, Jeannin discloses
A control system for displaying an artificial horizon in an enclosed space, the control system comprising: a first plurality of visual effect sources configured to generate a first visual effect ([0025], “lighting column can be … a linear array of Light Emitting Diodes (LEDs)” Examiner notes in claimed invention, “visual effect sources … may be … light emitting diodes (LED)” [0029]);
a second plurality of visual effect sources separate from the first plurality of visual effect sources and configured to generate a second visual effect ([0024], “In the system … a first … lighting column … is arranged at a left side … and a second … lighting column … is arranged at a right side”; [0025], “Each lighting column can be … a linear array of Light Emitting Diodes (LEDs)”);
a controller ([0013], “a controller illuminates points on … lighting columns to define an angle relative to the horizontal reference”);
and a tangible, non-transitory memory configured to communicate with the controller, the tangible, non-transitory memory having instructions stored thereon that, in response to execution by the controller, cause the controller to perform operations comprising ([0027], “a memory may be used to implement the above described embodiments.” Examiner notes that a non-transitory memory can be configured to communicate with a controller and can have instructions stored.): determining a configuration for a display of the artificial horizon ([0030], “the system … illuminates the lighting columns … so as to form an artificial horizon”) consistent with an orientation detected by an orientation sensor ([0013], “A sensor detects a roll angle of the structure”);
and sending a plurality of signals to the first plurality of visual effect sources and the second plurality of visual effect sources, each signal of the plurality of signals for a respective visual effect source in the first plurality of visual effect sources and the second plurality of visual effect sources ([0013], “and a controller illuminates points on the first and second lighting columns” Examiner notes that the sensor can send signals to a controller that may consequently activate illumination.), wherein each signal in the plurality of signals indicates at least one of a color tint, color hue, or filtering, to be executed by a respective one of the first plurality of visual effect sources or a respective one of the second plurality of visual effect sources ([0025], “Each lighting column can be … Light Emitting Diodes (LEDs), but the disclosure is not limited thereto, and other types of lighting can be used” Examiner notes that a lighting column can inherently include color hue, color tint, and filtering).
In regards to claim 11, Jeannin discloses
wherein the operations further comprise: receiving, from an orientation sensor, the orientation ([0024], “each location is controlled by a controller … based on inputs from a sensor …, for example an inertial sensor” Examiner notes that an inertial sensor is an orientation sensor.), wherein the orientation is consistent with an environment outside the enclosed space ([0024], “The sensor … is … configured to sense a roll angle of a structure … enclosing a space … The sensor … may perform other functions in the structure”);
and determining the configuration for the display of the artificial horizon ([0030], “the system … illuminates the lighting columns … so as to form an artificial horizon”) consistent with the orientation detected by the orientation sensor ([0013], “A sensor detects a roll angle of the structure”).
In regards to claim 12, Jeannin discloses
wherein the operations further comprise: modifying at least one of the first visual effect or the second visual effect based on an acceleration of the enclosed space ([0024], “position of each location is controlled by a controller …, based on inputs from … an accelerometer”).
In regards to claim 13, Jeannin discloses
further comprising: a visual effect modulator configured to receive the plurality of signals from the controller and configured to adjust one or more of the plurality of signals based on a type of a respective one of the first plurality of visual effect sources or a respective one of the second plurality of visual effect sources ([0024], “In the system … each location is controlled by a controller … based on inputs from a sensor” Examiner notes that a controller may include internal electronic modulators to generate signals.).
In regards to claim 14, Jeannin discloses
wherein the second visual effect is different from the first visual effect ([0030], “the system … illuminates the lighting columns”; [0025], “Each lighting column can be … Light Emitting Diodes (LEDs), but the disclosure is not limited thereto, and other types of lighting can be used.”).
In regards to claim 15, Jeannin discloses
wherein the enclosed space is void of any external cues ([0032], “FIG. 3 illustrates an embodiment … of the enclosed space” Examiner notes an enclosed space can be made void of external cues.).
In regards to claim 16, Jeannin discloses
A method for displaying an artificial horizon in an enclosed space, the method comprising: generating, by a first plurality of visual effect sources ([0025], “lighting column can be … a linear array of Light Emitting Diodes (LEDs)” Examiner notes in claimed invention, “visual effect sources … may be … light emitting diodes (LED)” [0029]) located in the enclosed space ([0013], “lighting columns are arranged on … a space that is … enclosed”), a first visual effect of the artificial horizon ([0030], “the system … illuminates the lighting columns … so as to form an artificial horizon”) consistent with an orientation detected by an orientation sensor ([0024], “each location is controlled by a controller … based on inputs from a sensor …, for example an inertial sensor” Examiner notes that an inertial sensor is an orientation sensor.);
and generating, by a second plurality of visual effect sources separate from the first plurality of visual effect sources ([0024], “In the system … a first … lighting column … is arranged at a left side … and a second … lighting column … is arranged at a right side”; [0025], “Each lighting column can be … a linear array of Light Emitting Diodes (LEDs)”), a second visual effect of the artificial horizon different from the first visual effect ([0030], “the system … illuminates the lighting columns … so as to form an artificial horizon”) consistent with the orientation detected by the orientation sensor ([0024], “each location is controlled by a controller … based on inputs from a sensor …, for example an inertial sensor” Examiner notes that an inertial sensor is an orientation sensor.);
and determining, by a controller, ([0013], “a controller illuminates points on … lighting columns to define an angle relative to the horizontal reference”), a configuration for a display of the artificial horizon ([0030], “the system … illuminates the lighting columns … so as to form an artificial horizon”) consistent with the orientation detected by the orientation sensor ([0013], “A sensor detects a roll angle of the structure”);
and sending, by the controller, a plurality of signals to the first plurality of visual effect sources and the second plurality of visual effect sources, each signal of the plurality of signals for a respective visual effect source in the first plurality of visual effect sources and the second plurality of visual effect sources ([0013], “and a controller illuminates points on the first and second lighting columns” Examiner notes that the sensor can send signals to a controller that may consequently activate illumination.), wherein each signal in the plurality of signals indicates at least one of a color tint, color hue, or filtering, to be executed by a respective one of the first plurality of visual effect sources or a respective one of the second plurality of visual effect sources ([0025], “Each lighting column can be … Light Emitting Diodes (LEDs), but the disclosure is not limited thereto, and other types of lighting can be used” Examiner notes that a lighting column can inherently include color hue, color tint, and filtering).
In regards to claim 18, Jeannin discloses
further comprising: modifying, by the controller, at least one of the first visual effect or the second visual effect based on an acceleration of the enclosed space ([0024], “position of each location is controlled by a controller …, based on inputs from … an accelerometer”).
In regards to claim 19, Jeannin discloses
further comprising: modulating, by a visual effect modulator, one or more of the plurality of signals based on a type of a respective one of the first plurality of visual effect sources or a respective one of the second plurality of visual effect sources ([0024], “In the system … each location is controlled by a controller … based on inputs from a sensor” Examiner notes that a controller may include internal electronic modulators to generate signals.).
In regards to claim 20, Jeannin discloses
further comprising: receiving, from an orientation sensor, the orientation, wherein the orientation is consistent with an environment outside the enclosed space ([0028], “The sensor … is … configured to sense a roll angle of a structure … enclosing a space … The sensor … may perform other functions in the structure”).
In regards to claim 21, Jeannin discloses
wherein each signal in the plurality of signals further indicates at least one of brightness or shuttering to be executed by the respective one of the first plurality of visual effect sources or the respective one of the second plurality of visual effect sources ([0025], “Each lighting column can be … illuminated at a lower brightness” Examiner notes that the sensor can send signals to affect brightness.).
In regards to claim 22, Jeannin discloses
wherein each signal in the plurality of signals further indicates at least one of brightness or shuttering to be executed by the respective one of the first plurality of visual effect sources or the respective one of the second plurality of visual effect sources ([0025], “Each lighting column can be … illuminated at a lower brightness” Examiner notes that the sensor can send signals to affect brightness.).
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:
Determining the scope and contents of the prior art.
Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue.
Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art.
Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness.
Claim 9 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable under Jeannin in view of US 20180002016 A1 (“McCullough”).
In regards to claim 9, Jeannin does not disclose wherein the enclosed space is located in an hyperloop capsule.
McCullough discloses
wherein the enclosed space is located in an hyperloop capsule ([0030], “FIGS. 6A-6B are schematic illustrations of a passenger pod assembly” Examiner notes that a passenger pod is a hyperloop capsule.).
Jeannin and McCullough combined are considered analogous to the claimed invention because they are in the fields of motion sickness reduction and aircrafts with attachable pod assemblies. Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the applicant’s invention for a system for displaying an artificial horizon in an enclosed space, the system comprising: a first plurality of visual effect sources located in the enclosed space and configured to generate a first visual effect of the artificial horizon consistent with an orientation detected by an orientation sensor; and a second plurality of visual effect sources separate from the first plurality of visual effect sources and located in the enclosed space and configured to generate a second visual effect of the artificial horizon different from the first visual effect consistent with the orientation detected by the orientation sensor, as disclosed by Jeannin, wherein the enclosed space is located in an hyperloop capsule, as disclosed by McCullough, to provide a passenger pod assembly for an aircraft including a flying frame, a propulsion system, and a flight control system.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed January 22, 2026 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive. Claims 1, 3-16, and 18-22 remain pending in this application. With respect to claim 1, Applicant argues that “Jeannin does not disclose or contemplate "[a] system for displaying an artificial horizon in an enclosed space, the system comprising: a first plurality of visual effect sources located in the enclosed space and configured to generate a first visual effect of the artificial horizon consistent with an orientation detected by an orientation sensor; a second plurality of visual effect sources separate from the first plurality of visual effect sources and located in the enclosed space and configured to generate a second visual effect of the artificial horizon different from the first visual effect consistent with the orientation detected by the orientation sensor; and a controller configured to: determine a configuration for a display of the artificial horizon consistent with the orientation detected by the orientation sensor; and send a plurality of signals to the first plurality of visual effect sources and the second plurality of visual effect sources, each signal of the plurality of signals for a respective visual effect source in the first plurality of visual effect sources and the second plurality of visual effect sources, wherein each signal in the plurality of signals indicates at least one of a color tint, color hue, or filtering, to be executed by a respective one of the first plurality of visual effect sources or a respective one of the second plurality of visual effect sources” (See REPLY TO NON-FINAL OFFICE ACTION, REMARKS, Rejection under 35 U.S.C. § 102, page 7, paragraph 5-page 8, lines 1-8) and “Jeannin does not disclose or contemplate each and every feature of independent claim 1. Accordingly, a prima facie case of anticipation has not been established with respect to claim 1” (See REPLY TO NON-FINAL OFFICE ACTION, REMARKS, Rejection under 35 U.S.C. § 102, page 8, paragraph 1). Examiner acknowledges Applicant’s remarks. Regarding claim 1, Jeannin discloses a system for displaying an artificial horizon in an enclosed space, the system comprising: a first plurality of visual effect sources ([0025], “lighting column can be … a linear array of Light Emitting Diodes (LEDs)” Examiner notes in claimed invention, “visual effect sources … may be … light emitting diodes (LED)” [0029]) located in the enclosed space ([0013], “lighting columns are arranged on … a space that is … enclosed”) and configured to generate a first visual effect of the artificial horizon ([0030], “the system … illuminates the lighting columns … so as to form an artificial horizon”) consistent with an orientation detected by an orientation sensor ([0024], “each location is controlled by a controller … based on inputs from a sensor …, for example an inertial sensor” Examiner notes that an inertial sensor is an orientation sensor.); and a second plurality of visual effect sources separate from the first plurality of visual effect sources ([0024], “In the system … a first … lighting column … is arranged at a left side … and a second … lighting column … is arranged at a right side”; [0025], “Each lighting column can be … a linear array of Light Emitting Diodes (LEDs)”) and located in the enclosed space ([0013], “lighting columns are arranged on … a space that is … enclosed”) and configured to generate a second visual effect of the artificial horizon different from the first visual effect ([0030], “the system … illuminates the lighting columns … so as to form an artificial horizon”) consistent with the orientation detected by the orientation sensor ([0024], “each location is controlled by a controller … based on inputs from a sensor …, for example an inertial sensor” Examiner notes that an inertial sensor is an orientation sensor.); and a controller configured to ([0013], “a controller illuminates points on … lighting columns to define an angle relative to the horizontal reference”): determine a configuration for a display of the artificial horizon ([0030], “the system … illuminates the lighting columns … so as to form an artificial horizon”) consistent with the orientation detected by the orientation sensor ([0013], “A sensor detects a roll angle of the structure”); and send a plurality of signals to the first plurality of visual effect sources and the second plurality of visual effect sources, each signal of the plurality of signals for a respective visual effect source in the first plurality of visual effect sources and the second plurality of visual effect sources ([0013], “and a controller illuminates points on the first and second lighting columns” Examiner notes that the sensor can send signals to a controller that may consequently activate illumination.), wherein each signal in the plurality of signals indicates at least one of a color tint, color hue, or filtering, to be executed by a respective one of the first plurality of visual effect sources or a respective one of the second plurality of visual effect sources ([0025], “Each lighting column can be … Light Emitting Diodes (LEDs), but the disclosure is not limited thereto, and other types of lighting can be used” Examiner notes that a lighting column can inherently include color hue, color tint, and filtering).
MPEP § 2111 discusses proper claim interpretation, including giving claims their
broadest reasonable interpretation (“BRI”) in light of the specification during examination. Under BRI, the words of a claim must be given their plain meaning unless such meaning is inconsistent with the specification, and it is improper to import claim limitations from the specification into the claim. Applicant’s argument is not persuasive because the BRI is broader than what is argued. Therefore, the rejection of claim 1, as anticipated by Jeannin, is maintained. Consequently, the rejections of dependent claims 3-8 are maintained.
As to establishing a prima facie case of anticipation, upon review, the
examiner’s rejection satisfied the requirements for MPEP 2131. To reject a claim as anticipated by a reference, the disclosure must teach every element required by the claim under its broadest reasonable interpretation. “A claim is anticipated only if each and every element as set forth in the claim is found, either expressly or inherently described, in a single prior art reference.” Verdegaal Bros. v. Union Oil Co. of California, 814 F.2d 628, 631, 2 USPQ2d 1051, 1053 (Fed. Cir. 1987). Applicant’s argument is not persuasive because the argument does not meet the requirements of 37 C.F.R. 1.111(b), and, upon review, the rejection does make a prima facie case using MPEP 2131. Therefore, the rejections of claims 1 and 3-8, as anticipated by Jeannin, are maintained.
With respect to claims 10 and 16, Applicant argues that “Jeannin does not disclose or contemplate all the recited features of amended independent claim 1. Thus, a prima face case of anticipation has not been established with respect to claims 10 and 16” (See REPLY TO NON-FINAL OFFICE ACTION, REMARKS, Rejection under 35 U.S.C. § 102, page 8, paragraph 2). Examiner acknowledges Applicant’s remarks. Regarding claim 10, Jeannin discloses a control system for displaying an artificial horizon in an enclosed space, the control system comprising: a first plurality of visual effect sources configured to generate a first visual effect ([0025], “lighting column can be … a linear array of Light Emitting Diodes (LEDs)” Examiner notes in claimed invention, “visual effect sources … may be … light emitting diodes (LED)” [0029]); a second plurality of visual effect sources separate from the first plurality of visual effect sources and configured to generate a second visual effect ([0024], “In the system … a first … lighting column … is arranged at a left side … and a second … lighting column … is arranged at a right side”; [0025], “Each lighting column can be … a linear array of Light Emitting Diodes (LEDs)”); a controller ([0013], “a controller illuminates points on … lighting columns to define an angle relative to the horizontal reference”); and a tangible, non-transitory memory configured to communicate with the controller, the tangible, non-transitory memory having instructions stored thereon that, in response to execution by the controller, cause the controller to perform operations comprising ([0027], “a memory may be used to implement the above described embodiments.” Examiner notes that a non-transitory memory can be configured to communicate with a controller and can have instructions stored.): determining a configuration for a display of the artificial horizon ([0030], “the system … illuminates the lighting columns … so as to form an artificial horizon”) consistent with an orientation detected by an orientation sensor ([0013], “A sensor detects a roll angle of the structure”); and sending a plurality of signals to the first plurality of visual effect sources and the second plurality of visual effect sources, each signal of the plurality of signals for a respective visual effect source in the first plurality of visual effect sources and the second plurality of visual effect sources ([0013], “and a controller illuminates points on the first and second lighting columns” Examiner notes that the sensor can send signals to a controller that may consequently activate illumination.), wherein each signal in the plurality of signals indicates at least one of a color tint, color hue, or filtering, to be executed by a respective one of the first plurality of visual effect sources or a respective one of the second plurality of visual effect sources ([0025], “Each lighting column can be … Light Emitting Diodes (LEDs), but the disclosure is not limited thereto, and other types of lighting can be used” Examiner notes that a lighting column can inherently include color hue, color tint, and filtering). Regarding claim 16, Jeannin discloses a method for displaying an artificial horizon in an enclosed space, the method comprising: generating, by a first plurality of visual effect sources ([0025], “lighting column can be … a linear array of Light Emitting Diodes (LEDs)” Examiner notes in claimed invention, “visual effect sources … may be … light emitting diodes (LED)” [0029]) located in the enclosed space ([0013], “lighting columns are arranged on … a space that is … enclosed”), a first visual effect of the artificial horizon ([0030], “the system … illuminates the lighting columns … so as to form an artificial horizon”) consistent with an orientation detected by an orientation sensor ([0024], “each location is controlled by a controller … based on inputs from a sensor …, for example an inertial sensor” Examiner notes that an inertial sensor is an orientation sensor.); and generating, by a second plurality of visual effect sources separate from the first plurality of visual effect sources ([0024], “In the system … a first … lighting column … is arranged at a left side … and a second … lighting column … is arranged at a right side”; [0025], “Each lighting column can be … a linear array of Light Emitting Diodes (LEDs)”), a second visual effect of the artificial horizon different from the first visual effect ([0030], “the system … illuminates the lighting columns … so as to form an artificial horizon”) consistent with the orientation detected by the orientation sensor ([0024], “each location is controlled by a controller … based on inputs from a sensor …, for example an inertial sensor” Examiner notes that an inertial sensor is an orientation sensor.); and determining, by a controller, ([0013], “a controller illuminates points on … lighting columns to define an angle relative to the horizontal reference”), a configuration for a display of the artificial horizon ([0030], “the system … illuminates the lighting columns … so as to form an artificial horizon”) consistent with the orientation detected by the orientation sensor ([0013], “A sensor detects a roll angle of the structure”); and sending, by the controller, a plurality of signals to the first plurality of visual effect sources and the second plurality of visual effect sources, each signal of the plurality of signals for a respective visual effect source in the first plurality of visual effect sources and the second plurality of visual effect sources ([0013], “and a controller illuminates points on the first and second lighting columns” Examiner notes that the sensor can send signals to a controller that may consequently activate illumination.), wherein each signal in the plurality of signals indicates at least one of a color tint, color hue, or filtering, to be executed by a respective one of the first plurality of visual effect sources or a respective one of the second plurality of visual effect sources ([0025], “Each lighting column can be … Light Emitting Diodes (LEDs), but the disclosure is not limited thereto, and other types of lighting can be used” Examiner notes that a lighting column can inherently include color hue, color tint, and filtering).
MPEP § 2111 discusses proper claim interpretation, including giving claims their
broadest reasonable interpretation (“BRI”) in light of the specification during examination. Under BRI, the words of a claim must be given their plain meaning unless such meaning is inconsistent with the specification, and it is improper to import claim limitations from the specification into the claim. Applicant’s argument is not persuasive because the BRI is broader than what is argued. Therefore, the rejections of claims 10 and 16, as anticipated by Jeannin, are maintained. Consequently, the rejections of dependent claims 11-15 and 18-22 are maintained.
As to establishing a prima facie case of anticipation, upon review, the
examiner’s rejection satisfied the requirements for MPEP 2131. To reject a claim as anticipated by a reference, the disclosure must teach every element required by the claim under its broadest reasonable interpretation. “A claim is anticipated only if each and every element as set forth in the claim is found, either expressly or inherently described, in a single prior art reference.” Verdegaal Bros. v. Union Oil Co. of California, 814 F.2d 628, 631, 2 USPQ2d 1051, 1053 (Fed. Cir. 1987). Applicant’s argument is not persuasive because the argument does not meet the requirements of 37 C.F.R. 1.111(b), and, upon review, the rejections do make a prima facie case using MPEP 2131. Therefore, the rejections of claims 10-16 and 18-22, as anticipated by Jeannin, are maintained.
With respect to claim 9, Applicant argues that “Jeannin does not disclose or contemplate each and every feature of claim 1 and therefore, claim 9 as well. McCullough does not cure these deficiencies. Thus, a prima facie case of obviousness has not been established with respect to claim 9” (See REPLY TO NON-FINAL OFFICE ACTION, REMARKS, Rejection under 35 U.S.C. § 102, page 9, paragraph 1). Examiner acknowledges Applicant’s remarks. Regarding claim 9, McCullough discloses wherein the enclosed space is located in an hyperloop capsule ([0030], “FIGS. 6A-6B are schematic illustrations of a passenger pod assembly” Examiner notes that a passenger pod is a hyperloop capsule.).
MPEP § 2111 discusses proper claim interpretation, including giving claims their
broadest reasonable interpretation (“BRI”) in light of the specification during examination. Under BRI, the words of a claim must be given their plain meaning unless such meaning is inconsistent with the specification, and it is improper to import claim limitations from the specification into the claim. Applicant’s argument is not persuasive because the BRI is broader than what is argued. Therefore, the rejection of claim 9, as obvious by Jeannin in view of McCullough, is maintained.
As to establishing a prima facie case of anticipation, upon review, the
examiner’s rejection satisfied the requirements for MPEP 2143(I)(G). Applicant’s argument is not persuasive because the argument does not meet the requirements of 37 C.F.R. 1.111(b), and, upon review, the rejections do make a prima facie case using 2143(I)(G). Therefore, the rejection of claim 9, as obvious by Jeannin in view of McCullough, is maintained.
Conclusion
Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP § 706.07(a). Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a).
A shortened statutory period for reply to this final action is set to expire THREE MONTHS from the mailing date of this action. In the event a first reply is filed within TWO MONTHS of the mailing date of this final action and the advisory action is not mailed until after the end of the THREE-MONTH shortened statutory period, then the shortened statutory period will expire on the date the advisory action is mailed, and any nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) pursuant to 37 CFR 1.136(a) will be calculated from the mailing date of the advisory action. In no event, however, will the statutory period for reply expire later than SIX MONTHS from the mailing date of this final action.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Lisa Antoine whose telephone number is (571)272-4252. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Thursday 8:30 am - 6:30 pm 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, 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. 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.
LISA H ANTOINE
Examiner
Art Unit 3715
/XUAN M THAI/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3715