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 .
Status of Claims
In response to the Amendment filed on December 2nd, 2025, claims 1, 5-7, 11-13, 17, and 18 have been amended. Claims 1-18 are currently pending.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 103 which forms the basis for all obviousness rejections set forth in this Office action:
A patent for a claimed invention may not be obtained, notwithstanding that the claimed invention is not identically disclosed as set forth in section 102, if the differences between the claimed invention and the prior art are such that the claimed invention as a whole would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which the claimed invention pertains. Patentability shall not be negated by the manner in which the invention was made.
The factual inquiries for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized as follows:
1. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art.
2. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue.
3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art.
4. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness.
This application currently names joint inventors. In considering patentability of the claims the examiner presumes that the subject matter of the various claims was commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the claimed invention(s) absent any evidence to the contrary. Applicant is advised of the obligation under 37 CFR 1.56 to point out the inventor and effective filing dates of each claim that was not commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the later invention in order for the examiner to consider the applicability of 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(C) for any potential 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) prior art against the later invention.
Claim(s) 1-18 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Lafortune et al. (US 2011/0230274 A1) in view of Bhupathi et al. (US 2011/0275045 A1).
Regarding claims 1, 7, and 13, Lafortune discloses a method for cue stroke monitoring for player development comprising:
collecting golf metrics for a real-time monitored golf player operating a golf club in a golf game (see par. [0138], systems and methods according to at least some examples of this invention will collect, store, and use golf swing dynamics information, ball flight information, and optionally other information for one or more golf swings made by a player); and
matching the golf metrics to a profile of a different golf player (see par. [0140], swing data for one or more individual swings of a golfer (e.g., swing dynamics information, ball launch information, etc.) will be compared against similar swing data for others in the golf community (S2012) in an effort to locate a “match” or “category” for the golfer's swing with respect to one or more other member(s) of the community (S2014)).
However, Lafortune does not explicitly disclose retrieving pool cue stroke content mapping to the profile of the different cue sports player comprising video imagery of the different cue sports player operating a different cue and striking a billiard ball; and, rendering a visualization of the pool cue stroke content of the different cue sports player in a mobile computing device of the real-time monitored cue sports player.
Bhupathi teaches a system for providing a video overlay sports motion analysis including retrieving content mapping to the profile of the different sports player comprising video imagery of the different sports player operating different equipment and striking a ball; and, rendering a visualization of the stroke content of the different sports player in a mobile computing device of the real-time monitored sports player (see par. [0005], A video of the student may be played in a side by side viewer simultaneously alongside a similar series of motions performed correctly, for example, a video sequence of a professional athlete; also see par. [0068], The student and/or the instructor can then compare the point in the motion where the student contacts the ball, and where the professional contacts the ball). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to combine the method of Lafortune with the video system of Bhupathi in order to instruct the player on how motions should be executed so as to perform the motions perfectly or correctly (see Bhupathi, par. [0002]). Though Lafortune describes the method mainly in relation to golf, Lafortune also recognizes that the method could apply to any other sport (see par. [0020], While much of this disclosure is dedicated to describing the invention in terms of use for golf and evaluating golf swings, the invention is not so limited. Rather, training, coaching, feedback, and/or fitting systems for other sports or activities are possible without departing from this invention). Similarly, Bhupathi teaches that the video system can apply to a multitude of sports (see par. [0036], However, the reader should understand that the various embodiments have a wide range of applications. The embodiments including, for example, the Ultimate Pro Compare (“UPC”) process described further below have application to all sports movements including baseball, golf, basketball, soccer, cricket, football, and gymnastics, just to name a few). Thus, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to apply Lafortune’s or Bhupathi’s method/system to a cue sport as this is merely the use of a known technique to improve a similar sport in the same way.
Regarding claims 2, 8, and 14, Lafortune discloses wherein the matching comprises establishing a communicative link to a social media network; transmitting a query to the social media network over the link with the golf metrics; and, receiving the profile of the different golf player from over the link in response to the querying (see par. [0140], swing data for one or more individual swings of a golfer (e.g., swing dynamics information, ball launch information, etc.) will be compared against similar swing data for others in the golf community (S2012) in an effort to locate a “match” or “category” for the golfer's swing with respect to one or more other member(s) of the community (S2014); also see par. [0017], Such community data hub systems and methods may provide one or more of the following: (a) storage of scoring data, swing dynamics data, ball flight data, and/or equipment data for multiple golfers; (b) at least some level of individual access to the stored data (both an individual's own data and the data of others); (c) electronic interaction between golfers within the community; and/or (d) feedback to the individual golfer).
Regarding claims 3, 9, and 15, Lafortune discloses wherein the different golf player is registered with the social media network as one of a professional golf player and an amateur golf player (see par. [0140], swing data for one or more individual swings of a golfer (e.g., swing dynamics information, ball launch information, etc.) will be compared against similar swing data for others in the golf community (S2012) in an effort to locate a “match” or “category” for the golfer's swing with respect to one or more other member(s) of the community (S2014)).
Regarding claims 4, 10, and 16, Lafortune discloses wherein the different golf player is an avatar representative of an ideal golf player (see par. [0127], the play back may include an avatar or other graphical representation of each individual player).
Regarding claims 5, 11, and 17, Lafortune discloses wherein the golf content additionally includes instructional material correlated to a portion of the golf metrics with a threshold disparity from counterpart metrics of the different golf player (see par. [0144], The output also may include any desired content, such as club or ball fitting information; club or ball selection information; club parameter adjustment information; swing tips; swing drills or other coaching information; comparative information regarding the user's swing data and one or more other player's swing data; etc.).
Regarding claim 6, 12, and 18, Lafortune discloses wherein the golf metrics are collected from image processing imagery of the real-time monitored golf player operating the golf club acquired by the mobile computing device of the golf player (see par. [0100], For example, this swing analysis system 800 includes one or more video cameras 814 that video record the golfer's swing and/or ball launch; also see par. [0044], Data transmission capabilities may be provided in any desired hardware associated with the analysis systems and methods, including, for example…provided with a portable electronic device (such as a cellular telephone, a PDA, a GPS device, etc.)).
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to claim(s) 1-18 have been considered but are moot because the new ground of rejection does not rely on any reference applied in the prior rejection of record for any teaching or matter specifically challenged in the argument.
Conclusion
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 ALLEN CHAN whose telephone number is (571)270-5529. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday, 11:00 AM EST to 7:00 PM EST.
Examiner interviews are available via telephone, in-person, and video conferencing using a USPTO supplied web-based collaboration tool. To schedule an interview, applicant is encouraged to use the USPTO Automated Interview Request (AIR) at http://www.uspto.gov/interviewpractice.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Dmitry Suhol can be reached at (571) 272-4430. 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.
/ALLEN CHAN/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3715 2/23/2026