Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status
1. The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
Response to Arguments
2. Applicant’s arguments filed January 2, 2026 regarding rejection of claim 1 under 35 USC 103 as being unpatentable over Kirchhoff et al. (US9248898B1) in view of Riski (US 9946261B2) have been fully considered but are moot due to amended claim 1.
Applicant’s arguments filed January 2, 2026 regarding rejection of claim 10 under 35 USC 103 as being unpatentable over Kirchhoff in view of “Land Rover Remote Control via iPhone RC Range Rover Sport Showcase – Autogefuhl”, www.youtube.com/watch?v=4ZaaYNaEFlo) in further view of Henderson et al. (US 10996793B2) have been fully considered but are unpersuasive.
Applicant’s arguments filed January 2, 2026 regarding claims 2-9 and 11-18 as being allowable through dependency to claims 1 and 10 have been fully considered but are unpersuasive.
3. Applicant indicates that Kirchhoff and Riski, nor do other prior arts of the Office Action prior, do not teach the new amended claim 1, especially of a detent-overcoming input is different from a control input.
However, examiner indicates that amended independent claim 1 requires further search and consideration. Therefore, applicant’s arguments regarding claim 1 are considered moot.
Thus, having done that, examiner has found Sako et al. (US 20120010766A1) does teach the amended limitation of claim 1. Sako teaches automatic cruise control system with an automatic cruise control panel where a switch on the panel issues a constant velocity command when first pressed by an operator, and cancels the constant velocity command when pressed again (see [0057]]). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the application to modify the physical control system of marine vessel propulsion system of Kirchhoff by incorporating teaching of Riski and Sako such that a graphical user interface with a virtual throttle is incorporated into the system to use a touch screen to also control a propulsion power demand and throttle parameters which mirrors the physical controls of a joystick system of Kirchhoff by providing touch-screen passed control moving movable control mechanisms through corresponding motions, including a virtual detent of Kirchhoff’s physical detent of a joystick, and incorporate within the control of propulsion power demand and throttle parameters to hold a slide position with a virtual switch or button for automatic cruise control and cancel it with another input of a button or switch, i.e. differing detent-overcoming input than control input.
Therefore, rejection of claim 1 under 35 USC 103 is maintained as being unpatentable over Kirchhoff in view of Riski and Sako, and argument made against amended independent claim 1 is moot.
4. Applicant argues that Kirchhoff in view of Land Rover and Henderson does not disclose or otherwise teach each claim element, especially of the amended claim limits.
However, examiner argues that claim 10 is rejected over Kirchhoff in view of Land Rover and Henderson, not of each prior art separately. Kirchhoff discloses in Fig. 2 and [col 5 lns 29-58] of marine vessel propulsion system to receive and control commands to operate propulsion of a marine vessel, Land Rover discloses in [1:30]-[2:00] a lever to control forwards or backwards movement, i.e. propulsion of a marine vehicle in combination with Kirchhoff, and Henderson discloses in Fig. 6 and [col 13 lns 33-65] input error detection through high enough vibration where the determined input error is cancelled and a corrected input is used as an actual user interaction, which modifies Kirchhoff and Land Rover to detect user’s intended true command and inputs corrected input for marine vessel propulsion system and cancels and ignores any error input, i.e. null command input, that is not a desired command to operate marine vessel propulsion system.
Therefore, rejection of claim 10 under 35 USC 103 is maintained and argument made against amended independent claim 10 is unpersuasive.
5. Applicant argues that claims 2-9 and 11-18 are patentable for their dependency from independent claims 1 and 10.
This argument is unpersuasive as each independent claims have been fully rejected and for the reasons as given above, and as shown in rejections of previous Office Action.
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.
6. Claims 1, 7, and 9 are rejected under pre-35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kirchhoff et al. (US9248898B1) in view of Riski (US9946261B2) in further view of Sako et al. (US 20120010766A1).
Regarding claim 1, Kirchhoff et al. teaches a propulsion control system for controlling operations of a marine vessel propulsion system that includes a prime mover and a power transmission device that are configured to propel a marine vessel (see [col 4 lns 22-67 and col 5 lns 1-28] propulsion devices and control elements with an operation control to control a marine vessel. Each propulsion device is provided with engine and transmission.), the propulsion control system comprising:
a physical control system that includes (see Fig. 2 and [col 5 lns 29-58] in general where operation console includes physical joystick, steering wheel, and lever.):
a physical control device with a movable control mechanism that can move through a range of motion and communicates with the marine vessel propulsion system to control at least one of the prime mover and the power transmission device to correspond to movements of the moveable control mechanism (see Fig. 2 and [col 5 lns 29-58] where there is an operation console that includes a joystick, a steering wheel, and a throttle/shift lever, i.e. physical control devices with mechanism that can move through different ranges of motion, and these devices are connected to command control module that communicates with first and second propulsion devices, i.e. with vessel propulsion system to control mover and transmission devices to move according to the physical control devices.);
a detent that holds the movable control mechanism at a detent position within the range of motion with a detent holding force that requires an application of greater force to move the movable control mechanism from the detent position than to move the movable control mechanism through a remainder of the range of motion (see Fig. 5 and [col 7 lns 20-52] where there are resistance when throttle/shift lever is moved to detent positions. This would allow an operator to realize that the lever has moved to a new shift and because of the resistance, it would require greater force to move the lever, i.e. moveable control mechanism, from the detent than other range of motion that is not a detent.);
Kirchhoff does not teach:
a virtual control system with a touch screen having a GUI (graphical user interface) that displays:
a virtual control device with a virtual movable control mechanism that can move through a virtual range of motion in response to a control input that is delivered through the touch screen, wherein the virtual control device communicates with the marine vessel propulsion system to control at least one of the prime mover and the power transmission device to correspond to movements of the virtual movable control mechanism; and
a virtual detent that holds the virtual movable control mechanism at a virtual detent position until application of a detent-overcoming input that is delivered through the touch screen and is different from the control input.
However, Riski does teach a user-operable control that is implemented through a graphical user interface (GUI) with a virtual throttle implemented on a touch-screen display, i.e. a virtual control device with movable control mechanism, that operates a propulsion power demand and throttle parameters, i.e. communicating with marine vessel propulsion system. Riski also indicates the throttle control using swiping up and down to control propulsion power demand, which would hold a position that was set using touch screen and is changed when another operation, i.e. swiping further or in different direction, overcomes current situation (see Fig. 2B, [col 10 lns 31-35] and [col 10 lns 46-67 and col 11 lns 1-20]).
Further, Sako teaches automatic cruise control system with an automatic cruise control panel where a switch on the panel issues a constant velocity command when first pressed by an operator, and cancels the constant velocity command when pressed again (see [0057]]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the application to modify the physical control system of marine vessel propulsion system of Kirchhoff by incorporating teaching of Riski and Sako such that a graphical user interface with a virtual throttle is incorporated into the system to use a touch screen to also control a propulsion power demand and throttle parameters which mirrors the physical controls of a joystick system of Kirchhoff by providing touch-screen passed control moving movable control mechanisms through corresponding motions, including a virtual detent of Kirchhoff’s physical detent of a joystick, and incorporate within the control of propulsion power demand and throttle parameters to hold a slide position with a virtual switch or button for automatic cruise control and cancel it with another input of a button or switch, i.e. differing detent-overcoming input than control input.
The motivation to have a graphical user interface (GUI) with a virtual throttle control implemented on a touch-screen display is that, as indicated by Riski, this would allow for the throttle control to be operable remotely on a portable device, which would promote ease of operation anywhere within a marine vessel or off the marine vessel, and the screen can display throttle parameters such as total power produced by a propulsion system to know how much changes have been made (see [col 10 lns 36-45] and [col 11 lns 6-25]).
The motivation to have a GUI with a virtual throttle control that is implement on a touch screen display that includes a switch or a button to engage and disengage autonomous cruise control is that, as indicated by Sako, this would allow a ship to arrive to a predetermined destination in a predetermined time, prevent over complication of adjusting to water flow and waves, and prevent danger of runaway (see [0006]-[0007]).
Regarding claim 7, Riski teaches a user-operable control is a touch-screen display and controls a propulsion system of marine vessel, i.e. a virtual control head, where user-operable control is a GUI and indicates that a throttle control includes a virtual throttle lever, in which image of throttle lever is also show in Fig. 2B (Fig 2B, col 10 lns 23-35, lns 31-62).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the application to modify the physical control system of marine vessel propulsion system of Kirchhoff, as already modified by Riski and Sako, by further incorporating the teachings of Riski, such that a user operable control also includes a touch-screen display and have a virtual throttle lever that is shown on a GUI as an image of a lever.
The motivation to do so is the same as acknowledged by Riski in regards to claim 1.
Regarding claim 9, Riski teaches a system where a virtual throttle control is a virtual throttle lever, i.e. a single axis joystick that slides, or moves, up or down presented on a GUI as an image (see [col 10 lns 23-62] and Fig. 2B.)
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the application to modify the physical control system of marine vessel propulsion system of Kirchhoff, as already modified by Riski and Sako, by further incorporating the teachings of Riski, such that a user operable control also includes a touch-screen display and have a virtual throttle lever that is shown on a GUI as an image of a single axis joystick that slides.
The motivation to do so is the same as acknowledged by Riski in regards to claim 1.
7. Claim 2 is rejected under pre-35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kirchhoff in view of Riski and Sako in further view of Larin (US10907727B2).
Regarding claim 2, Kirchhoff as modified by Riski and Sako, teaches the propulsion control system of claim 1.
Kirchhoff, as modified by Riski, does not teach: wherein the control input and the detent-overcoming input are defined by different touch engagement characteristics at the touch screen that correspond to a different number of fingers that provide the control input and the detent-overcoming input.
However, Larin does teach a display screen for a gear selection Graphical Unser Interface (GUI) where the display screen is controlled to display the gear selection GUI responding to a user gesture that uses at least two fingers on the display screen to drag up or down to change gear selection (see claim 1, [col 6 lns 29-48], and Fig. 1C). While this is explicitly described as operating gear selection, such gestures apply equally to other operating controls.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the application to modify a physical control system and GUI with virtual throttle lever of marine vessel propulsion system of Kirchhoff in view of Riski and Sako by incorporating teaching of Larin such that at least two or more fingers are used to drag up or down to operate a virtual lever, including beyond a detent.
The motivation to have a touch-based display screen with a GUI that allow changes in response to two or more fingers is that, as indicated by Larin, this would allow for a user to not need to take their eyes off the road to look to see if the touch-based display screen has responded to the two or more fingers in use, which would promote safety of the user and occupants of a vehicle, including marine vessel that can also change throttle forwards and backwards and neutral (see [col 8 lns 19-50]).
8. Claims 3-6 are rejected under pre-35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kirchhoff in view of Riski, Sako, and Larin in further view of Jobs et al. (US10295999B2).
Regarding claim 3, Kirchhoff, as modified by Riski, Sako, and Larin, teaches the propulsion control system of claim 2.
Kirchhoff, as modified by Riski and Larin, does not teach wherein the virtual control system provides feedback that conveys position information relating to the virtual movable control mechanism.
However, Jobs et al. does teach a wireless mobile device with a touch-sensitive screen with a virtual control system that provides visual tick marks on a main engine control slider, rudder control slider, and bow thruster controls, i.e. visual feedback conveying position information relating to a virtual movable control mechanism (see Fig. 4 and [col 8 lns 18-42]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the application to modify a physical control system and GUI with virtual throttle lever of marine vessel propulsion system of Kirchhoff in view of Riski, Sako, and Larin by incorporating teaching of Jobs such that the virtual throttle lever of marine vessel propulsion system uses visual feedback of tick marks to convey position information of a virtual movable control mechanism.
The motivation to have a GUI with virtual throttle lever to use tick marks as well as lever control on other functions of a marine vessel is that, as indicated by Jobs, this would allow for a wireless device to accurately control motion of a marine vessel based on received information of throttle level, transmission, rudder, etc. (see [col 2 lns 57-67 and col 3 lns 1-16]).
Regarding claim 4, Jobs teaches a wireless mobile device with a touch-sensitive screen with a virtual control system that provides visual tick marks on a main engine control slider, rudder control slider, and bow thruster controls that can slide out of and through the tick marks, i.e. visual feedback that will show a virtual movable control mechanism moving out of virtual detent position and tick marks serves as a visual detent feedback (see Fig. 4 and [col 8 lns 18-42]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the application to modify a physical control system and GUI with virtual throttle lever of marine vessel propulsion system of Kirchhoff in view of Riski, Sako, and Larin by further incorporating teaching of Jobs such that the virtual throttle lever of marine vessel propulsion system uses visual feedback of tick marks to convey position information of a virtual movable control mechanism.
The motivation to do so is the same as acknowledged by Jobs in regards to claim 3.
Regarding claim 5, Jobs teaches a wireless mobile device with a touch-sensitive screen with a virtual control system that provides visual tick marks on a main engine control slider, rudder control slider, and bow thruster controls that can slide out of and in between the tick marks within a set of ranges provided for each slider controls, i.e. visual feedback that shows a virtual movable control mechanism being able to position outside of virtual detent position and tick marks serves as visual detent feedback with slider ranges shown in Fig. 4 to show a range of motion possible (see Fig. 4 and [col 8 lns 18-42]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the application to modify a physical control system and GUI with virtual throttle lever of marine vessel propulsion system of Kirchhoff in view of Riski and Larin by further incorporating teaching of Jobs such that the virtual throttle lever of marine vessel propulsion system uses visual feedback of tick marks to convey position information of a virtual movable control mechanism, including beyond the tick marks, or detent.
The motivation to do so is the same as acknowledged by Jobs in regards to claim 3.
Regarding claim 6, Riski teaches a two-way arrow next to lever control image to indicate which direction a throttle lever is being pushed up or pulled down, i.e. a visual feedback and notification of a virtual control system (see [col 10 lns 52-62] and Fig. 2B).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the application to modify the physical control system of marine vessel propulsion system of Kirchhoff by further incorporating teaching of Riski such that a graphical user interface with a virtual throttle is incorporated into the system to use a touch screen to also control a propulsion power demand and throttle parameters which is notified by visual feedback arrows.
The motivation to have a graphical user interface (GUI) with a virtual throttle control implemented on a touch-screen display is that, as indicated by Riski, this would allow for the throttle control to be operable remotely on a portable device, which would promote ease of operation anywhere within a marine vessel or off the marine vessel, and the screen can display throttle parameters such as total power produced by a propulsion system as well as visual feedback arrows to know how much changes and in which direction changes have been made (see [col 10 lns 36-45] and [col 11 lns 6-25]).
9. Claim 8 is rejected under pre-35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kirchhoff in view of Riski and Sako in further view of Wang et al. (US9493232B2).
Regarding claim 8, Kirchhoff, as modified by Riski, teaches the propulsion control system of claim 1.
Kirchhoff, as modified by Riski, does not teach: wherein: the virtual control device is a virtual joystick device; and the virtual movable control mechanism is a virtual joystick that is presented on the GUI as an image of a multi axis joystick.
However, Wang et al. does teach a touch screen with virtual control sticks which is presented as having up-down and left-right control movement, i.e. multi axis virtual joystick on a GUI (see Fig. 6 and [col 38 lns 60-67 and col 39 lns 1-9]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the application to modify a physical control system and GUI with virtual throttle lever of marine vessel propulsion system of Kirchhoff in view of Riski by incorporating teaching of Wang such that there is a multi-axis virtual control stick that controls a marine vessel.
The motivation to have a GUI with virtual control stick to control functions of a marine vessel is that, as indicated by Wang, this would allow for a wireless device to accurately control motion of an unmanned marine vessel to search or to carry objects to other areas (see [col 1 lns 22-27] and [col 1 lns 45-50]). Note that a virtual control stick with multi-axis also enables multiple movement control of a vehicle (see [col 39 lns 10-28]). Note also that Wang indicates that disclosed technologies are applied to water-based movable objects also, such as submarines, boats, or ships (see [col 18 lns 30-67 and col 9 lns 1-2]).
10. Claims 10 and 15-18 are rejected under pre-35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kirchhoff et al. in view of “Land Rover Remote Control via iPhone RC Range Rover Sport Showcase - Autogefühl.” (www.youtube.com/watch?v=4ZaaYNaEFio) in further view of Henderson et al. (US10996793B2).
Regarding claim 10, Kirchhoff et al. teaches a propulsion control system for controlling operations of a marine vessel propulsion system that includes a prime mover and a power transmission device that are configured to propel a marine vessel (see [col 4 lns 22-67 and col 5 lns 1-28] in general where there are propulsion devices and control elements with an operation control to control a marine vessel), the propulsion control system comprising:
a physical control system with a set of physical movable control mechanisms that are configured to be actuated by a user as physical control commands to control the operations of the marine vessel propulsion system (see Fig. 2 and [col 5 lns 29-58] where there is an operation console that includes a joystick, a steering wheel, and a throttle/shift lever, i.e. physical control devices with mechanism that are actuated by a user, and these devices are connected to command control module that communicates with first and second propulsion devices, i.e. with vessel propulsion system to control mover and transmission devices to move according to the physical control devices.);
Kirchhoff does not teach a virtual control system with an HMI (human machine interface) that includes a touch screen that is configured to display a set of virtual movable control mechanisms and to receive touch-based inputs from the user as virtual control commands to control the operations of the marine vessel propulsion system; and
wherein the propulsion control system is configured to:
identify touch-based engagements of the set of virtual control devices as potential command inputs; and
evaluate the potential command inputs to determine whether each potential command input is:
a true command input that corresponds to a desired command from the user to control an operation of the marine vessel propulsion system to be executed and control the operation of the marine vessel propulsion system; or
a null command input that corresponds to an ancillary touch-based engagement of the touch screen that does not correspond to a desired command from the user to be ignored and not control the operation of the marine vessel propulsion system.
However, “Land Rover” does teach a remote control system through a smartphone that displays a slider or lever to control forwards and backwards movement of a vehicle depending on how much is swiped up or down, and a wheel that can be steered proportionally with a physical wheel, i.e. a set of virtual movable control mechanisms and receives and reacts to touch-based inputs (see [1:30]-[2:00]).
Further, Henderson et al. does teach a system that controls an aircraft, such as a flight plan parameter, sensing a vibration and determining an intended trajectory of user’s movement using sensors, such as a camera, when a touch-based engagement and command is made for virtual control. For each touch engagement or input, if vibration is small, a processor, or control system, can determine that the input was not error of vibration and use actual user interaction as a true command input. If the vibration is high enough for a sensed vibration to have caused an input error to occur, then, touch input is ignored or cancelled, i.e. null command input that is not a desired command from a user, and a corrected input is used as an actual user interaction (see Fig. 6 and [col 13 lns 33-65])
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the application to modify an interactive touch screen display with physical controls of lever, joystick and wheel of Kirchhoff by incorporating teaching of “Land Rover Remote Control” and Henderson such that a virtual lever and steering wheel be a part of the interactive touch screen control and have a control system of marine vessel propulsion system that sense a vibration of a vehicle and detect an intended trajectory of user’s movement to determine an actual user input, i.e. a true command input, is a desired and intended input of the user to replace error input, i.e. null command input ignored and not control the operation of the marine vessel propulsion system.
The motivation to have a remote application on a smartphone or an interactive display with a set of virtual movable controls of lever and steering wheel is that, as indicated by “Land Rover”, this would allow for a user to be able to view any vehicle, including marine vessels, that will have to perform parking or move in a narrow area, outside of the vehicle itself and maneuver it precisely without a worry of hitting other objects and constantly checking where the vehicle is headed (see [2:13]-[2:50]).
The motivation to have a system to sense vibration and determine user’s intended trajectory through use of sensors, such as a camera, is that, as indicated by Henderson, this would allow for prevention of vibration-induced error when selecting virtual elements, especially when there are weather conditions that causes a user to have difficulty controlling their movement (see [col 1 lns 7-10] and [col 1 lns 25-37]). Note all vehicles, including marine vessels, are also susceptible to wind, waves, storms, and other weather conditions with vibrations that would cause a user to have difficulty controlling their movements, and so, it would equally be distinguished as applied to Kirchhoff reference.
Regarding claim 15, Kirchhoff as modified by “Land Rover” and Henderson teaches the propulsion control system of claim 10, wherein:
the set of physical movable control mechanisms includes a joystick device with a base and a joystick that is moveable with respect to the base by at least one of forward/backward translation, side-to-side translation, and rotation, to control the operations of the marine vessel propulsion system (see Kirchhoff [col 6 lns 42-67 and col 7 lns 1-19] and Fig. 4 where joystick that controls movement of a marine vessel is indicated to have directional movement of forward-reverse, right-left, and rotation of the handle.);
“Land Rover” also teaches the virtual steering wheel, i.e. virtual joystick, is positioned differently using touch screen and controls physical steering wheel of a vehicle corresponding to how the virtual steering wheel has moved ([1:20]-[1:30]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the application to modify an interactive touch screen display with physical controls of lever, joystick and wheel of Kirchhoff by incorporating teaching of “Land Rover Remote Control” such that a virtual lever and steering wheel be a part of the interactive touch screen control that controls the physical controls of lever and joystick of a vehicle.
The motivation to have a remote application on a smartphone or an interactive display with a set of virtual movable controls of lever and steering wheel is that, as indicated by “Land Rover”, this would allow for a user to be able to view any vehicle, including marine vessels, that will have to perform parking or move in a narrow area, outside of the vehicle itself and maneuver it precisely without a worry of hitting other objects and constantly checking where the vehicle is headed (see [2:13]-[2:50]).
Regarding claim 16, “Land Rover” teaches an operator is using a smartphone and its app to control a vehicle (see [1:30]-[2:00]). “Land Rover” further teaches a safety feature built to which a vehicle is put into park and do not engage in any propulsion, especially in case of a smartphone is dropped, so that the vehicle is not going anywhere, i.e. detecting a touch screen dropped and issuing a removal control of propulsion and enter into a stand-by state (see [5:10]-[5:30])
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the application to modify an interactive touch screen display with physical controls of lever, joystick and wheel of Kirchhoff by incorporating teaching of “Land Rover Remote Control” such that a virtual lever and steering wheel be a part of the interactive touch screen control that controls the physical controls of lever and joystick of a vehicle and remove control of propulsion of a vehicle if a wireless touch screen control device is dropped.
The motivation to have a remote application on a smartphone or an interactive display with a set of virtual movable controls of lever and steering wheel that disconnects and removes control of propulsion of a vehicle with putting the vehicle into a parked or stand-by state is that, as indicated by “Land Rover”, this would allow for a user to be able to view any vehicle, including marine vessels, that will have to perform parking or move in a narrow area, outside of the vehicle itself and maneuver it precisely without a worry of hitting other objects and constantly checking where the vehicle is headed as well as have a safety feature to prevent the vehicle from moving when wireless control device is dropped or in state beyond control of a user (see [2:13]-[2:50] and [5:10]-[5:30]).
Regarding claim 17, “Land Rover” teaches a safety feature built to which a vehicle is put into park and do not engage in any propulsion, especially in case of a smartphone is dropped, so that the vehicle is not going anywhere, i.e. detecting a touch screen dropped and enter into a stand-by state. Note also that prime mover and transmission device of the vehicle are disconnected and enter into a predefined state of parked mode.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the application to modify an interactive touch screen display with physical controls of lever, joystick and wheel of Kirchhoff by incorporating teaching of “Land Rover Remote Control” such that a virtual lever and steering wheel be a part of the interactive touch screen control that controls the physical controls of lever and joystick of a vehicle and remove control of propulsion of a vehicle if a wireless touch screen control device is dropped.
The motivation to do so is the same as acknowledged by “Land Rover” in regards to claim 16.
Regarding claim 18, Kirchhoff as modified by “Land Rover” and Henderson teaches the propulsion control system of claim 17, wherein the predefined states include shifting the transmission into its neutral range and reducing the speed of the prime mover to idle (see Kirchhoff [col 7 lns 20-52] and Fig. 5 where when in neutral detent and range before forward and reverse detent, a control lever sends a signal to an engine output shaft and propeller shaft to be disengaged, i.e. engine, or prime mover in idle. Note also that there is no signal sent to the engine to engage until the lever is at forward or reverse detent.).
11. Claims 11-14 are rejected under pre-35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kirchhoff in view of “Land Rover” and Henderson in further view of Larin.
Regarding claim 11, Kirchhoff as modified by “Land Rover” and Henderson does teach the propulsion control system of claim 10, wherein:
the physical control system includes a control head (see Kirchhoff Fig. 2 and [col 5 lns 29-58] in general where operation console includes physical joystick, steering wheel, and lever.) and wherein: the set of physical movable control mechanisms includes a lever that is pivot mounted to the control head (see Kirchhoff Fig. 2, 3-4, and [col 16 lns 23-59] where a physically movable joystick is part of control system, i.e. a lever pivot mounted to control head.);
the lever defines a neutral position and from which the lever can be moved through a lever range of motion (see Kirchhoff Fig. 5 and [col 7 lns 20-52] where a throttle/shift lever has a neutral detent and can move through a range of motion between forward range, neutral range, and reverse range.);
a detent holds the lever in the neutral position and is configured to require a greater force to move the lever away from the neutral position than is required to move the lever through the reminder of the lever range of motion (see Kirchhoff [col 7 lns 20-52] and Fig. 5 where there is a neutral detent that provides a resistance that requires greater force to overcome the detent and allow for user to move towards reverse or forward aspects of lever control.);
Land rover also teaches the lever of a smartphone control system that controls a vehicle sliding to different positions to determine a level of engagement of breaks, i.e. dynamic repositioning of virtual lever through touch screen to move the virtual lever within a range of motion ([1:40]-[1:50]).
Kirchhoff as modified by “Land Rover” and Henderson does not teach: a virtual detent requires a different characteristic of the touch-based engagements of the virtual lever to move the virtual lever past the virtual detent than is required to move the virtual lever through the remainder of the virtual lever range of motion.
However, Larin does teach a display screen for a gear selection Graphical User Interface (GUI) where the display screen is controlled to display the gear selection GUI responding to a user gesture that uses at least two fingers on the display screen to drag up or down to change gear selection, i.e. a different characteristic of touch-based engagements of a virtual lever to move past a virtual detent (see claim 1, [col 6 lns 29-48], and Fig. 1C).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the application to modify an interactive touch screen display with both physical virtual controls of lever, joystick and wheel of Kirchhoff, as already modified by “Land Rover”, and Henderson by further incorporating the teachings “Land Rover” and incorporating the teachings of Larin such that a physical lever has a yield over other lever range of motion and a virtual lever, with a visual feedback of different colors and width, uses different number of finger touch and gesture is applied to move through a detent.
The motivation to further combine “Land Rover” is that, as indicated by “Land Rover”, this would allow for a user to be able to view any vehicle, including marine vessels, that will have to perform parking or move in a narrow area, outside of the vehicle itself and maneuver it precisely through a visual indication of how much break is engaged as well as maneuvering without a worry of hitting other objects and constantly checking where the vehicle is headed (see [2:13]-[2:50] and [1:40]-[1:50]).
The motivation to have a touch-based display screen with a GUI that allow changes in response to two or more fingers is that, as indicated by Larin, this would allow for a user to not need to take their eyes off the road to look to see if the touch-based display screen has responded to the two or more fingers in use, which would promote safety of the user and occupants of a vehicle, including marine vessel that can also change throttle forwards and backwards and neutral (see [col 8 lns 19-50]).
Regarding claim 12, “Land Rover” teaches a user sliding a lever control of breaks up and down and visual feedback of different colors and width being visible based on which position the lever is at, i.e. a visual notification of virtual lever moving beyond virtual detent (see [1:40]-[1:50]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the application to modify an interactive touch screen display with physical controls of a lever, a joystick and a steering wheel of Kirchhoff by incorporating teaching of “Land Rover Remote Control” such that a virtual lever and steering wheel be a part of the interactive touch screen control that controls the physical controls of lever and joystick of a vehicle with visual indication of width and colors on the virtual lever control and different detent.
The motivation to have a remote application on a smartphone or an interactive display with a set of virtual movable controls of lever and steering wheel is that, as indicated by “Land Rover”, this would allow for a user to be able to view any vehicle, including marine vessels, that will have to perform parking or move in a narrow area, outside of the vehicle itself and maneuver it precisely through a visual indication of how much break is engaged as well as maneuvering without a worry of hitting other objects and constantly checking where the vehicle is headed (see [2:13]-[2:50] and [1;40]-[1:50]).
Regarding claim 13, “Land Rover” teaches a user sliding a lever control of breaks up and down and visual feedback of different colors and width being visible based on which position the lever is at, i.e. a visual notification of virtual lever moving (see [1:40]-[1:50]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the application to modify an interactive touch screen display with physical controls of a lever, a joystick and a steering wheel of Kirchhoff by incorporating teaching of “Land Rover Remote Control” such that a virtual lever and steering wheel be a part of the interactive touch screen control that controls the physical controls of lever and joystick of a vehicle with visual indication of width and colors on the virtual lever control.
The motivation to do so is the same as acknowledged by “Land Rover” in regards to claim 12.
Regarding claim 14, “Land Rover” teaches a user sliding a lever control of breaks up and down and visual feedback of different colors and width being visible based on which position the lever is at, i.e. a visual notification of virtual lever moving (see [1:40]-[1:50]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the application to modify an interactive touch screen display with physical controls of a lever, a joystick and a steering wheel of Kirchhoff by incorporating teaching of “Land Rover Remote Control” such that a virtual lever and steering wheel be a part of the interactive touch screen control that controls the physical controls of lever and joystick of a vehicle with visual indication of width and colors on the virtual lever control and different detent.
The motivation to do so is the same as acknowledged by “Land Rover” in regards to claim 12.
Conclusion
12. The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
a. Chan et al. (US 20230073225A1), teaches motion planner that engages and disengages cruise control for a marine vessel.
b. Pryor (US 7084859B1), tactile touch screen and displays that uses different numbers of finger and gestures to engage with virtual controls.
13. 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.
14. Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to HYANG AHN whose telephone number is (571)272-4162. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 9-5.
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, Ramya Burgess can be reached at 571-272-6011. 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.
/H.A./Examiner, Art Unit 3661
/MATTHIAS S WEISFELD/Examiner, Art Unit 3661