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and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114.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 April 1, 2026 has been entered.
Status of Claims
This office action is in response to arguments and amendments entered on April 1, 2026 for the patent application 17/993,460 filed on November 23, 2022. Claims 1, 11 and 25 are amended. Claims 15-20 are cancelled. Claims 1-14 and 21-25 are pending. The first office action of August 28, 2025 and the second office action of January 2, 2026 are fully incorporated by reference into this Non-Final Office Action.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 101
35 U.S.C. § 101 reads as follows:
Whoever invents or discovers any new and useful process, machine, manufacture, or composition of matter, or any new and useful improvement thereof, may obtain a patent therefor, subject to the conditions and requirements of this title.
Claims 1-14 and 21-25 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 101 because the claimed invention is directed to a judicial exception (i.e., a law of nature, a natural phenomenon, or an abstract idea) without significantly more.
Step 1 – “Statutory Category Identification”
Claim 1 is directed to “a synthetic training system” (i.e. a machine) and claims 11 and 21 are directed to “a method” (i.e. a process), hence the claims are directed to one of the four statutory categories (i.e. process, machine, manufacture, or composition of matter). In other words, Step 1 of the subject-matter eligibility analysis is “Yes.”
Step 2A, Prong 1 “Abstract Idea Identification”
However, the claims are drawn to an abstract idea of “synthetic training,” in the form of “certain methods of organizing human activity,” in terms of managing personal behavior or relationships or interactions between people (including social activities, teaching and following rules or instructions), or reasonably in the form of “mental processes,” in terms of processes that can be performed in the human mind (including an observation, evaluation, judgement or opinion). Regardless, the claims are reasonably understood as either “certain methods of organizing human activity” or “mental processes,” which require the following limitations:
Per claim 1:
“…receive user input based on user actuation… and to transmit the user input;
…measure physical information … and to transmit the physical information;
…capture calibration information …to input the calibration information from a configuration file and to store the calibration information… or to transmit the calibration information…;
…transmit user information…and to receive simulation information …, the user information based on the user input, based on the physical information, and based on the calibration information, and the simulation information based on the user input, based on the physical information, and based on a mapping of aspects … to a model… based on the calibration information; and
present a simulation to the user, wherein the simulation is based on the simulation information.”
Per claim 11:
“receiving user input based on user actuation …and transmitting the user input …;
measuring physical information…and transmitting the physical information to the processing device;
capturing calibration information or inputting the calibration information from a configuration file, and storing the calibration information…or transmitting the calibration information…;
transmitting user information …and receiving simulation information…, the user information based on the user input, based on the physical information, and based on a mapping of aspects … to a model… based on the calibration information; and
presenting a simulation to the user, wherein the simulation is based on the simulation information.”
Per claim 21:
“detecting physical attachment of a modular adaptive control device to a live training object;
entering a calibration mode based on determining that the live training object is a new connection for the modular adaptive control device;
while in the calibration mode, configuring calibration information for control of the live training object in a simulated environment, wherein the configuring of the calibration information establishes control over the live training object based on identifying physical specification information pertaining to the live training object, and calibrating sensor information for sensors attached to the modular adaptive control device based on user input detected from user interaction with the live training object while the modular adaptive control device is attached; and
storing the configured calibration information for control of the live training object in the simulated environment.”
These limitations simply describe a process of data gathering and manipulation, which is partially analogous to “collecting information, analyzing it, and displaying certain results of the collection analysis” (i.e. Electric Power Group, LLC, v. Alstom, 830 F.3d 1350, 119 U.S.P.Q.2d 1739 (Fed. Cir. 2016)). Hence, these limitations are akin to an abstract idea which has been identified among non-limiting examples to be an abstract idea. In other words, Step 2A, Prong 1 of the subject-matter eligibility analysis is “Yes.”
Step 2A, Prong 2 – “Practical Application”
Furthermore, the claims do not include additional elements that either alone or in combination are sufficient to claim a practical application because to the extent that, e.g., “a processing device,” “a memory device,” “an input interface,” “a live training object,” “a measurement device,” “a simulation server,” “a communications interface” and “an output device,” are claimed, as these are merely claimed to generally link the use of a judicial exception to a particular technological environment or field of use. In other words, the claimed “synthetic training,” is not providing a practical application, thus Step 2A, Prong 2 of the subject-matter eligibility analysis is “No.”
Step 2B – “Significantly More”
Likewise, the claims do not include additional elements that either alone or in combination are sufficient to amount to significantly more than the judicial exception because to the extent that, e.g. “a processing device,” “a memory device,” “an input interface,” “a live training object,” “a measurement device,” “a simulation server,” “a communications interface” and “an output device,” are claimed, these are generic, well-known, and conventional elements. As evidence that these are generic, well-known, and a conventional elements (or an equivalent term), as a commercially available product, or in a manner that indicates that the additional elements are sufficiently well-known, the Applicant’s specification discloses these in a manner that indicates that the additional elements are sufficiently well-known that the specification does not need to describe the particulars of such additional elements to satisfy 35 U.S.C. § 112(a), per MPEP § 2106.07(a) III (a). As such, this satisfies the Examiner’s evidentiary burden requirement per the Berkheimer memo.
Specifically, the Applicant’s claimed “a processing device,” as described in paras. [0030] and [0031] of the Applicant’s written description as originally filed, provides the following: “[0030] Processing device 202 includes any suitable hardware and/or software for displaying a simulation and receiving input from a user. For example, in some implementations, processing device 202 includes a central processing unit (CPU) and/or a graphics processing unit (GPU). In some implementations, processing device 202 includes a personal computer, smart phone, and/or programmable microcontroller, such as an Arduino™ or Raspberry Pi™ device. Processing device 202 also includes a memory 214, however it is noted that, as with other aspects of interface device 200, memory 214 may be in communication with but outside of processing device 202 instead.”
“[0031] In some implementations, processing device 202 includes processor 102 as shown and described with respect to FIG. 1, or aspects thereof. In some implementations, processing device 202
includes further elements as shown and described with respect to FIG. 1, such as memory 104, storage 106, input driver 112, output driver 114, input devices 108, and/or output devices 110.” As such, the Applicant’s claimed “a processing device,” is reasonably interpreted as a generic, well-known, and conventional computer component.
Likewise, the Applicant’s claimed “a memory device,” as described in para. [0020] of the Applicant’s written description as originally filed, provides the following: “[0020] Some implementations provide a synthetic training system. The system includes a processing device, and a memory device. The system also includes an input interface configured to receive user input based on user actuation of a live training object and to transmit the user input to the processing device. The system also includes a measurement device physically coupled to the live training object and configured to measure physical information of the live training object and to transmit the physical information to the processing device. The processing device is configured to capture calibration information via the measurement device or the input interface and to store the calibration information in the memory device or to transmit the calibration information to a simulation server.” As such, the Applicant’s claimed “a memory device,” is reasonably interpreted as a generic, well-known, and conventional computer component.
Further, the Applicant’s claimed “an input interface,” and “a measurement device,” as described in para. [0021] of the Applicant’s written description as originally filed, provides the following: “[0021] In some implementations, the processing device is configured to modify the user input based on the calibration information. In some implementations, the input interface comprises a button, pressure sensor, angle sensor, or switch. In some implementations, the measurement device comprises a position sensor, level sensor, or accelerometer.” As such, the Applicant’s claimed “an input interface,” and “a measurement device,” are reasonably interpreted as any generic, well-known, conventional and commercially available hardware components.
Continuing, the Applicant’s claimed “a live training object,” as described in para. [0021] of the Applicant’s written description as originally filed, provides the following: “[0021] … In some implementations, the live training object comprises a piece of equipment or a surrogate for the piece of equipment. In some implementations, the live training object comprises a infrared zoom laser illuminator designator (IZLID), laser rangefinder, or lightweight laser designator rangefinder (LLDR).” As such, the Applicant’s claimed “a live training object,” is reasonably interpreted as any generic, well-known, and conventional component.
Also, the Applicant’s claimed “a simulation server,” as described in para. [0043] of the Applicant’s written description as originally filed, provides the following: “[0043] Simulation server 212 includes a computer server, laptop, cloud computing system, or any other suitable hardware and/or software configured to run a training simulation program and provide a simulated and/or synthetic training environment to a user, e.g., via a user interface device such as device 200.” As such, the Applicant’s claimed “a simulation server,” is reasonably interpreted as any generic, well-known, conventional and commercially available computer product.
Still further, the Applicant’s claimed “a communications interface” as described in para. [0040] of the Applicant’s written description as originally filed, provides the following: “[0040] Communications interface 210 includes any suitable device for communications between processing device 202 and simulation server 212. Communications interface 210 communicates with simulation server 212 via any suitable wired or wireless communications interface and/or medium. For example, in some implementations, such as a Universal Serial Bus™ (USB). For example, in some implementations, communications interface 210 includes a wireless network transceiver, such as a dual-band WiFi transceiver, or a wired interface, such as a USB receiver and transmitter. Communications interface 210 can be considered an input and/or output device, in some implementations, however it is described separately herein for clarity and ease of description.”As such, the Applicant’s claimed “a communications interface” is reasonably interpreted as any generic, well-known, conventional and commercially available computer interface product.
Finally, the Applicant’s claimed “an output device,” as described in para. [0021] of the Applicant’s written description as originally filed, provides the following: “[0021] …In some implementations, the output device comprises a display, projector, haptic inter-face, and/or virtual reality headset.” As such, the Applicant’s claimed an output device,” is reasonably interpreted as any generic, well-known, and conventional commercially available computer display product. Therefore, these elements (i.e. “a processing device,” “a memory device,” “an input interface,” “a live training object,” “a measurement device,” “a simulation server,” “a communications interface” and “an output device”) are regarded as ubiquitous computer elements that are part of commercially available products which do not provide anything significantly more. Therefore, Step 2B, of the subject-matter eligibility analysis is “No.”
In addition, dependent claims 2-10, 12-14 and 22-25 do not provide a practical application and are insufficient to amount to significantly more than the judicial exception. As such, dependent claims 2-10, 12-14 and 22-25 are also rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 101, based on their respective dependencies to claim 1, 11 or 21. Therefore, claims 1-14 and 21-25 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 101 as being directed to non-statutory subject matter.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
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 1-5, 7-9, and 11-14 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Wallack, et al., (hereinafter referred to as “Wallack,” U.S. PG Pub. 2022/0364829).
Regarding claim 1, and substantially similar limitations in claim 11, Wallack discloses a synthetic training system (see para. [0001]: Embodiments according to various aspects of the present disclosure relate to simulation-based training), comprising: a processing device (see para. [0045]: Wearable computing device 210 may be configured to receive user inputs and present one or more visual simulations states to a user. Wearable computing device 210 may comprise a headset. Wearable computing device 210 may comprise a VR headset. A housing of wearable computing device 210 may be configured to be mounted on a head of a user. Wearable computing device 210 may comprise one or more hardware and/or software components. For example, wearable computing device 210 may comprise processor 212, memory 214, wireless communication interface 216, display 218, input audio interface 211, image sensor 213, output audio interface 215, position sensor 217, object detection module 219A, and/or equipment position detection module 219B. In embodiments, and with brief reference to FIG. 1, wearable computing device 210 may perform one or more operations of headset 110.
see para. [0046]: In various embodiments, processor 212 may be similar to any other processing unit, processor, or the like described herein. Processor 212 may comprise any circuitry, electrical components, electronic components, software, and/or the like configured to perform various operations and functions discussed herein. For example, processor 212 may comprise a processing unit described herein, a processing circuit, a processor, a digital signal processor, a microcontroller, a microprocessor, an application specific integrated circuit (ASIC), a programmable logic device, logic circuitry, state machines, MEMS devices, signal conditioning circuitry, communication circuitry, a computer, a computer-based system, a radio, a network appliance, a data bus, an address bus, and/or any combination thereof);
a memory device (see para. [0050]: In various embodiments, wearable computing device 210 may comprise a memory. For example, wearable computing device 210 may comprise memory 214. The memory may comprise non-transitory computer-readable medium comprising computer-executable instructions that when executed by a processor (e.g., processor 212), perform one or more actions. The non-transitory computer-readable medium may be a tangible, non-transitory memory configured to communicate with the processor. In one embodiment, non-transitory computer-readable medium contains computer-executable instructions that enable user inputs to be received and one or more simulation states to be presented via a display. Those skilled in the art will appreciate that one or more processors and/or computer-readable mediums may be provided as part of one or more various components recited herein);
an input interface configured to receive user input based on user actuation of a live training object and to transmit the user input to the processing device (see para. [0060]: In embodiments, user interface 228 may be configured to receive a user input from a user. The user input may comprise a physical input. For example, user interface 228 may comprise one or more buttons, switches, triggers, or other actuatable physical elements and the manual input may comprise a physical actuation of one or more such elements. In embodiments, user interface 228 may comprise a housing and one or more position sensors coupled to the housing, and the manual input may comprise a physical input applied to the housing that is further detected by the one or more sensors. In embodiments, processor 222 may receive the user input via user interface 228;
see para. [0065]: In embodiments, the user interface 228 may comprise at least one position sensor communicatively coupled to processor 222 to enable position information to be generated by equipment 220);
a measurement device physically coupled to the live training object and configured to measure physical information of the live training object and to transmit the physical information to the processing device (see para. [0065]: In embodiments, equipment 220 may comprise a position sensor communicatively coupled to processor 222, wherein processor 222 is configured to determine a position and/or change in position of equipment 220 in accordance with information received by the processor 222 from the position sensor. The position sensor may comprise one or more features or components as discussed with regards to position sensor 217. In embodiments, the user interface 228 may comprise at least one position sensor communicatively coupled to processor 222 to enable position information to be generated by equipment 220);
the processing device configured to capture calibration information of the live training object via the measurement device or the input interface or to input the calibration information of the live training object from a configuration file and to store the calibration information in the memory device or to transmit the calibration information of the live training object to a simulation server (see para. [0041] A server may store a user input. A server may analyze the user input provided by a CEW. A server may analyze the user input from one or more simulation equipment to determine one or more of a change in position, a change in orientation, an initial orientation, and an operation of the one or more simulation equipment. A server may be configured to generate a virtual equipment in a virtual environment, wherein movement and/or operation of the virtual equipment corresponds with movement and/or operation of a simulation equipment;
see para. [0067]: Server computing device 230 may be configured to receive one or more user inputs, perform an analysis on the one or more user inputs, and transmit the analysis. The user inputs may be received from wearable computing device 210 and/or equipment 220. The analysis may be provided to wearable computing device 210 and/or trainer computing device 250. Server computing device 230 may comprise various software and/or hardware components. For example, server computing device 230 may comprise processor 232, memory 234, network interface 236, transcription module 231, sentiment detection module 233, target detection module 235, motion detection module 237, and/or intent detection module 238. In embodiments, and with brief reference to FIG. 1, server computing device 230 may perform one or more operations of server 130);
a communications interface configured to transmit user information to the simulation server and to receive simulation information from the simulation server, the user information based on the user input, based on the physical information, and based on a mapping of aspects of the live training object to a model of the live training object based on the calibration information of the live training object (see para. [0066]: Wireless communication interface 226 may comprise suitable hardware and/or software components capable of enabling the transmission and/or reception of data. Wireless communication interface 226 may enable electronic communications between devices and systems. Wireless communication interface 226 may be configured to communicate via a wireless protocol such as an 802.11a/b/g/n/ac signal (e.g., Wi-Fi), a wireless communications protocol using short wavelength UHF radio waves and defined at least in part by IEEE 802.15.1 (e.g., the BLUETOOTH® protocol maintained by Bluetooth Special Interest Group), a wireless communications protocol defined at least in part by IEEE 802.15.4 (e.g., the ZigBee® protocol maintained by the ZigBee alliance), a cellular protocol, an infrared protocol, an optical protocol, or any other protocol capable of transmitting information via a wireless connection. In embodiments, wireless communication interface 226 may enable equipment 220 to communicate with wearable computing device 210 and/or server computing device 230. In embodiments, wireless communication interface 226 may transmit status information and/or position information from equipment 220 via a short-range wireless connection;
see para. [0041] A server may store a user input. A server may analyze the user input provided by a CEW. A server may analyze the user input from one or more simulation equipment to determine one or more of a change in position, a change in orientation, an initial orientation, and an operation of the one or more simulation equipment. A server may be configured to generate a virtual equipment in a virtual environment, wherein movement and/or operation
see para. [0089] In embodiments, server computing device 230 may comprise motion detection module 237. Motion detection module 237 may be configured to receive user input and generate motion information identifying motion events indicated in the user input. The motion events may comprise a gesture indicated in the user input. For example, motion detection module 237 may receive image data from image sensor 213 and detect a hand gesture made by a user of wearable computing device 210 as indicated in the image data. The gesture may comprise a type selected among a group comprising a lateral waving gesture, a downward waving gesture, a thumbs up gesture, a thumbs down gesture, a stop gesture, and a pointing gesture. Alternately or additionally, motion detection module 237 may receive physical input from user interface 228 and detect a gesture (e.g., aim, pattern of movement, orientation) made with equipment 220 as indicated in the user input. In embodiments, the motion events may comprise a simulated contact with an object in a simulated environment. For example, motion detection module 237 may receive physical input and object information regarding a location of an object (e.g., door, window, vehicle, NPC, etc.) in a simulated environment. Based on a comparison between the physical input and the object information, motion detection module 237 may generate a motion event indicating virtual contact in the simulated environment between the user and the object. The virtual contact may comprise indication of one or more of an intensity, location, and duration contact between a user and the object. The motion event may be provided to other components of simulation system 200 for further processing, including intent detection module 238); and
an output device configured to present a simulation to the user, wherein the simulation is based on the simulation information (see para. [0039]: In various embodiments, simulation system 100 may comprise a server configured to aid in analyzing a user input to generate output data to be displayed by a display of headset 110. Server 130 may be in wired and/or wireless communication with one or more of headset 110 and equipment 120 via a network, such as network 140. Network 140 may comprise a wireless communication network using one or more wireless communication protocols, such as WIFI, 2G, 3G, 4G, 5G, LTE, WIMAX, BLUETOOTH, and the like).
Regarding claim 2, and substantially similar limitations in claim 12, Wallack discloses wherein the processing device is configured to modify the user input based on the calibration information of the live training object (see para. [0041] A server may store a user input. A server may analyze the user input provided by a CEW. A server may analyze the user input from one or more simulation equipment to determine one or more of a change in position, a change in orientation, an initial orientation, and an operation of the one or more simulation equipment. A server may be configured to generate a virtual equipment in a virtual environment, wherein movement and/or operation of the virtual equipment corresponds with movement and/or operation of a simulation equipment;
see para [0151] In embodiments, a user input received by a simulation system may be analyzed. For example, processor 212 of wearable computing device 210, independently or in combination with one or more local or remote modules, may be configured to analyze a user input received while simulation system 200 is executed in first simulation state 510. The user input may be analyzed for different factors. For example, the user input may be analyzed for factors comprising text information, target information, sentiment information, gesture information, and/or contact information in accordance with user input. In embodiments, the user input may include or not include such factors. Analyzing the user input may comprise providing the user input to one or more modules configured to detect one or more factors of the different factors. Analyzing the user input may comprise separating a portion of the user input for processing by the one or more modules. In embodiments, analyzing the user input may comprise performing an analysis on the user input for a factor, independent of whether the factor is detected in the user input.
Regarding claim 3, and substantially similar limitations in claim 13, Wallack discloses wherein the input interface comprises a button, pressure sensor, angle sensor, or switch (see para. [0060] In embodiments, user interface 228 may be configured to receive a user input from a user. The user input may comprise a physical input. For example, user interface 228 may comprise one or more buttons, switches, triggers, or other actuatable physical elements and the manual input may comprise a physical actuation of one or more such elements).
Regarding claim 4, and substantially similar limitations in claim 14, Wallack discloses wherein the measurement device comprises a position sensor, level sensor, or accelerometer (see para. [0055] In various embodiments, wearable computing device 210 may comprise at least one position sensor. A position sensor may be configured to detect a position and/or changes in position of a wearable computing device. A position sensor may include a radar-based sensor, an infrared sensor, microwave sensor, gyroscope, ultrasonic detector, acoustic sensor, optical sensor, vibration detector, electromagnetic sensor, accelerometer, inertial measurement unit (IMUs), and/or other device or component capable of detecting movement. For example, wearable computing device 210 may comprise at least one position sensor 217. In embodiments, wearable computing device 210 may comprise more than one position sensor 217. For example, position sensor 217 may comprise an accelerometer and gyroscope that are used to detect movement of wearable computing device 210. Position information detected by position sensor 217 may be provided to processor 212 to enable a simulation state presented via display 218 to be updated in accordance with movement of wearable computing device 210 on a user).
Regarding claim 5, Wallack discloses wherein the live training object comprises a piece of equipment or a surrogate for the piece of equipment (see para. [0028] Simulation equipment may include real equipment adapted to be used in a simulation system. Simulation equipment may be configured to provide visual, audible, or haptic inputs to a simulator. Simulation equipment may be displayed as virtual equipment in a simulated environment. A user's interactions with simulation equipment in real space may correspond with the user's interactions with virtual equipment in a simulated environment. At least one of a change in position, a change in orientation, an initial orientation, and an operation of the simulation equipment in a real environment may correspond with at least one of a change in position, a change in orientation, an initial orientation, and an operation of the virtual equipment in the simulated environment).
Regarding claim 7, Wallack discloses wherein the physical information comprises orientation, position, inertial, and/or geometric information regarding the live training object, the user, and/or a training environment (see para. [0028] Simulation equipment may include real equipment adapted to be used in a simulation system. Simulation equipment may be configured to provide visual, audible, or haptic inputs to a simulator. Simulation equipment may be displayed as virtual equipment in a simulated environment. A user's interactions with simulation equipment in real space may correspond with the user's interactions with virtual equipment in a simulated environment. At least one of a change in position, a change in orientation, an initial orientation, and an operation of the simulation equipment in a real environment may correspond with at least one of a change in position, a change in orientation, an initial orientation, and an operation of the virtual equipment in the simulated environment);.
see para. [0065]: In embodiments, equipment 220 may comprise a position sensor communicatively coupled to processor 222, wherein processor 222 is configured to determine a position and/or change in position of equipment 220 in accordance with information received by the processor 222 from the position sensor. The position sensor may comprise one or more features or components as discussed with regards to position sensor 217. In embodiments, the user interface 228 may comprise at least one position sensor communicatively coupled to processor 222 to enable position information to be generated by equipment 220);
Regarding claim 8, Wallack discloses wherein the communications interface comprises a universal serial bus (USB), Bluetooth connection, or WiFi connection (see para. [0051] In various embodiments, wearable computing device 210 may comprise a wireless communication interface. For example, wearable computing device 210 may comprise wireless communication interface 216. Wireless communication interface 216 may comprise suitable hardware and/or software components capable of enabling the transmission and/or reception of data. Wireless communication interface 216 may enable electronic communications between devices and systems. Wireless communication interface 216 may be configured to communicate via a wireless protocol such as an 802.11a/b/g/n/ac signal (e.g., WI-FI), a wireless communications protocol using short wavelength UHF radio waves and defined at least in part by IEEE 802.15.1 (e.g., the BLUETOOTH® protocol maintained by Bluetooth Special Interest Group), a wireless communications protocol defined at least in part by IEEE 802.15.4 (e.g., the ZigBee® protocol maintained by the ZigBee alliance), a cellular protocol, an infrared protocol, an optical protocol, or any other protocol capable of transmitting information via a wireless connection. In embodiments, wireless communication interface 216 may enable wearable computing device 210 to communicate with server computing device 230 and/or trainer computing device 250 via network 240 using a first type of wireless connection (e.g., a WIFI connection, long-range wireless connection, etc.) and communicate with equipment 220 via a second type of wireless connection (e.g., a short-range wireless connection). In embodiments, wireless communication interface 216 may be configured to receive position information from equipment 220. [0077] In various embodiments, a “communication interface” or “network interface” (collectively, “communications unit”) as described herein may comprise any suitable hardware and/or software components capable of enabling the transmission and/or reception of data. A communications unit may enable electronic communications between devices and systems. A communications unit may enable communications over a network. Examples of a communications unit may include a modem, a network interface (such as an Ethernet card), a communications port, etc. Data may be transferred via a communications unit in the form of signals which may be electronic, electromagnetic, optical, or other signals capable of being transmitted or received by a communications unit. A communications unit may be configured to communicate via any wired or wireless protocol such as a CAN bus protocol, an Ethernet physical layer protocol (e.g., those using 10BASE-T, 100BASE-T, 1000BASE-T, etc.), an IEEE 1394 interface (e.g., FireWire), Integrated Services for Digital Network (ISDN), a digital subscriber line (DSL), an 802.11a/b/g/n/ac signal (e.g., Wi-Fi), a wireless communications protocol using short wavelength UHF radio waves and defined at least in part by IEEE 802.15.1 (e.g., the BLUETOOTH® protocol maintained by Bluetooth Special Interest Group), a wireless communications protocol defined at least in part by IEEE 802.15.4 (e.g., the ZigBee® protocol maintained by the ZigBee alliance), a cellular protocol, an infrared protocol, an optical protocol, or any other protocol capable of transmitting information via a wired or wireless connection. In embodiments, server computing device 230 may comprise at least one network interface 256 in communication with other devices of simulation system 200 via network 240).
Regarding claim 9, Wallack discloses wherein the output device comprises a display, projector, haptic inter-face, and/or virtual reality headset (see para. [0032]: In various embodiments, headset 110 may be configured to receive a user input. The user input may comprise a signal associated with an action of a user. Headset 110 may comprise a VR headset and/or an AR headset. Headset 110 may comprise at least one camera 112 configured to capture image data (e.g., an image, video, video data, video signal etc.) in which a physical input (e.g., motion, movement, pose, location, etc.) of a portion of a user is represented. Headset 110 may comprise at least one microphone 114 configured to capture an audio input (e.g., audio data, audio signal, etc.) in which an audio input from a user is provided. The user input may comprise an audio input. Headset 110 may comprise at least one wireless communication interface (not shown) configured to receive a physical input corresponding to user control of equipment 120;
see para. [0033]: In various embodiments, headset 110 may be configured to provide a simulated environment to a user. Headset 110 may comprise a display (not shown) to visually output (e.g., present) the simulated environment to the user).
Claim Rejections - 35 USC §103
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 set forth in Graham v. John Deere Co., 383 U.S. 1, 148 USPQ 459 (1966), that are applied 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 6 and 10 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Wallack in view of Tamir (US 2020/0200509).
Regarding claim 6, Wallack does not explicitly disclose wherein the live training object comprises a infrared zoom laser illuminator designator (IZLID), laser rangefinder, or lightweight laser designator rangefinder (LLDR). However, Tamir teaches wherein the live training object comprises a laser rangefinder (see para. [0080] In embodiments in which the shooter-side sensor arrangement 130 includes a distance measuring unit 144, the distance measuring unit 144 is configured to measure (i.e., estimate) the distance between the shooter-side sensor arrangement 130 and each of the shooters 102, 110, 120. The distance measuring unit 144 may be implemented, for example, as a laser rangefinder that emits laser pulses for reflection off of a target (i.e., the shooters) and calculates distance based on the time difference between the pulse emission and receipt of the reflected pulse).
Tamir is analogous to Wallack, as both are drawn to the art of simulation training. It would be obvious to try by one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of filing to have modified the system as taught by Wallack, to include wherein the live training object comprises a laser rangefinder, as taught by Tamir, since the modification would facilitate a training advantage when applied to collaborative and interactive virtual training scenarios which simulate real-life combat or combat-type situations and/or firearms training and/or competitions, such as in a virtual firing range (see para. [0125] of Tamir). A person of ordinary skill in the art would have reasonably been motivated to combine the prior art of Tamir with Wallack to achieve the claimed invention and would have done so with a reasonable expectation of success.
Regarding claim 10, Wallack does not explicitly disclose wherein the simulation comprises a virtual battlespace simulation (VBS). However, Tamir teaches wherein the simulation comprises a virtual battlespace simulation (VBS) (see para. [0125] Although embodiments of the system 100 as described thus far have pertained to detecting projectile discharges and projectile strikes, and correlating the detected discharges and strikes to link the discharges with strikes, embodiments of the present disclosure may also be used to advantage when applied to collaborative and interactive virtual training scenarios which simulate real-life combat or combat-type situations and/or firearms training and/or competitions, such as in a virtual firing range).
Tamir is analogous to Wallack, as both are drawn to the art of simulation training. It would be obvious to try by one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of filing to have modified the system as taught by Wallack, to include wherein the simulation comprises a virtual battlespace simulation (VBS), as taught by Tamir, since the modification would facilitate a training advantage when applied to collaborative and interactive virtual training scenarios which simulate real-life combat or combat-type situations (see para. [0125] of Tamir). A person of ordinary skill in the art would have reasonably been motivated to combine the prior art of Tamir with Wallack to achieve the claimed invention and would have done so with a reasonable expectation of success.
Response to Arguments
The Applicant’s remarks filed on April 1, 2026 related to claims 1-14 and 21-25 are fully considered, but are not persuasive.
Claim Rejections - 35 U.S.C. § 101
The Applicant respectfully argues “Regarding step 2A, prong 2, it appears to be argued essentially that because the specification recites various standard components, the claims cannot include "a practical application" and that the argument describes only "claimed utility". However, Applicant respectfully submits that this argument itself misconstrues the standard. The claims as written clearly provide at least one of the categories enumerated in the Office Action. For example, the arrangement in the claims is clearly directed to improvements in a training system, qualifying under at least MPEP 2106.05(a) as improvements to the functioning of any other technology. These improvements to technology are clearly reflected in the claims, as set forth in detail in the prior response. Notably, the Office Action characterizes the claims as drawn to " certain methods of organizing human activities... (See e.g., Office Action p. 2), however it is clear that the claims are directed to an improvement in technology, which is patent eligible under step 2A, prong 2. Here, the claims are not directed to an improvement in training, but rather, to an improvement in a training device and are patent eligible for at least these reasons.”
The Examiner respectfully disagrees. The Applicant’s conclusory argument “For example, the arrangement in the claims is clearly directed to improvements in a training system, qualifying under at least MPEP 2106.05(a) as improvements to the functioning of any other technology. These improvements to technology are clearly reflected in the claims, as set forth in detail in the prior response,” fail to provide any evidence supporting the notion that the Applicant is claiming “improvements in a training system.”
The Applicant continues with more conclusory arguments (i.e. “Notably, the Office Action characterizes the claims as drawn to " certain methods of organizing human activities... (See e.g., Office Action p. 2), however it is clear that the claims are directed to an improvement in technology, which is patent eligible under step 2A, prong 2. Here, the claims are not directed to an improvement in training, but rather, to an improvement in a training device and are patent eligible for at least these reasons.”), however, it is unclear as to what the basis of the alleged “improvement” even is, since no evidence has been provided. The Argument appears to be as broadly written as the Applicant’s claims. As such, the argument is not persuasive.
The Applicant respectfully argues “Regarding step 2B, the Office Action appears to advance essentially the same argument - i.e., that because the specification recites various standard components, the claims cannot include "significantly more." However, again, Applicant respectfully submits that the claims as written clearly provide at least one of the categories enumerated in the Office Action. For example, the arrangement in the claims is clearly directed to improvements in a training system, qualifying under at least MPEP 2106.05(a) as improvements to the functioning of any other technology.
These improvements to technology are clearly reflected in the claims, as set forth in detail in the prior response.
Because the claims are unambiguously directed to (and the claims themselves provide) an improvement in technology, and eligible at Step 2A (See e.g., MPEP 2106.04(d)(1)) and/or Step 2B (See e.g., MPEP 2106.05(a)) as discussed above, Applicant respectfully submits that the claims are eligible for purposes of 35 U.S.C. § 101.
Accordingly, Applicant respectfully requests that the rejection of claims 1-20 under 35 U.S.C. § 101 be withdrawn.”
The Examiner respectfully disagrees. The Applicant’s conclusory argument is repetitive of questions asked and answered above. Therefore, the rejection under 35 U.S.C. § 101 is not withdrawn.
Claim Rejections - 35 U.S.C. § 102
The Applicant respectfully argues “The Office Action does not appear to disagree that nothing in the cited passages of Wallack discloses, teaches, or mentions " .calibration. Instead, it appears to be argued, essentially, that the word " calibration " has no patentable weight other than to denote example aspects listed in the specification as possibly comprising the calibration information.
Applicant does not acquiesce to the propriety of this construction. Nevertheless, even if it were accepted for the sake of argument only (and Applicant does not concede this), nothing in Wallack discloses or teaches " the simulation information based on a mapping of aspects of the live training object to a model of the live training object based on the calibration information of the training object " as in the amended claim 1.
The cited passages of Wallack, at best, describe only storage and analysis of user input to determine a change in position, orientation, or operation of simulation equipment. However, this is not equivalent to " .simulation information based on a mapping of aspects of the live training object to a model of the live training object based on the calibration information of the training object..."
Because each and every element as set forth in claim 1 is not found, either expressly or inherently described, in Wallack, Applicant respectfully submits that claim 1 is novel over Wallack. These arguments also apply to independent claim 11, and accordingly to all claims depending from claims 1 and 11. No other cited reference cures this deficiency in Wallack.
Accordingly, Applicant respectfully requests that the rejection of claims 1-5, 7-9, 11-15, and 17-19 under 35 U.S.C. § 102 be withdrawn.”
The Examiner respectfully disagrees. The Applicant’s written description of the specification as originally filed provides the following at para. [0021]: “In some implementations, the calibration information comprises orientation, position, inertial, and/or geometric information regarding the live training object, the user, and/or a training environment.”
Wallack at para [0041] provides the following:
“A server may store a user input. A server may analyze the user input provided by a CEW. A server may analyze the user input from one or more simulation equipment to determine one or more of a change in position, a change in orientation, an initial orientation, and an operation of the one or more simulation equipment. A server may be configured to generate a virtual equipment in a virtual environment, wherein movement and/or operation of the virtual equipment corresponds with movement and/or operation of a simulation equipment.”
That being said, Wallack’s “user input” of “one or more of a change in position, a change in orientation, an initial orientation, and an operation of the one or more simulation equipment,” is a reasonable equivalent to the Applicant’s broadly claimed label of “calibration information.”
Furthermore, with regard to Applicant’s amendment of “the simulation information based on a mapping of aspects of the live training object to a model of the live training object based on the calibration information of the training object,” such a “mapping” is discussed as a “comparison” in para. [0089] as follows: “Based on a comparison between the physical input and the object information, motion detection module 237 may generate a motion event indicating virtual contact in the simulated environment between the user and the object. The virtual contact may comprise indication of one or more of an intensity, location, and duration contact between a user and the object. The motion event may be provided to other components of simulation system 200 for further processing, including intent detection module 238.” As such, the argument is not persuasive. Therefore, the rejection under 35 U.S.C. § 102 is not withdrawn.
Claim Rejections - 35 U.S.C. § 103
The Applicant respectfully argues “Claims 6 and 10 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103 as being unpatentable over Wallack in view of U.S. Pat. Pub. No. 2020/0200509 to Tamir, (hereinafter "Tamir".)
Claims 6, 10, 16, and 20 depend from independent claims 1 and 11, respectively, which Applicant respectfully submits are allowable as discussed above. Accordingly, Applicant respectfully submits that claims 6, 10, 16, and 20 are allowable for at least the same reasons.
Accordingly, Applicant respectfully requests that the rejection under 35 USC 103 of claims 6, 10, 16, and 20 be withdrawn.”
The Examiner respectfully disagrees for the same reasons previously stated above with regard to independent claims 1 and 11. As such, the argument is not persuasive. Therefore, the rejection under 35 U.S.C. § 103 is not withdrawn.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ROBERT P. BULLINGTON whose telephone number is (313) 446-4841. The examiner can normally be reached on Monday through Friday from 8 A.M. to 4 P.M. If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner's supervisor, Peter Vasat, can be reached on (571) 270-7625. 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 http://portal.uspto.gov/external/portal. Should you have questions on access to the Private PAIR system, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at (866) 217-9197 (toll-free).
/Robert P Bullington, Esq./ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3715
Prosecution Insights