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 .
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)(2) the claimed invention was described in a patent issued under section 151, or in an application for patent published or deemed published under section 122(b), in which the patent or application, as the case may be, names another inventor and was effectively filed before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claims 1-3, 6-10, and 12 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) as being anticipated by Crawford (US 20140309035).
Regarding claim 1, Crawford teaches an interactive ride experience system (Abstract, Fig. 2) comprising: a motion control system (250); a motion assembly (120); a vehicle (element 114-vehicle base; Fig. 2) coupled to the motion assembly and configured to be moved along at least one axis (paragraph 39, last sentence; paragraph 55; Fig. 2) by the motion assembly; and a force sensor (420,428,424) coupled to the vehicle (Fig. 4) and in electrical communication with the motion control system (paragraph 48, last two sentences; paragraph 49), wherein: the force sensor is configured to be activated by a passenger supported by the vehicle (paragraph 45, first sentence), and the motion control system (250) generates instructions for the motion assembly to change a position of the vehicle relative to the at least one axis based on the force sensor (paragraph 39; paragraph 50, last sentence).
Regarding claim 2, Crawford teaches an input device (410; Fig.4) coupled to the force sensor, and wherein a change in a position of or a force on the input device by the passenger activates the force sensors (paragraph 45).
Regarding claim 3, Crawford teaches wherein the input device is a seat (410; Figs. 2 and 4) movable relative to a body (114) of the vehicle, and the position of the input device is changeable by a shift in weight of a passenger (paragraph 45).
Regarding claim 6, Crawford teaches a ride environment corresponding to a thematic element (paragraph 36) of the interactive ride experience system and including one or more of an imager (200), a set, or a combination of the imager and the set.
Regarding claim 7, Crawford teaches wherein the motion control assembly (120) changes a pitch orientation of the vehicle (paragraph 31, last sentence).
Regarding claim 8, Crawford teaches wherein the motion control assembly (120) changes a roll orientation of the vehicle (paragraph 31, last sentence).
Regarding claim 9, Crawford teaches wherein the motion control assembly (120) changes a yaw orientation of the vehicle (paragraph 31, last sentence).
Regarding claim 10, Crawford teaches the vehicle further comprising: a body (114) shaped to correspond to a thematic element of the interactive ride experience system (paragraph 28, last sentence); and wherein the body includes one or more features positioned between a passenger area (vehicle seat-410; Fig. 4; paragraph 44, first sentence) of the vehicle and the motion assembly (120).
Regarding claim 12, Crawford teaches wherein the body is shaped to represent an aerial vehicle (paragraph 23, last sentence, “spacecraft”).
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 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.
Claim 11 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Crawford.
Regarding claim 11, Crawford does not teach wherein the body is shaped to represent a hang glider. However, Crawford does teach that the body can be shaped to represent any desirable feature (paragraph 23 and paragraph 28, last sentence). Choosing a body that represents the shape of a hang glider is a simple matter of design choice and does not hold patentable weight. See In re Seid, 161 F.2d 229, 73 USPQ 431 (CCPA 1947), where the court found that matters relating to ornamentation only which have no mechanical function cannot be relied upon to patentably distinguish the claimed invention from the prior art.
Claims 4,5,13 and 20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Crawford in view of Bloomfield (US 20210023465).
Regarding claim 4, Crawford does not teach a track defining a pathway of the interactive ride experience system; and a track module coupled to the track and movable along the pathway, wherein the motion assembly is coupled to the track module. However, Bloomfield teaches a track (222; Fig. 16) defining a pathway of the interactive ride experience system; and a track module (226) coupled to the track and movable along the pathway, wherein the motion assembly (230) is coupled to the track module (Fig. 16). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the instantly claimed invention to have combined the teachings of Crawford and Bloomfield by providing the track (222) and track module (226) of Bloomfield on the bottom of the motion assembly (120) of Crawford (near element 124 of Crawford, Fig.2) to enable an interactive movement of the ride by shifting the weight of the rider while progressing through a moving ride on a track.
Regarding claim 5, Crawford teaches at least two links (122), and wherein the motion assembly (120) modifies a position of the vehicle relative to at least two axes (paragraph 31, last sentence). Although Crawford teaches multiple linkages (122) in the motion assembly, Crawford does not clearly teach the motion assembly comprising: at least two joints, the at least two links movable about the at least two joints. However, Bloomfield teaches the motion assembly comprising: at least two links (paragraph 88, last two sentences; Fig. 16), at least two joints (“pivot point”, paragraph 88; Fig. 16), the at least two links movable about the at least two joints (paragraph 88), and wherein the motion assembly (230) modifies a position of the vehicle relative to at least two axes (paragraph 88, last two sentences). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the instantly claimed invention to have combined the teachings of Crawford and Bloomfield by providing the motion assembly of Crawford with at least two links and two joints as taught by Bloomfield, for the motion assembly to be able to modify the position of the vehicle.
Regarding claim 13, Crawford teaches wherein the vehicle is movable in six degrees of freedom (paragraph 30, first two sentences). Crawford does not teach a track module coupled to the track and attaching the motion assembly to the track; and wherein the vehicle is movable in six degrees of freedom relative to the track module by the motion assembly. However, Bloomfield teaches a track module (226) coupled to the track (222) and attaching the motion assembly (230) to the track; and wherein the vehicle (228) is movable relative to the track module by the motion assembly (paragraph 95). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the instantly claimed invention to have substituted the motion assembly and vehicle of Bloomfield with that taught by Crawford to enable the vehicle to move in six degrees of freedom relative to the track module.
Regarding claim 20, Crawford teaches the vehicle (114) including: an input device (410) for a passenger (102) to provide an input requesting a change an orientation of the vehicle (114) (paragraph 39; paragraph 50, last sentence); a motion control system (250) in operative communication with the input device (410; Figs. 2 and 4) and the motion assembly (120) (Fig. 2); and one or more computer readable media (paragraph 38, second sentence “computer readable media”) encoded with instructions which, when executed by one or more processors (242) of the motion control system cause the interactive ride experience system to: receive the input from the input device, the input corresponding to a request to move the vehicle from a first orientation to a second orientation (268) (paragraph 39); and communicate one or more commands from the motion control system (250) to the motion assembly (120) to implement the movement (paragraph 39). Crawford does not teach a vehicle pathway; a chassis movable along the vehicle pathway; a motion assembly coupled to the chassis; a vehicle coupled to the motion control assembly and movable by the motion assembly relative to the chassis, nor a “non-transitory” computer readable media, and neither clearly discloses the interactive ride to determine a current arrangement of the motion assembly corresponding to the first orientation; determine a second arrangement of the motion assembly corresponding to the second orientation; determine a movement of the motion assembly to move from the first arrangement to the second arrangement. However, Bloomfield teaches a vehicle pathway (222) (Fig. 16); a chassis (226) movable along the vehicle pathway; a motion assembly (230) coupled to the chassis; a vehicle (228) coupled to the motion control assembly and movable by the motion assembly relative to the chassis (paragraph 87). Furthermore, Bloomfield teaches non-transitory computer readable media (claim 10). Regarding the interactive ride to determine a current arrangement of the motion assembly corresponding to the first orientation; determine a second arrangement of the motion assembly corresponding to the second orientation; determine a movement of the motion assembly to move from the first arrangement to the second arrangement, although Crawford does not clearly disclose these steps, it is inherent to perform the movement of the motion assembly. As discussed above, Crawford discloses moving its vehicle in six degrees of freedom so that the vehicle is inherently going to be moving from one axis/orientation to another based on the sensed force input that is received. Receiving the force input and changing from one orientation to another reads on the determining arrangements as claimed. . Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the instantly claimed invention to have combined the teachings of Crawford and Bloomfield by adding the pathway and chassis of Bloomfield to the ride of Crawford, , to obtain an interactive experience by the rider while moving along a track and simultaneously having control of the motion assembly.
Claims 14-19 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Crawford in view of Bloomfield further in view of Blum (US 20180221778).
Regarding claim 14, Crawford teaches the vehicle (114) comprising: a body corresponding to a thematic (paragraph 23, last sentence) element of the ride experience system; and a force sensor (420,428,424) coupled to the vehicle (Fig. 4) and in electrical communication with a motion control system (paragraph 48, last two sentences; paragraph 49), wherein: the force sensor detects a force on or a change in a position of an input device (410), and the motion assembly (120) modifies a position of the vehicle (114) relative to the at least one axis corresponding to the change in position of the input device (Abstract; paragraph 31, last sentence; paragraph 39, first sentence). Crawford does not teach a force “torque” sensor, a track; a chassis operatively coupled to the track; a motion assembly coupled to the chassis; a vehicle coupled to the motion assembly and moveable relative to at least one axis relative to the chassis. However, Bloomfield teaches a track; a chassis operatively coupled to the track; a motion assembly coupled to the chassis; a vehicle coupled to the motion assembly and moveable relative to at least one axis relative to the chassis. Regarding the force “torque” sensor, although Crawford does not specifically disclose a force “torque” sensor, Crawford does disclose force sensors that are in communication with the motion assembly (120) to enable vehicle movements such as pitch, roll and yaw (paragraph 31, last sentence). Furthermore, Crawford discloses several different types of force sensors that may be used (paragraph 48, last two sentences). Furthermore, Blum teaches the use of a torque sensor (111) (Fig. 5) in a ride vehicle. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the instantly claimed invention to have combined the teachings of Crawford, Bloomfield and Blum by applying the track and chassis of Bloomfield to the bottom of the motion assembly (near element 124) of Crawford, and substituting the force sensor of Crawford with that of Blum, to obtain an interactive ride that is adjustable based on the force applied by the rider.
Regarding claim 15, Crawford does not teach wherein the force torque sensor detects movement in six degrees of freedom. However, Crawford teaches multiple force sensors in communication with the motion assembly enabling the motion assembly with six degrees of freedom (paragraph 30), inherently indicating detection by the sensors in six degrees of freedom. Furthermore, Blum teaches the use of a torque sensor (111) (Fig. 5) in a ride vehicle. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the instantly claimed invention to have substituted the force sensor of modified Crawford with the force torque sensor of Blum to detect the movement of a rider in a ride vehicle in six degrees of freedom and to subsequently initiate the corresponding movement of the motion assembly.
Regarding claim 16, Crawford teaches a ride environment corresponding to the thematic element (paragraph 23, last sentence). Crawford does not clearly disclose wherein the motion control system modifies the position of the vehicle in a manner corresponding to the ride environment and the thematic element. However, Bloomfield discloses wherein the motion control system (30) modifies the position of the vehicle (172) (Fig. 14) in a manner corresponding to the ride environment (120) and the thematic element (paragraph 69). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the instantly claimed invention to have combined the teachings of Crawford and Bloomfield by moving the ride vehicle of modified Crawford corresponding to a thematic environment as taught by both Crawford and Bloomfield to provide an immersive experience for the rider.
Regarding claim 17, Crawford teaches the motion assembly (120) comprising: at least two links (122). Crawford does not clearly disclose a first joint rotatable about the at least one axis, and a second joint rotatable relative to a second axis transverse to the at least one axis. However, Bloomfield teaches the motion assembly (230) (Fig. 16) comprising: at least two links (242) (Fig.16), a first joint (Fig. 16) rotatable about the at least one axis (14), and a second joint (Fig. 16) rotatable relative to a second axis (16) transverse to the at least one axis (paragraph 88, last sentence; paragraph 89). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the instantly claimed invention to have combined the teachings of modified Crawford and Bloomfield by substituting the motion assembly of modified Crawford with that of Bloomfield to obtain rotatable motion relative to two axes for an immersive experience for the rider.
Regarding claim 18, Crawford teaches wherein the motion control assembly (120) changes a roll orientation of the vehicle (114) (paragraph 31, last sentence).
Regarding claim 19, Crawford teaches wherein the motion control assembly (120) changes a pitch orientation of the vehicle (114) (paragraph 31, last sentence).
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to SABA ALI whose telephone number is (571)272-0268. The examiner can normally be reached 8:00 a.m. - 5 p.m..
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, Eugene Kim can be reached at 571-272-4463. 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.
/SABA N. ALI/Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3711
/EUGENE L KIM/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3711
Prosecution Insights