Office Action Predictor
Last updated: April 15, 2026
Application No. 18/468,872

INPUT DEVICE, CONTROLLER AND METHOD

Non-Final OA §103
Filed
Sep 18, 2023
Examiner
PIERCE, DAMON JOSEPH
Art Unit
3715
Tech Center
3700 — Mechanical Engineering & Manufacturing
Assignee
Sony Interactive Entertainment INC.
OA Round
1 (Non-Final)
75%
Grant Probability
Favorable
1-2
OA Rounds
2y 10m
To Grant
99%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 75% — above average
75%
Career Allow Rate
646 granted / 860 resolved
+5.1% vs TC avg
Strong +28% interview lift
Without
With
+28.2%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
2y 10m
Avg Prosecution
35 currently pending
Career history
895
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
11.6%
-28.4% vs TC avg
§103
42.7%
+2.7% vs TC avg
§102
17.7%
-22.3% vs TC avg
§112
21.2%
-18.8% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 860 resolved cases

Office Action

§103
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 1-12, 14, and 16-18 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over US Pub. 20200188775 to Sbragia et al (Sbragia) in view of US Pub. 20100285882 to Hsu and US Pub. 20210001171 to Fung. Claims 1, 2, 6, 8, 16, and 18. Sbragia discloses an input device for controlling a computing system, comprising: one or more sensors (¶¶54, 56, and 117) configured to sense a change in weight distribution of a user positioned on the input device in use (¶¶114 and 120); and a transmitter configured to transmit a signal based on the sensed change in weight distribution (¶¶43, 48, 78, and 115), and (as required by claim 16) a controller configured to determine a virtual input based on the sensed change in weight distribution and provide the virtual input to a computing system (Fig. 15, and ¶¶87, 117, and 145-148). However, Sbragia fails to explicitly discloses: (as required by claims 1 and 18) for use in a virtual joystick input to a computing system. (as required by claim 6) determine a virtual joystick input based on the signal; (as required by claim 6) provide the virtual joystick input to the computing system; and (as required by claims 8 and 16) a controller configured to determine a virtual joystick input based on the sensed change in weight distribution and provide the virtual joystick input to a computing system (emphasis added). Hsu and/or Fung teaches a virtual joystick input (see Hsu Fig. 5, and ¶¶13 and 22; and see Fung ¶¶78 and 115). The gaming system of Sbragia would have motivation to use the teachings of Hsu and/or Fung in order to replicate the game commands of a joystick using the balance platform as disclosed in paragraphs 81 and 153 of Sbragia. It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the gaming system of Sbragia with the teachings of Hsu and/or Fung in order to depict corresponding player movement using a virtual joystick which would give the player a sense of how input commands are normally performed on a video game gamepad in doing so would provide an enhanced gaming experience. Claim 2. Sbragia discloses wherein the one or more sensors: (a) are configured to sense a change in weight distribution in at least two (x, y) dimensions; and/or (b) comprise a two-dimensional (x, y) array of sensors: and/or (c) are located on, embedded in or located underneath a surface of the device on which the user is positioned in use: and/or (d) comprise one or more sensors which are movable with respect to the input device: (e) comprise one or more force sensors: (f) comprise one or more pressure sensors: and/or (g) comprise one or more: capacitance pressure sensors: resistance pressure sensors: piezoresistive pressure sensors: piezoelectric pressure sensors: optical pressure sensors: and/or elastoresistive pressure sensors (¶10, “air pressure sensor”). Claim 3. Sbragia in view of Fung teaches further comprising a rotational sensor for detecting rotation of the user and/or the input device (see Fung ¶¶75, 78, and 100). Claim 4. Sbragia in view of Fung teaches further comprising one or more additional input devices, actuators or haptic feedback devices (¶100). Claim 5. Sbragia in view of Hsu and Fung teaches comprising a controller for controlling a computing system based on a signal from an input device, the controller configured to: (a) receive a signal based on a sensed change in weight distribution from an input device comprising one or more sensors configured to sense a change in weight distribution of a user positioned on the input device in use: (b) determine a virtual joystick input based on the signal: and (c) provide the virtual joystick input to the computing system (see Hsu Fig. 5, and ¶¶13 and 22; and see Fung ¶¶78 and 115). Claim 7. Sbragia discloses wherein: (d) the input device comprises the controller; or (e) the computing system comprises the controller (¶84); or (f) the controller is an intermediary controller between the input device and the computing system. Claim 9. Sbragia in view of Hsu and Fung teaches wherein the controller is configured to: (c) determine a two-dimensional (x,y) directional virtual joystick input; and/or (d) determine the virtual joystick input based on the sensed change in weight distribution relative to a reference weight distribution (see Sbragia ¶¶81 and 153; see Hsu Fig. 5, and ¶¶13 and 22; and see Fung ¶¶78 and 115). Claim 10. Sbragia in view of Hsu and Fung teaches wherein the virtual joystick input comprises: (c) one, two or three dimensional directional input; and/or (d) analogue directional input or digital directional input; and/or optionally further comprising: (e) an analogue action input or a digital action input (see Hsu Fig. 5, and ¶¶13 and 22; and see Fung ¶¶78 and 115). Claim 11. Sbragia in view of Hsu and Fung teaches wherein: (c) the virtual joystick input comprises two-dimensional (x, y) digital directional input having 2N possible directions, preferably where N lies between 1 and 8; and/or (d) the virtual joystick input comprises two-dimensional (x, y) digital directional input having 2N possible magnitudes, preferably where N lies between 1 and 8 (see Hsu Fig. 5, and ¶¶13 and 22; and see Fung ¶¶78 and 115, where the player can move in a plurality of directions). Claim 12. Sbragia in view of Hsu and Fung teaches wherein determining the virtual joystick input comprises: (c) determining an increase or decrease in weight distribution in one or more directions relative to a reference weight distribution; and (c) mapping the relative increase or decrease in weight distribution in one or more directions to a virtual joystick input direction or action (see Sbragia ¶¶81 and 153; see Hsu Fig. 5, and ¶¶13 and 22; and see Fung ¶¶78 and 115). Claim 14. Sbragia in view of Hsu and Fung teaches wherein: (c) the one or more sensors are configured to sense a change in weight distribution in at least two (x, y) dimensions; and determining the virtual joystick input comprises: (d) determining an increase or decrease in weight distribution in two (x, y) dimensions relative to a reference weight distribution; and (e) mapping the increase or decrease in weight distribution in two (x, y) dimensions to a two-dimensional (x, y) analogue virtual joystick input direction (see Sbragia ¶¶81 and 153; see Hsu Fig. 5, and ¶¶13 and 22; and see Fung ¶¶78 and 115). Claim 17. Sbragia in view of Hsu and Fung teaches, comprising a seat pan, seat pad, seat leg, seat wheel, bed frame, bed frame leg, bed frame wheel or a mattress (see Fung ¶112). Claims 13 and 15 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over US Pub. 20200188775 to Sbragia et al (Sbragia) in view of US Pub. 20100285882 to Hsu and US Pub. 20210001171 to Fung as applied to claim 8 above, and further in view of US Pub. 20210380189 to Tett. Claim 13. Sbragia fails to explicitly disclose wherein the controller is configured to filter and ignore small changes in weight distribution falling under a dead zone threshold. Tett teaches dead zones (¶¶132-134). Note, a dead zones related to video game input devices refer to a range of input where the game does not register any movement or action from the input device. Therefore, the gaming system of Sbragia in view of Hsu and/or Fung would have motivation to use the teachings of Tett in order to ensure unintended movement by a user does not trigger unwanted input actions within a video game. It would have been further obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the gaming system of Sbragia in view of Hsu and/or Fung with the teachings of Tett in order to ensure unintended movement by a user does not trigger unwanted input actions within a video game. Claim 15. Sbragia fails to explicitly disclose claim 15 limitations. Tett teaches wherein the input device is configured to calibrate the input device for a user (¶86), comprising the input device or controller being configured to: (c) set a neutral or reference weight distribution as a neutral position of the virtual joystick; and/or (d) set one or more extreme weight distributions as one or more extreme positions of the virtual joystick; and/or (e) map a particular sensed change in weight distribution to a particular virtual joystick input direction or action; and/or (f) adjust an overall sensitivity of changes in weight distribution; and/or (g) adjust a sensitivity of one or more of the sensors; and/or (h) adjust a dead zone threshold for detecting the changes in weight distribution (¶¶132-134). The gaming system of Sbragia in view of Hsu and/or Fung would have motivation to use the teachings of Tett in order to enable the user to define preferred parameters in doing so would provide a better gaming experience for the player. It would have been further obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the gaming system of Sbragia in view of Hsu and/or Fung with the teachings of Tett in order to enable the user to define preferred parameters in doing so would provide a better gaming experience for the player. Conclusion Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to DAMON J PIERCE whose telephone number is (571)270-1997. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 8am-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, Kang Hu can be reached at 571-270-1344. 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. /DAMON J PIERCE/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3715
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Sep 18, 2023
Application Filed
Aug 17, 2025
Non-Final Rejection — §103
Apr 01, 2026
Response after Non-Final Action

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12594490
CONTROL DEVICE, SYSTEM AND METHOD
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 07, 2026
Patent 12582916
PROGRAM, INFORMATION PROCESSING DEVICE, METHOD, AND SYSTEM
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 24, 2026
Patent 12582912
STORAGE MEDIUM, INFORMATION PROCESSING SYSTEM, INFORMATION PROCESSING APPARATUS, AND GAME PROCESSING METHOD
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 24, 2026
Patent 12569753
SERVER APPARATUS, EVENT DATA PROCESSING METHOD, AND INFORMATION PROCESSING APPARATUS
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 10, 2026
Patent 12569765
INTERACTION METHOD AND RELATED APPARATUS
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 10, 2026
Study what changed to get past this examiner. Based on 5 most recent grants.

AI Strategy Recommendation

Get an AI-powered prosecution strategy using examiner precedents, rejection analysis, and claim mapping.
Powered by AI — typically takes 5-10 seconds

Prosecution Projections

1-2
Expected OA Rounds
75%
Grant Probability
99%
With Interview (+28.2%)
2y 10m
Median Time to Grant
Low
PTA Risk
Based on 860 resolved cases by this examiner. Grant probability derived from career allow rate.

Sign in for Full Analysis

Enter your email to receive a magic link. No password needed.

Free tier: 3 strategy analyses per month