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 .
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.
Claim(s) 1-20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Thatcher (US Patent Application Publication No. 2006/0131382) in view of www.YouTube.com Vip3D outdoor living design software overview March 19, 2018.
Regarding claim 1, Thatcher discloses a computer system comprising a digital display [see para. 0004; a graphical interface and/or display for providing information and searchable options to a user], a graphical user interface controller therefor which displays a graphical user interface, the graphical user interface comprising [see para. 0004, 0084 and figure 2; The input used to search the database and determine a unique product and Graphical User Interface (GUI) components. The windows may include images, graphics, charts, animations, interactive calculators, and the like to assist a user in choosing materials and designs to suit his/her needs. The GUI components may guide a user through the definition process to define a project profile]:
a cost calculation controller which makes cost calculations in accordance with pre-configured size, area [see para. 0100 and figure 6; the calculation module subsequently perform calculations to arrive at the estimated price of the materials based on the quantity of material, the materials unit price list, and/or the customized formulas, if a customer is building a pool, and selects tile A for the deck, tile B for the rim, and tile C for the bowl, the calculation module determine the number of pieces of each type of tile required based on the size of the deck, the depth of the rim, and the shape, size, and which corresponds to product module and visual representation] depth of the pool]; and/or volumetric dependent cost calculation parameters and perimeter and the depth profiles configured on-screen [see para. 0102 and figures 8A-8B; a majority of the information in the product specification 314 is automatically calculated for the consumer, substantially all the information in product specification and/or product profile modified by the consumer as desired. The calculation module accesses the source location and delivery costs within the source/supplier database and calculates a combined estimate that includes the cost of shipping the materials to the delivery site from the source or supplier location; which corresponds to perimeter shape and depth-related specs and cost calculation]; however, Thatcher fails to explicitly teach an interactive perimeter profile configuration control comprising vertex controls interactively positionable on screen to define a perimeter of a pool by rays between the vertex controls; and an interactive depth profile configuration control interactively controllable on screen to define a depth profile of the pool.
Vip3D discloses an interactive perimeter profile configuration control comprising vertex controls interactively positionable on screen to define a perimeter of a pool by rays between the vertex controls [see timelines 3:00-12:00; 3D drew the shape in the pool stage and see the depth]; and an interactive depth profile configuration control interactively controllable on screen to define a depth profile of the pool [see timelines 3:00-12:00; a skirt around the bottom and adjust the angle size and spacing of the boards in the panels and columns with the interactive pergola in the panel].
It would have been obvious to one of an ordinary skill in the art, having the teachings of Thatcher and VIP3D before the affective filing date of the claimed invention to modify, software engineer experienced in construction CAD of Thatcher to include outdoor living design software, as taught by VIP3D.
One would have been motivated to make such a combination in order to create a practical user-friendly on screen tool that allows professional and clients to interactively define pool perimeters and depths and obtain accurate volumetric and measurements and cost estimates.
Regarding claim 2, Thatcher discloses wherein the system automatically calculates size, area and/or volumetric parameters according to the perimeter and the depth profiles configured on-screen [see para. 0100 and figure 6; the calculation module subsequently perform calculations to arrive at the estimated price of the materials based on the quantity of material, the materials unit price list, and/or the customized formulas. For example, if a customer is building a pool, and selects tile A for the deck, tile B for the rim, and tile C for the bowl, the calculation module determine the number of pieces of each type of tile required based on the size of the deck, the depth of the rim, and the shape, size, and depth of the pool].
Regarding claim 3, Thatcher discloses, wherein the size, area and/or volumetric parameters comprise at least one of length, width, minimum depth, maximum depth, perimeter length, surface area and interior surface area in accordance with the perimeter of the depth profile [see para. 0054-0056; square face footage calculator or the like may help the user determine how much rock will be needed for a retaining wall or the like, a square face footage calculator comprises a chart comparing the length and height of the wall with a corresponding rock size and square footage estimate. In one embodiment, retaining wall options include single or multiple rows with the same height or tapering at one end. For a selected retaining wall design, the dimensions entered may include the number of rows, the height of the wall on the left end, the height of the wall in the middle, the height of the wall on the right end, the length of the wall, the slope, and the space between the rocks associated with the rock stacking style, the slope of the retaining wall, the rock shape, the entered dimension, and the space between the rocks; which corresponds to dimension-based calculations for pools].
Regarding claim 4, Thatcher discloses wherein the graphical user interface comprises cost inputs accepting cost according to the at least one of length, width, minimum depth, maximum depth, perimeter length, surface area and interior surface area [see para. 0084 and figure 4; the consumer interface presents a series of windows and other Graphical User Interface (GUI) components. The windows include images, graphics, charts, animations, interactive calculators, and the like to assist a user in choosing materials and designs to suit his/her needs. The GUI components guide a user through the definition process to define a project profile. The windows and GUI components may be displayed on a variety of devices including a computer monitor, a television screen, or other projection device. The consumer interface provides hard copies of the windows and/or product designs. The consumer interface comprise specialized computer software, specially designed hardware, or a web browser].
Regarding claim 5, VIP3D discloses wherein the system automatically calculates the size, area and/or volumetric parameters dynamically in real time as the perimeter and the depth profiles are configured on-screen [see YouTube timelines 3:00-12:00; insert pool template from the library].
Regarding claim 6; VIP3D discloses wherein a graphical user interface comprises view controls to control at least one of position and zoom of a view of the interactive perimeter profile configuration control [see YouTube timelines 3:00-12:00; fully interactive 3D presentation pool design].
Regarding claim 7; VIP3D discloses, wherein the graphical user interface comprises a control for at least one of adding and removing vertex controls [see YouTube timelines 3:00-12:00; fully interactive 3D presentation pool design].
Regarding claim 8, Thatcher discloses wherein the cost calculation parameters comprise parameters for at least one of the length, width, minimum depth, maximum depth, perimeter length, surface area and interior surface area [see para. 0096 and figure 6; quantification module include a calculation module, a quantity of material determination, a price estimate for material, a combined estimate for all materials, and an alternative estimate. The quantification module receive input from the consumer and input data from the source and/or the specialty contractor, the quantification module0 receives the product specification].
Regarding claim 9, VIP3D discloses wherein the interactive depth profile configuration control displays a vertical cross section of the pool and comprises a plurality of marker controls interactively positionable on-screen thereon, the vertical positioning of the marker controls defining the depth profile [see YouTube timelines 3:00-12:00; fully interactive 3D presentation pool design].
Regarding claim 10, VIP3D discloses wherein the graphical user interface control determines a length of the pool according to the perimeter and configures the length of the cross-section accordingly [see YouTube timelines 3:00-12:00; fully interactive 3D presentation pool design].
Regarding claim 11, VIP3D discloses wherein the interactive depth profile configuration control comprises a maximum depth input and wherein the graphical user interface configures the display of the depth of the cross-section accordingly [see YouTube timelines 3:00-12:00; fully interactive 3D presentation pool design].
Regarding claim 12, VIP3D discloses wherein the depth profile configuration control displays a curved line interpolation between the markers [see YouTube timelines 3:00-12:00; fully interactive 3D presentation pool design].
Regarding claim 13, VIP3D discloses wherein the depth profile configuration control comprises a control to at least one of add or remove marker controls [see YouTube timelines 3:00-12:00; fully interactive 3D presentation pool design].
Regarding claim 14, VIP3D discloses wherein each marker displays a respective depth which dynamically updates depending on the vertical position of the marker with respect to the cross-section [see YouTube timelines 3:00-12:00; fully interactive 3D presentation pool design].
Regarding claim 15, Thatcher discloses further comprising an electronic document generation controller which, for a specified electronic document template comprising a plurality of input fields, obtains a merge mapping data structure associated with the specified electronic document template, and maps parameters from at least one of the perimeter and the depth profiles configured on-screen and the cost calculations to respective input fields of the specified electronic document template as specified by the merge mapping data structure to dynamically generate an electronic document [see para. 0102, 0107; a majority of the information in the product specification is automatically calculated for the consumer, substantially all the information in product specification and/or product profile modified by the consumer. The calculation module accesses the source location and delivery costs within the source/supplier database and calculates a combined estimate that includes the cost of shipping the materials to the delivery site from the source or supplier location and the display module creates a graphical display of all calculations and variables used to arrive at a price estimate. The graphical display include specific details such as the material pricing system, delivery vehicle details, delivery costs, transportation time estimates, a tip for the operator, labor costs, etc. The user be able to modify one or more variables and receive updated calculations in real time].
Regarding claim 16, VIP3D discloses wherein positioning of the input fields are configurable on screen using the graphical user interface [see YouTube timelines 3:00-12:00; fully interactive 3D presentation pool design].
Regarding claim 17, Thatcher discloses wherein the merge mapping data structure is configured to map more than one parameter to one input field of the electronic document template [see figures 7A-8B].
Regarding claim 18, VIP3D discloses wherein the system calculates a volumetric parameter by summing the product of a perimeter profile width and depth at intervals along a length of the depth profile [see YouTube timelines 3:00-12:00; fully interactive 3D presentation pool design].
Regarding claim 19, VIP3D discloses wherein the interactive depth profile configuration control is configured for defining a pair of orthogonal depth profiles [see YouTube timelines 3:00-12:00; fully interactive 3D presentation pool design].
Regarding claim 20, VIP3D discloses wherein the system calculates a volumetric parameter by summing depths of square intervals along both of the pair of orthogonal depth profiles [see YouTube timelines 3:00-12:00; fully interactive 3D presentation pool design].
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure (See PTO-892).
Morkos et al. (US2019/0205484) discloses the systems and methods may utilize construction recipes and recipe relationships between the construction recipes. A construction recipe may comprise a formula for building a construction element, and comprise one or more construction operations logically related by one or more logical relationships. The same construction recipe may be assigned to construction elements of the same type. An operation can be defined by required resources drawn from a resource pool.
A reference to specific paragraphs, columns, pages, or figures in a cited prior art reference is not limited to preferred embodiments or any specific examples. It is well settled that a prior art reference, in its entirety, must be considered for all that it expressly teaches and fairly suggests to one having ordinary skill in the art. Stated differently, a prior art disclosure reading on a limitation of Applicant's claim cannot be ignored on the ground that other embodiments disclosed were instead cited. Therefore, the Examiner's citation to a specific portion of a single prior art reference is not intended to exclusively dictate, but rather, to demonstrate an exemplary disclosure commensurate with the specific limitations being addressed. In re Heck, 699 F.2d 1331, 1332-33,216 USPQ 1038, 1039 (Fed. Cir. 1983) (quoting In re Lemelson, 397 F.2d 1006,1009, 158 USPQ 275, 277 (CCPA 1968)). In re: Upsher-Smith Labs. v. Pamlab, LLC, 412 F.3d 1319, 1323, 75 USPQ2d 1213, 1215 (Fed. Cir. 2005); In re Fritch, 972 F.2d 1260, 1264, 23 USPQ2d 1780, 1782 (Fed. Cir. 1992); Merck & Co. v. Biocraft Labs., Inc., 874 F.2d 804, 807, 10 USPQ2d 1843, 1846 (Fed. Cir. 1989); In re Fracalossi, 681 F.2d 792,794 n.1,215 USPQ 569, 570 n.1 (CCPA 1982); In re Lamberti, 545 F.2d 747, 750, 192 USPQ 278, 280 (CCPA 1976); In re Bozek, 416 F.2d 1385, 1390, 163 USPQ 545, 549 (CCPA 1969).
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to CAO H NGUYEN whose telephone number is (571)272-4053. The examiner can normally be reached on Mon-Fri 9am-5pm.
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, Kieu Vu can be reached on 571-272-4057. 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://pair-direct.uspto.gov. Should you have questions on access to the Private PAIR system, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative or access to the automated information system, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000.
/CAO H NGUYEN/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2171
Prosecution Insights