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 .
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted on February 13, 2026 is in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statement is being considered by the examiner.
Response to Amendment
Claims 1, 5, 7-9, 11, 13, 17-18 and 20 have been amended changing the scope and contents of the claim.
Claims 21-23 have been newly added.
Claims 3-4 and 10 have been cancelled.
Applicant’s amendment filed February 13, 2026 overcomes the following objection/rejection(s) from the last Office Action of November 14, 2025:
Objections to the claims for minor informalities
Interpretation of the claims under 35 USC 112(f)
Rejection of the claims under 35 USC 112(b)
Rejections of the claims under 35 USC 102
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to claim(s) 1, 13 and 20 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.
Claim Objections
Claim 13 is objected to because of the following informalities:
Claim 13, line 5, “tabled” should read “tablet”
Appropriate correction is required.
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.
Claim(s) 1-2, 7-9, 11-12, 20 and 22 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over U.S. Patent No. 8,941,723 to Bentley et al. (hereinafter Bentley), and further in view of U.S. Publication No. 2023/0267768 to Menaker et al. (hereinafter Menaker) and U.S. Publication No. 2020/0398138 to Hendrix et al. (hereinafter Hendrix).
Regarding independent claim 1, Bentley discloses A system for determining a trajectory of a sport object propelled via an implement using a single mobile device (abstract, “Portable wireless mobile device motion capture and analysis system and method configured to display motion capture/analysis data on a mobile device;” column 4, line 40, “Calculated data, such as a predicted ball flight path data can be calculated and displayed on the mobile device with or without utilizing images of the user's body. ”), the system comprising:
a smartphone or tablet (column 10, line 43, “ Each mobile device 101, 102, 102 a, 102 b may have an internal identifier reader 190, ”);
a first sensor disposed within the smartphone or tablet (column 11, line 1, “One or more embodiments of the system may utilize a mobile device that includes at least one camera 130, for example coupled to the computer within the mobile device;” sensor is read as the at least one camera);
a swing radius module running on the smartphone or tablet (column 10, line 36, “As shown, embodiments of the system generally include a mobile device 101 and applications that execute thereon, that includes computer 160, ”);
a notification module running on the smartphone or tablet (column 10, line 36, “As shown, embodiments of the system generally include a mobile device 101 and applications that execute thereon, that includes computer 160, ”)
a second sensor disposed (column 11, line 35, “Camera 103 may also be utilized either for still images or as is now common, for video. In embodiments of the system that utilize external cameras, any method of obtaining data from the external camera is in keeping with the spirit of the system including wireless communication of the data, or via wired communication as when camera 103 is docked with computer 105 for example, which then may transfer the data to mobile device 101.”).
Bentley fails to explicitly disclose as further recited. However, Menaker discloses a swing radius module (Figure 1, element 108), the swing radius module calculating a swing radius of an implement swung by a user based on sensor data obtained from the first sensor (paragraph 0013, “the kinematic parameters for the indicated components throughout the actor's performance of actions against an ideal or some other reference (e.g. viewing a trace of the line between a user's elbows, wrists, and the head of a golf club throughout a golf swing, etc.);” paragraph 0145, “If the user is out of frame in their subsequent actions, user device 304 may use voice prompts to direct them back into the frame.;” paragraph 0147, “FIG. 5 is an illustrative human movement, in accordance with the embodiments disclosed herein. In the illustration, a human movement is performed relating to a sport of golf, although any context may be applicable. The human user may be centered in an image frame (e.g., through feedback from the registration and setup process, etc.) and the user device may record one or more image or video frames of the human movement.;” paragraph 0151, “This may include visual characteristics of the image captured by a camera, motion or magnitude values captured by a motion sensor (e.g., to determine speed, direction, etc.), or other values described throughout the disclosure. As illustrated, four images are captured to determine the context of the action, including four different positions of a swing in the activity/domain of golf.”);
a notification module (paragraph 0145, “user device 304”), the notification module providing a notification to the user that the swing radius is outside of a viewing frame of the first sensor (paragraph 0133, “In some examples, user continues to perform the action (e.g., swing). After each performance, a user confirmation may be provided to user device 304. The action may be ended when the user moves (e.g., walks, etc.) out the camera scope;” paragraph 0145, “ If the user is out of frame in their subsequent actions, user device 304 may use voice prompts to direct them back into the frame. ”).
Bentley is directed toward a “Portable wireless mobile device motion capture and analysis system and method configured to display motion capture/analysis data on a mobile device (abstract).” Menaker is directed toward utilizing biomechanics for the analysis of golf swing correction (see paragraphs 0003-0005). As can be easily seen by one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date that Bentley and Menaker are directed toward similar methods of endeavor of analyzing features and effects of a golf swing. Further, Menaker allows for notifying a user with respect to changes that can be made for a more optimal positioning for analysis (paragraph 0145). It can be easily seen by one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention that interacting with the user and guiding the proper positioning can aid in a more accurate output, and easier interaction with the user as a whole as opposed to outputting inadequate data, based on inadequate input. Thus, It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary sill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to incorporate the teaching of Menaker to ensure efficient and effective interaction with a user, while also generating the most accurate results.
Bentley and Menaker in the combination as a whole fail to explicitly disclose as further recited. However, Hendrix discloses a second sensor disposed at a known distance from the first sensor, wherein the second sensor is separate from the smartphone or tablet and in wired or wireless communication with the smartphone or tablet (paragraph 0032, “The first camera 352 and the second camera 354 are disposed in one or more openings 308, 310, 312 in the housing. The first camera 352 may be laterally spaced from the second camera such that the field of view of the first camera 352 is slightly different from the field of view of the second camera 354. In some embodiments, the first camera 352 is laterally spaced from the second camera 354 approximately one inch. In other embodiments, the first camera 352 is laterally spaced from the second camera 354 in a range of up to eight inches, up to six inches, in a range of one to eight inches, or some other range”).
As noted above, Bentley and Menaker are directed toward similar methods of endeavor of analyzing features and effects of a golf swing. Further, Hendrix is directed toward “A golf launch monitor is configured to determine a flight characteristic of a golf ball (abstract).” As can be easily seen by one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, Bentley, Menaker and Hendrix are all directed toward similar methods of endeavor of analyzing features and effects of a golf swing. Additioanlly, one of ordinary skill in the art would easily conceive that when analyzing a users swing, a user may also be interested in the effects on the ball. Thus, it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to incorporate the teaching of Hendrix to ensure the user can understand the effect of their swing and how altering a swing can alter ball trajectory.
Regarding dependent claim 2, the rejection of claim 1 is incorporated herein. Additionally, Bentley in the combination further discloses wherein the sport object is a golf ball (column 6, line 16, “ One or more embodiments of the invention may also operate with balls that have integrated sensors as well. Alternatively, the system may calculate the virtual flight path of a ball that has come in contact with equipment moved by a player. ”) and the implement swung by the user is a golf club (column 10, line 49, “ The system generally includes at least one motion capture element 111 that couples with user 150 or with piece of equipment 110, for example a golf club, or baseball bat, tennis racquet, hockey stick, weapon, stick, sword, or any other piece of equipment for any sport, or other sporting equipment such as a shoe, belt, gloves, glasses, hat, etc.”).
Regarding dependent claim 7, the rejection of claim 1 is incorporated herein. Additionally, Menaker in the combination further discloses wherein if the notification module indicates that the swing radius is outside the viewing frame of the first sensor, the user is notified to reposition the smartphone or tablet (paragraph 0145, “ If the user is out of frame in their subsequent actions, user device 304 may use voice prompts to direct them back into the frame;” paragraph 0147, “The human user may be centered in an image frame (e.g., through feedback from the registration and setup process, etc.) and the user device may record one or more image or video frames of the human movement.”).
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary sill in the art before the effective filing date to incorporate the teaching of Menaker to ensure the user is alerted to incorrect placement which would cause an inaccurate output. Said differently, if the swing/user is out of frame and continues with the process as opposed to being alerted, the kinetics of the golf ball may not be able to be calculated correctly.
Regarding dependent claim 8, the rejection of claim 2 is incorporated herein. Additionally, Bentley in the combination further discloses wherein the smartphone or tablet calculates, based on the sensor data obtained from the first sensor, a ball speed after the golf club makes contact with the golf ball (column 10, line 36, “As shown, embodiments of the system generally include a mobile device 101 and applications that execute thereon, that includes computer 160;” column 21, line 25, “A numerical form of the equations may be utilized to calculate the flight path for small increments of time assuming no wind and a spin axis of 0.1 radians or 5.72 degrees is as follows:” column 21, line 18, “Cd=coefficient of drag which depends on the speed and spin of the ball Cl=coefficient of drag which depends on the speed and spin of the ball” the functions for acceleration are determined based on the speed (specific constants require that determination) ).
Regarding dependent claim 9, the rejection of claim 2 is incorporated herein. Additionally, Hendrix in the combination further discloses wherein the smartphone or tablet calculates, based on the sensor data obtained from the first sensor, a ball spin rate and ball spin direction after the golf club makes contact with the golf ball (paragraph 0003, “In some embodiments, the hybrid golf launch monitor, through an analysis of one or more images, may be capable of ascertaining club path, ball launch angles, ball spin, impact location, and other flight characteristics;” paragraph 0081, “A third example flight characteristic is ball spin. The ball spin affects the future flight characteristics of the ball flight (e.g., hooking or slicing). The ball spin may include a spin rate and/or a spin direction. The spin rate is a measure of the amount or rate of spin imparted on the golf ball 104 by the strike. Spin is imparted by the striking of a non-perpendicular club face. The spin direction is a measure of a spin axis about which the golf ball 104 is spinning. The spin axis may have components of back/topspin and sidespin. This is because back/topspin will affect the flight characteristics independently of the sidespin. The ball spin is determined by analyzing one or more indicium 604 on the golf ball 104. Typically, the golfer 102 will face the indicium 604 toward the hybrid golf launch monitor 100 before striking the golf ball 104, such that the first camera 352 and the second camera 354 can capture two consecutive images showing the indicium 604.”).
One of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention would be aware there are many different features of a golf ball trajectory to consider when analyzing the flight of a golf ball. Thus, it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to incorporate the teaching of Hendrix in order to obtain additional data of the trajectory, allowing for additional analysis.
Regarding dependent claim 11, the rejection of claim 1 is incorporated herein. Additionally, Bentley in the combination further discloses wherein the first sensor and second sensor are cameras (column 5, line 45, “ if the mobile device is configured with two or more cameras”)
Further, Hendrix in the combination further discloses wherein the first sensor and second sensor are cameras, and wherein a magnification of the first camera and a magnification of the second camera are known (paragraph 0033, “The first camera 352 and the second camera 354 each generate images of a field of view (the “image data”). The cameras 352,354 are each configured to capture image data of the golf ball 104 at or after the club head 108 strikes the golf ball 104;” the field of view is known to be affected by the magnification (i.e. there is a correlation between the field of view with the magnification; the images are correlated based upon the fields of view; paragraph 0075, “In Step 414, the processing element 350 compares the first image to the second image. An amount of the progression of the golf ball 104 in the second image, relative to the first image, is indicative of a speed of the golf ball 104 as imparted by the swing. ”).
One of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention would be aware a field of view of a camera can be adjusted using magnification. Thus, it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to incorporate the teaching of Hendrix in order to alter a field of view, without having to move the entire camera and also allowing the system to know any alteration of camera parameters to take into account with further processing.
Regarding dependent claim 12, the rejection of claim 11 is incorporated herein. Additionally, Hendrix in the combination further discloses further comprising a trajectory module configured to correlate images from the first camera and the second camera using the known distances (paragraph 0033, “The first camera 352 and the second camera 354 each generate images of a field of view (the “image data”). The cameras 352,354 are each configured to capture image data of the golf ball 104 at or after the club head 108 strikes the golf ball 104. Two exemplary captured images are shown in FIGS. 6A and 6B. The second camera 354 is configured to capture a second image after the first camera 352 captures a first image. A time interval between the first image and the second image may be static, variable, or input by the user (as discussed below). Typically, the time interval between the first image and the second image will be faster than a frame rate of the cameras 352,354. The allows the two low- speed cameras 352,354 to mimic a high-speed camera, but at a significantly reduced cost;” paragraph 0020, “The hybrid golf launch monitor 100 calculates various flight characteristics of the golf ball 104 and/or the golf club 106 after the swing, as discussed in depth below. The calculated flight characteristics may then be utilized for any of various purposes. As one example, in an indoor simulated game, the calculated flight characteristics may be utilized to calculate a theoretical resting place for the golf ball 104 within the simulated game. ”) and magnifications of the first camera and the second camera (paragraph 0033, “The first camera 352 and the second camera 354 each generate images of a field of view (the “image data”). The cameras 352,354 are each configured to capture image data of the golf ball 104 at or after the club head 108 strikes the golf ball 104;” the field of view is known to be affected by the magnification (i.e. there is a correlation between the field of view with the magnification; the images are correlated based upon the fields of view; paragraph 0075, “In Step 414, the processing element 350 compares the first image to the second image. An amount of the progression of the golf ball 104 in the second image, relative to the first image, is indicative of a speed of the golf ball 104 as imparted by the swing. ”) to compute a velocity and spin of the sport object (paragraph 0080, “The ball launch speed, in combination with one or both of the ball launch angles, may be referred to as ball launch velocity;” paragraph 0081, “A third example flight characteristic is ball spin. The ball spin affects the future flight characteristics of the ball flight (e.g., hooking or slicing). The ball spin may include a spin rate and/or a spin direction. The spin rate is a measure of the amount or rate of spin imparted on the golf ball 104 by the strike. Spin is imparted by the striking of a non-perpendicular club face. The spin direction is a measure of a spin axis about which the golf ball 104 is spinning. The spin axis may have components of back/topspin and sidespin. This is because back/topspin will affect the flight characteristics independently of the sidespin. The ball spin is determined by analyzing one or more indicium 604 on the golf ball 104. Typically, the golfer 102 will face the indicium 604 toward the hybrid golf launch monitor 100 before striking the golf ball 104, such that the first camera 352 and the second camera 354 can capture two consecutive images showing the indicium 604.”).
One of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention would be aware there are many different features of a golf ball trajectory to consider when analyzing the flight of a golf ball. Thus, it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to incorporate the teaching of Hendrix in order to obtain additional data of the trajectory, allowing for additional analysis.
Regarding independent claim 20, the rejection of claim 1 applies directly. Additionally, Bentley discloses A system for determining a trajectory of a sport object propelled via an implement using a single mobile device smartphone or tablet (abstract, “Portable wireless mobile device motion capture and analysis system and method configured to display motion capture/analysis data on a mobile device. System obtains data from motion capture elements and analyzes the data. Enables unique displays associated with the user, such as 3D overlays onto images of the user to visually depict the captured motion data. Ratings associated with the captured motion can also be displayed. Predicted ball flight path data can be calculated and displayed.”), the system comprising:
software running on the smartphone or tablet (column 10, line 36, “As shown, embodiments of the system generally include a mobile device 101 and applications that execute thereon, that includes computer 160, shown as located internally in mobile device 101 as a dotted outline, ;” column 12, line 45, “FIG. 1A shows an embodiment of computer 160. In computer 160 includes processor 161 that executes software modules, commonly also known as applications, generally stored as computer program instructions within main memory 162”) and configured to communicate with a first sensor disposed on the smartphone or tablet (column 11, line 1, “One or more embodiments of the system may utilize a mobile device that includes at least one camera 130, for example coupled to the computer within the mobile device;” sensor is read as the at least one camera);
a second sensor separate from the smartphone or tablet (column 11, line 35, “Camera 103 may also be utilized either for still images or as is now common, for video. In embodiments of the system that utilize external cameras, any method of obtaining data from the external camera is in keeping with the spirit of the system including wireless communication of the data, or via wired communication as when camera 103 is docked with computer 105 for example, which then may transfer the data to mobile device 101.”);
Bentley fails to explicitly disclose as further recited. However, Menaker discloses a swing radius module of the software (Figure 1, element 108), the swing radius module calculating, based on the images from the first sensor and the second sensor, a swing radius of an implement swung by a user (paragraph 0013, “the kinematic parameters for the indicated components throughout the actor's performance of actions against an ideal or some other reference (e.g. viewing a trace of the line between a user's elbows, wrists, and the head of a golf club throughout a golf swing, etc.);” paragraph 0145, “If the user is out of frame in their subsequent actions, user device 304 may use voice prompts to direct them back into the frame.;” paragraph 0147, “FIG. 5 is an illustrative human movement, in accordance with the embodiments disclosed herein. In the illustration, a human movement is performed relating to a sport of golf, although any context may be applicable. The human user may be centered in an image frame (e.g., through feedback from the registration and setup process, etc.) and the user device may record one or more image or video frames of the human movement.;” paragraph 0151, “This may include visual characteristics of the image captured by a camera, motion or magnitude values captured by a motion sensor (e.g., to determine speed, direction, etc.), or other values described throughout the disclosure. As illustrated, four images are captured to determine the context of the action, including four different positions of a swing in the activity/domain of golf.”); and
a notification module of the software (paragraph 0145, “user device 304”), the notification module providing a notification to the user that the swing radius is outside of a viewing frame of the sensor (paragraph 0133, “In some examples, user continues to perform the action (e.g., swing). After each performance, a user confirmation may be provided to user device 304. The action may be ended when the user moves (e.g., walks, etc.) out the camera scope;” paragraph 0145, “ If the user is out of frame in their subsequent actions, user device 304 may use voice prompts to direct them back into the frame. ”).
Bentley and Menaker in the combination as a whole fail to explicitly disclose as further recited. However, Hendrix discloses a second sensor separate from the smartphone or tablet, wherein a first-second inter-sensor distance between the first sensor and the second sensor is known (paragraph 0032, “The first camera 352 and the second camera 354 are disposed in one or more openings 308, 310, 312 in the housing. The first camera 352 may be laterally spaced from the second camera such that the field of view of the first camera 352 is slightly different from the field of view of the second camera 354. In some embodiments, the first camera 352 is laterally spaced from the second camera 354 approximately one inch. In other embodiments, the first camera 352 is laterally spaced from the second camera 354 in a range of up to eight inches, up to six inches, in a range of one to eight inches, or some other range”);
a trajectory module of the software configured to correlate images from the first sensor and the second sensor using the first-second inter-sensor distance to compute a trajectory of the sport object (Figure 4, element 410, 414, 416; paragraph 0057, “ Image trigger latency, ball distance, optical camera details, distances between system 100 components, and related system configuration information may be stored in memory device 360 and retrieved by processing element 350 or calculated dynamically in real-time;” paragraph 0080, “A second example flight characteristic is ball launch speed. The ball launch speed is the amount of speed imparted on the golf ball 104 by the strike. The speed may be measured based upon a linear distance between the golf ball 104 in the first image and the second image, in relation to the interval time. ”).
As noted above, Bentley and Menaker are directed toward similar methods of endeavor of analyzing features and effects of a golf swing. Further, Hendrix is directed toward “A golf launch monitor is configured to determine a flight characteristic of a golf ball (abstract).” As can be easily seen by one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, Bentley, Menaker and Hendrix are all directed toward similar methods of endeavor of analyzing features and effects of a golf swing. Additionally, one of ordinary skill in the art would easily conceive that when analyzing a users swing, a user may also be interested in the effects on the ball. Thus, it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to incorporate the teaching of Hendrix to ensure the user can understand the effect of their swing and how altering a swing can alter ball trajectory.
Regarding dependent claim 22, the rejection of claim 12 is incorporated herein. Additionally, Hendrix in the combination further discloses wherein the trajectory module is further configured to, based on the velocity and spin of the sport object, compute a trajectory of the sport object (paragraph 0020, “The hybrid golf launch monitor 100 calculates various flight characteristics of the golf ball 104 and/or the golf club 106 after the swing, as discussed in depth below. The calculated flight characteristics may then be utilized for any of various purposes. As one example, in an indoor simulated game, the calculated flight characteristics may be utilized to calculate a theoretical resting place for the golf ball 104 within the simulated game;” paragraph 0081, “A third example flight characteristic is ball spin. The ball spin affects the future flight characteristics of the ball flight (e.g., hooking or slicing). The ball spin may include a spin rate and/or a spin direction;” paragraph 0022, “Golf launch monitors may be used to measure and predict the path of a golf ball based on various characteristics of the ball (and/or club head) measured concurrently with striking of the golf ball. ”).
Additionally, one of ordinary skill in the art would easily conceive that when analyzing a users swing, a user may also be interested in the effects on the ball. Thus, it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to incorporate the teaching of Hendrix to ensure the user can understand the effect of their swing and how altering a swing can alter ball trajectory.
Claim(s) 5-6 and 21 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Bentley further in view of Menaker and Hendrix as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of U.S. Publication No. 2023/0381584 to Lee (hereinafter Lee).
Regarding dependent claim 5, the rejection of claim 1 is incorporated herein. Additionally, Bentley, Menaker and Hendrix in the combination fail to explicitly disclose a pre-swing detection system running on the smartphone or tablet that calculates a length of a golf club based on the sensor data obtained from the first sensor.
However, Lee discloses further comprising a pre-swing detection system running on the smartphone or tablet that calculates a length of a golf club based on the sensor data obtained from the first sensor (paragraph 0037, “Meanwhile, the determination criterion adjustment unit 110 according to one embodiment of the invention may function to adjust a determination criterion for the user's golf swing on the basis of information on the user's actual body, which is estimated from the photographed image of the user's golf swing using an artificial neural network model;” paragraph 0038, “Further, the determination criterion adjustment unit 110 according to one embodiment of the invention may estimate the information on the user's actual body with reference to the at least one detected joint of the user. Here, according to one embodiment of the invention, the information on the user's actual body may include, but is not limited to, dimensions of the user's actual body (e.g., an actual height, actual arm length, and actual leg length);” paragraph 0040, “Here, the determination criterion adjustment unit 110 according to one embodiment of the invention may recognize a type and/or length of a golf club from the two-dimensional photographed image of the user's golf swing using the artificial neural network model, and estimate the user's actual height with further reference to the recognized type and/or length of the golf club.”).
As noted above, Bentley, Menaker and Hendrix are directed toward analyzing golf swings and the effect on ball movement features. Further, Lee is directed toward “A method for estimating information on a golf swing posture is provided (abstract).” As can be easily seen by one of ordinary skill in the art, Bentley, Menaker, Hendrix and Lee are all directed toward similar methods of endeavor of golf swing analysis. Further, Lee allows for detecting additional data that may impact a golf swing and a golf ball trajectory; said differently, it can be easily conceived that golf club length can impact the ball movement. Thus, It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary sill in the art before the effective filing date to incorporate the teaching of Lee to ensure personalized and accurate outputs based upon features of the golf club.
Regarding dependent claim 6, the rejection of claim 5 is incorporated herein. Additionally, Lee in the combination further discloses wherein the pre-swing detection system calculates a length of the user's arms based on the sensor data obtained from the first sensor (paragraph 0037, “Meanwhile, the determination criterion adjustment unit 110 according to one embodiment of the invention may function to adjust a determination criterion for the user's golf swing on the basis of information on the user's actual body, which is estimated from the photographed image of the user's golf swing using an artificial neural network model;” paragraph 0038, “Further, the determination criterion adjustment unit 110 according to one embodiment of the invention may estimate the information on the user's actual body with reference to the at least one detected joint of the user. Here, according to one embodiment of the invention, the information on the user's actual body may include, but is not limited to, dimensions of the user's actual body (e.g., an actual height, actual arm length, and actual leg length)”).
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary sill in the art before the effective filing date to incorporate the teaching of Lee to ensure the biomechanics are based on personalized data of the user; said differently, different user arm length could affect the output.
Regarding dependent claim 21, the rejection of claim 6 is incorporated herein. Additionally, Lee in the combination further discloses wherein the swing radius module calculates the swing radius based at least in part on the length of the golf club and the length of the user's arms (abstract, “; and estimating information on a golf swing posture of the user on the basis of the adjusted determination criterion;” paragraph 0037, “Meanwhile, the determination criterion adjustment unit 110 according to one embodiment of the invention may function to adjust a determination criterion for the user's golf swing on the basis of information on the user's actual body, which is estimated from the photographed image of the user's golf swing using an artificial neural network model;” one of ordinary skill in the art would easily recognize a swing radius is the combination of a length of a user arm and the golf club (i.e. the length from the motion starting point (shoulder) to the end of the implement (club)).
Lee allows for detecting additional data that may impact a golf swing and a golf ball trajectory; said differently, it can be easily conceived that golf club length and user arm data can impact the ball movement. Thus, It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary sill in the art before the effective filing date to incorporate the teaching of Lee to ensure personalized and accurate outputs based upon features of the golf club and user.
Claim(s) 13-15 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Bentley, and further in view of Hendrix.
Regarding independent claim 13, the rejection of claim 1 applies directly. Additionally, Bentley discloses A system for determining a trajectory of a sport object propelled via an implement using a single mobile device (abstract, “Portable wireless mobile device motion capture and analysis system and method configured to display motion capture/analysis data on a mobile device;” column 4, line 40, “Calculated data, such as a predicted ball flight path data can be calculated and displayed on the mobile device with or without utilizing images of the user's body. ”), the system comprising:
a smartphone or tablet (column 10, line 43, “ Each mobile device 101, 102, 102 a, 102 b may have an internal identifier reader 190, ”);
a first sensor disposed within the smartphone or tablet (column 11, line 1, “One or more embodiments of the system may utilize a mobile device that includes at least one camera 130, for example coupled to the computer within the mobile device;” sensor is read as the at least one camera);
a second sensor separate from the smartphone or tabled and in wired or wireless communication with the smartphone or tablet (column 11, line 35, “Camera 103 may also be utilized either for still images or as is now common, for video. In embodiments of the system that utilize external cameras, any method of obtaining data from the external camera is in keeping with the spirit of the system including wireless communication of the data, or via wired communication as when camera 103 is docked with computer 105 for example, which then may transfer the data to mobile device 101.”),
Bentley fails to explicitly disclose as further recited. However, Hendrix discloses wherein a first-second inter-sensor distance between the first sensor and the second sensor is known (paragraph 0032, “The first camera 352 and the second camera 354 are disposed in one or more openings 308, 310, 312 in the housing. The first camera 352 may be laterally spaced from the second camera such that the field of view of the first camera 352 is slightly different from the field of view of the second camera 354. In some embodiments, the first camera 352 is laterally spaced from the second camera 354 approximately one inch. In other embodiments, the first camera 352 is laterally spaced from the second camera 354 in a range of up to eight inches, up to six inches, in a range of one to eight inches, or some other range”)
a trajectory module configured to correlate images from the first sensor and the second sensor using the first-second inter-sensor distance to compute a trajectory of the sport object (Figure 4, specifically element 416, “determine flight characteristics” is based on the two image data sets).
Bentley is directed toward a “Portable wireless mobile device motion capture and analysis system and method configured to display motion capture/analysis data on a mobile device (abstract).” Hendrix is directed toward “A golf launch monitor is configured to determine a flight characteristic of a golf ball (abstract).” As can be easily seen by one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, Bentley and Hendrix are all directed toward similar methods of endeavor of analyzing features and effects of a golf swing. Additionally, one of ordinary skill in the art would easily conceive that when analyzing a users swing, a user may also be interested in the effects on the ball. Thus, it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to incorporate the teaching of Hendrix to ensure the user can understand the effect of their swing and how altering a swing can alter ball trajectory.
Regarding dependent claim 14, the rejection of claim 13 incorporated herein. Additionally, Bentley in the combination further discloses wherein the first sensor and second sensor are cameras (column 11, line 13, “If mobile device 101 contains two cameras, as shown in mobile device 102, i.e., cameras 130 a and 130 b, then the cameras may be utilized to create a three-dimensional data set through image analysis of the visual markers for example. ”).
Regarding dependent claim 15, the rejection of claim 13 incorporated herein. Additionally, Hendrix in the combination further discloses wherein a first magnification of the first sensor and a second magnification of the second sensor is known and the first and second magnifications are used by the trajectory module in correlating the images (paragraph 0033, “The first camera 352 and the second camera 354 each generate images of a field of view (the “image data”). The cameras 352,354 are each configured to capture image data of the golf ball 104 at or after the club head 108 strikes the golf ball 104;” the field of view is known to be affected by the magnification (i.e. there is a correlation between the field of view with the magnification; the images are correlated based upon the fields of view; paragraph 0075, “In Step 414, the processing element 350 compares the first image to the second image. An amount of the progression of the golf ball 104 in the second image, relative to the first image, is indicative of a speed of the golf ball 104 as imparted by the swing. ”).
One of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention would be aware a field of view of a camera can be adjusted using magnification, but also that when processing images that have been magnified the processing must take into account the magnification to determine an accurate output. Thus, it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to incorporate the teaching of Hendrix in order to alter a field of view, without having to move the entire camera and also allowing the system to know any alteration of camera parameters to take into account with further processing.
Claim(s) 16-17 and 23 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Bentley further in view of Hendrix as applied to claim 13 above, and further in view of Lee .
Regarding dependent claim 16, the rejection of claim 13 is incorporated herein. Additionally, Bentley and Hendrix in the combination fail to explicitly disclose further comprising a pre-swing detection system that calculates a length of the implement, wherein the implement is a golf club.
However, Lee discloses further comprising a pre-swing detection system that calculates a length of the implement, wherein the implement is a golf club (paragraph 0037, “Meanwhile, the determination criterion adjustment unit 110 according to one embodiment of the invention may function to adjust a determination criterion for the user's golf swing on the basis of information on the user's actual body, which is estimated from the photographed image of the user's golf swing using an artificial neural network model;” paragraph 0038, “Further, the determination criterion adjustment unit 110 according to one embodiment of the invention may estimate the information on the user's actual body with reference to the at least one detected joint of the user. Here, according to one embodiment of the invention, the information on the user's actual body may include, but is not limited to, dimensions of the user's actual body (e.g., an actual height, actual arm length, and actual leg length);” paragraph 0040, “Here, the determination criterion adjustment unit 110 according to one embodiment of the invention may recognize a type and/or length of a golf club from the two-dimensional photographed image of the user's golf swing using the artificial neural network model, and estimate the user's actual height with further reference to the recognized type and/or length of the golf club.”).
As noted above, Bentley and Hendrix are directed toward analyzing golf swings and the effect on ball movement features. Further, Lee is directed toward “A method for estimating information on a golf swing posture is provided (abstract).” As can be easily seen by one of ordinary skill in the art, Bentley, Hendrix and Lee are all directed toward similar methods of endeavor of golf swing analysis. Further, Lee allows for detecting additional data that may impact a golf swing and a golf ball trajectory; said differently, it can be easily conceived that golf club length can impact the ball movement. Thus, It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary sill in the art before the effective filing date to incorporate the teaching of Lee to ensure personalized and accurate outputs based upon features of the golf club.
Regarding dependent claim 17, the rejection of claim 16 is incorporated herein. Additionally, Lee in the combination further discloses wherein the pre-swing detection system calculates an arm length of a user of the implement ((paragraph 0037, “Meanwhile, the determination criterion adjustment unit 110 according to one embodiment of the invention may function to adjust a determination criterion for the user's golf swing on the basis of information on the user's actual body, which is estimated from the photographed image of the user's golf swing using an artificial neural network model;” paragraph 0038, “Further, the determination criterion adjustment unit 110 according to one embodiment of the invention may estimate the information on the user's actual body with reference to the at least one detected joint of the user. Here, according to one embodiment of the invention, the information on the user's actual body may include, but is not limited to, dimensions of the user's actual body (e.g., an actual height, actual arm length, and actual leg length)”).
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary sill in the art before the effective filing date to modify Hendrix with Lee to ensure the biomechanics are based on personalized data of the user; said differently, different user arm length could affect the output.
Regarding dependent claim 23, the rejection of claim 17 is incorporated herein. Additionally, Lee in the combination further discloses further comprising a swing radius module configured to compute a swing radius of the implement based in part on the length of the implement and the arm length of the user (abstract, “; and estimating information on a golf swing posture of the user on the basis of the adjusted determination criterion;” paragraph 0037, “Meanwhile, the determination criterion adjustment unit 110 according to one embodiment of the invention may function to adjust a determination criterion for the user's golf swing on the basis of information on the user's actual body, which is estimated from the photographed image of the user's golf swing using an artificial neural network model;” one of ordinary skill in the art would easily recognize a swing radius is the combination of a length of a user arm and the golf club (i.e. the length from the motion starting point (shoulder) to the end of the implement (club)).
Lee allows for detecting additional data that may impact a golf swing and a golf ball trajectory; said differently, it can be easily conceived that golf club length and user arm data can impact the ball movement. Thus, It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary sill in the art before the effective filing date to incorporate the teaching of Lee to ensure personalized and accurate outputs based upon features of the golf club and user.
Claim(s) 18-19 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Bentley further in view of Hendrix and Lee as applied to claim 23 above, and further in view of Menaker.
Regarding dependent claim 18, the rejection of claim 23 incorporated herein. Additionally, Bentley, Hendrix and Lee in the combination as a whole fail to explicitly disclose further comprising a notification module, the notification module providing a notification to a user that the swing radius of the implement is outside of a viewing frame of the first sensor.
However, Menaker discloses further comprising a notification module (paragraph 0145, “user device 304”), the notification module providing a notification to a user that the swing radius of the implement is outside of a viewing frame of the first sensor (paragraph 0133, “In some examples, user continues to perform the action (e.g., swing). After each performance, a user confirmation may be provided to user device 304. The action may be ended when the user moves (e.g., walks, etc.) out the camera scope;” paragraph 0145, “ If the user is out of frame in their subsequent actions, user device 304 may use voice prompts to direct them back into the frame. ”).
As noted above Bentley, Hendrix and Lee are all directed toward similar methods of endeavor of golf swing analysis. Menaker is directed toward utilizing biomechanics for the analysis of golf swing correction (see paragraphs 0003-0005). As can be easily seen by one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date that Bentley, Hendrix, Lee and Menaker are directed toward similar methods of endeavor of analyzing features and effects of a golf swing. Further, Menaker allows for notifying a user with respect to changes that can be made for a more optimal positioning for analysis (paragraph 0145). It can be easily seen by one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention that interacting with the user and guiding the proper positioning can aid in a more accurate output, and easier interaction with the user as a whole as opposed to outputting inadequate data, based on inadequate input. Thus, It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary sill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to incorporate the teaching of Menaker to ensure efficient and effective interaction with a user, while also generating the most accurate results.
Regarding dependent claim 19, the rejection of claim 18 incorporated herein. Additionally, Menaker in the combination further discloses wherein if the notification module (paragraph 0145, “user device 304”) indicates that the swing radius is outside the viewing frame of the sensor (paragraph 0133, “In some examples, user continues to perform the action (e.g., swing). After each performance, a user confirmation may be provided to user device 304. The action may be ended when the user moves (e.g., walks, etc.) out the camera scope;” paragraph 0145, “ If the user is out of frame in their subsequent actions, user device 304 may use voice prompts to direct them back into the frame. ”), the user is notified to reposition the single mobile device (paragraph 0139, “In some examples, the suggestions may correspond with changing inputs to data processing module 108. The suggestions may correspond with adjusting various camera characteristics and camera positions for the image or video data at user device 304 including, but not limited to, angle, tilt, or focal length. In some examples, different camera angles may be suggested based on swing location (e.g., to see the changes at the most visible angle, etc.). In some examples, additional sensors may be recommended to capture data in addition to image date (e.g., magnitude, speed, direction, etc. using a gyroscope);” paragraph 0145, “ If the user is out of frame in their subsequent actions, user device 304 may use voice prompts to direct them back into the frame;” paragraph 0147, “he human user may be centered in an image frame (e.g., through feedback from the registration and setup process, etc.) and the user device may record one or more image or video frames of the human movement.”).
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary sill in the art before the effective filing date to incorporate the teaching of Menaker to ensure the user is alerted to incorrect placement which would cause an inaccurate output. Said differently, if the swing/user is out of frame and continues with the process as opposed to being alerted, the kinetics of the golf ball may not be able to be calculated correctly.
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.
Contact
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Courtney J. Nelson whose telephone number is (571)272-3956. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday 8:00 - 4:00.
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, John Villecco can be reached at 571-272-7319. 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.
/COURTNEY JOAN NELSON/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2661