DETAILED ACTION
This Office action is in response to application filed on 5/1/2024. Claim(s) 1-20 is/are pending.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
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 set forth in Graham v. John Deere Co., 383 U.S. 1, 148 USPQ 459 (1966), that are applied for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized as follows:
1. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art.
2. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue.
3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art.
4. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness.
Claim(s) 1-3, 5-6, 13-16, 18-19 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Noma (US 20120124979 A1) in view of Kato et al. (US 20230030345 A1).
Regarding claim 1, and similarly claim 14, Noma teaches A marine propulsion system (“the present invention can be applied to…a marine vessel or the like without being limited…The working machine is used as a generic name of…the marine vessel and the like.”, [0194]) comprising:
a propulsion device (“engine 70”, Fig. 1)
a propulsion device operator including:
a vessel speed indicator (“control handle 11”, Fig. 1) (“A control handle 11 and an operation seat 12 are arranged within the operation cabin 10. In this case, as shown in FIG. 2, in the operation cabin 10, there are arranged a step (not shown) in which an operator gets on board, a handle column 14 which is provided with the control handle 11, a main shift lever 16 which is provided in a lever column 15 in a left side of an operation seat 12 and serves as shift operating means, an auxiliary shift lever 17, a working clutch lever 18 for operating a working clutch (a harvesting clutch and a grain threshing clutch, an illustration of which are omitted) to turn on and off, and the like. A diesel engine 70 which serves as a power source is arranged in the traveling machine body 1 below the operation seat 12.”, [0060]); and
a deceleration switch (“forced low rotation switch 35”, Fig. 26) to receive an operation to enter a deceleration mode in which the vessel speed is decreased by a predetermined speed from the indicated vessel speed (“The forced low rotation switch 35 is a reset type push switch (which may be called as a momentary switch), and is set such as to forcibly lower the engine speed to the low idle rotating speed by a push-down operation at the first time”, [0169]); wherein
the marine propulsion system is operable to enter the deceleration mode and decrease the vessel speed by the predetermined speed from the indicated vessel speed when the deceleration switch is turned on (“The forced low rotation switch 35 is a reset type push switch (which may be called as a momentary switch), and is set such as to forcibly lower the engine speed to the low idle rotating speed by a push-down operation at the first time”, [0169]), and return the vessel speed to the indicated vessel speed before the deceleration mode is entered when an operation is performed to cancel the deceleration mode (“The forced low rotation switch 35 is a reset type push switch (which may be called as a momentary switch), and is set such as…to return the engine speed to the original rotating speed before being lowered, from the low idle rotating speed by a push-down operation at the second time.”, [0169]).
Noma does not explicitly teach
a propulsion device (“engine 70”, Fig. 1) to be provided on a hull;
a vessel speed indicator (“control handle 11”, Fig. 1) to adjust a thrust of the propulsion device by changing an indicated vessel speed that is a vessel speed provided to the propulsion device.
Instead, Noma teaches an “engine 70” (Fig. 1, corresponds to Applicant’s “propulsion device”) which is controlled by a “control handle 11” ([0060], corresponds to Applicant’s “vessel speed indicator”), wherein “the present invention can be applied to…a marine vessel or the like without being limited…The working machine is used as a generic name of…the marine vessel and the like.” [0194]
Further, Kato teaches
a propulsion device (“outboard motor 1”, Fig. 1) to be provided on a hull;
a vessel speed indicator (“operation lever 11”, Fig. 1) to adjust a thrust of the propulsion device by changing an indicated vessel speed that is a vessel speed provided to the propulsion device (“When the operation lever 11, which has been switched to the forward position or the backward position, is further tilted forward or backward, the throttle opening TH and the engine output are adjusted in accordance with the operation amount of the operation lever 11, and the travel speed is adjusted.”, [0022]).
Thus, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to modify the invention of Noma with the teachings of Kato such that the propulsion device of Kato is provided on a hull, as suggested by Kato and that the vessel speed indicator of Noma changes the vessel speed by the propulsion device, as suggested by Kato, with a reasonable expectation of success. This would achieve the predictable result of applying the invention of Noma to a marine vessel, as suggested by Noma. KSR International Co. v. Teleflex Inc. (KSR), 550 U.S. 398, 82 USPQ2d 1385 (2007)
Regarding claim 2, and similarly claim 15, Noma in view of Kato teaches The marine propulsion system according to claim 1, and Noma further teaches wherein the deceleration switch includes a single switch to alternately receive an on operation to enter the deceleration mode and an off operation to cancel the deceleration mode (“The forced low rotation switch 35 is a reset type push switch (which may be called as a momentary switch), and is set such as to forcibly lower the engine speed to the low idle rotating speed by a push-down operation at the first time, and to return the engine speed to the original rotating speed before being lowered, from the low idle rotating speed by a push-down operation at the second time.”, [0169]).
Regarding claim 3, and similarly claim 16, Noma in view of Kato teaches The marine propulsion system according to claim 2, and Noma further teaches wherein the deceleration switch includes a deceleration mode lamp (“informing device 337”, [0095], Fig. 26) that is on during the deceleration mode and is off when the deceleration mode is canceled.
In the fifth embodiment, Noma teaches “the fuel injection controller 311 according to the fifth embodiment is structured such as to inform by the informing device 337 that a forced regeneration of the DPF 60 (the soot filter 65) is necessary” [0174]. However, in the first embodiment, Noma teaches the “informing device 337” ([0095], Fig. 26, corresponds to Applicant’s “deceleration mode lamp” is used to indicate that the engine is lowered to low speed [0105] or returned to an original high speed [0106]. Thus, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to modify the invention of Noma in view of Kato such that the “informing device 337” ([0095], Fig. 26) is on during the deceleration mode and off when the deceleration mode is canceled, as suggested by Noma, with a reasonable expectation of success. The motivation for doing so would be to provide “a visual information in correspondence to the actuation state” of the propulsion device [0095], as taught by Noma.
Regarding claim 5, and similarly claim 18, Noma in view of Kato teaches The marine propulsion system according to claim 1, and Kato further teaches wherein the propulsion device operator further includes:
a speed control switch (“function switch 12”, Fig. 1) to receive an operation to enter a speed control mode in which the vessel speed is able to be finely adjusted, and an operation to finely adjust the vessel speed in the speed control mode (“The operator adjusts the travel speed by the operation lever 11, and when the cruise mode is activated by the function switch 12, the travel speed can be finely adjusted to the travel speed of the time point when the cruise mode is activated by intermittent operations of pressing the operation buttons 12a, 12b.”, [0029]); wherein
a fluctuation range corresponding to the predetermined speed by which the vessel speed is decreased from the indicated vessel speed when the deceleration switch is turned on and the deceleration mode is entered is larger than an adjustment range of the vessel speed in the speed control mode in which the speed control switch is operated (“When the operation lever 11, which has been switched to the forward position or the backward position, is further tilted forward or backward, the throttle opening TH and the engine output are adjusted in accordance with the operation amount of the operation lever 11, and the travel speed is adjusted. More specifically, the throttle opening TH is adjusted in the range of 0% to 100% and the engine output and the travel speed are adjusted in accordance with the operation amount of continuous operation of the operation lever 11 in the swing range corresponding to the forward position, i.e. the opening degree (lever opening) of the operation lever 11.”, [0022], “As shown in FIG. 1, in the vicinity of the operation lever 11 of the control panel in front of the operator's seat, operation buttons 12a, 12b to be pressed by the operator are provided. When the operation button 12a is pressed, the throttle opening TH is finely adjusted to the opened side by a predetermined amount (e.g., 1%) in accordance with the number of operations (pressing operations) of the operation button 12a, and the engine output (engine speed) and the travel speed is finely adjusted to the speed-up side. When the operation button 12b is pressed, the throttle opening TH is finely adjusted to the closed side by a predetermined amount (e.g., 1%) in accordance with the number of operations (pressing operations) of the operation button 12b, and the engine output (engine speed) and the travel speed is finely adjusted to the speed-down side.”, [0027]).
Noma teaches a deceleration mode in which a vessel speed is decreased by a predetermined speed. Kato teaches decreasing a vessel speed by a predetermined amount using an “operation lever 11” (Fig. 1) and finely adjusting a vessel speed in a speed control mode using a “function switch 12” (Fig. 1), wherein a fluctuation range related to the “operation lever 11” (Fig. 1) is larger than an adjustment range related to the “function switch 12” (Fig. 1). Thus, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to further modify the invention of Noma with the teachings of Kato such that a fluctuation range corresponding to the predetermined speed is larger than an adjustment range of the vessel speed in a speed control mode, as suggested by Kato, with a reasonable expectation of success. The motivation for doing so would be to implement a finely adjusting the travel speed “so that the travel speed of the boat 2 can be maintained and finely adjusted as necessary” [0039], as taught by Kato.
Regarding claim 6, and similarly claim 19, Noma in view of Kato teaches The marine propulsion system according to claim 1, and Noma further teaches wherein the marine propulsion system is operable to decrease the vessel speed by the predetermined speed from the indicated vessel speed concurrently with entering the deceleration mode when the deceleration switch is turned on (“The forced low rotation switch 35 is a reset type push switch (which may be called as a momentary switch), and is set such as to forcibly lower the engine speed to the low idle rotating speed by a push-down operation at the first time”, [0169]).
Regarding claim 13, Noma in view of Kato teaches The marine propulsion system according to claim 1, and Noma further teaches wherein the deceleration switch is a mechanical button operable by being pressed (“The forced low rotation switch 35 is a reset type push switch (which may be called as a momentary switch)”, [0169]).
Claim(s) 4, 12, 17 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Noma (US 20120124979 A1) in view of Kato et al. (US 20230030345 A1) in view Johnson et al. (US 20220291682 A1).
Regarding claim 4, and similarly claim 17, Noma in view of Kato teaches The marine propulsion system according to claim 1,
However, Johnson teaches
wherein the deceleration switch is to be turned on before the hull rides over a wave (“In step 702, a slamming parameter is measured. The slamming parameter is a numerical measure of the degree to which the vessel is currently experiencing a slamming type of motion”, [0035], “Similarly, a slamming impact may be detected in other ways. For example, any force-sensing apparatus may directly measure the force with which the vessel's hull slams into the water below after traversing a wave.”, [0036], “If the slamming parameter is not in the acceptable range, then the vessel enters reduced speed mode (step 706), and the time at which this occurs is noted. If the vessel was already in reduced speed mode, then the time at which reduced speed mode was entered is updated to reflect the time of the most recent measurement of step 702.”, [0039]).
Noma teaches a deceleration switch which is operated to decrease a marine vessel speed. Johnson teaches automatically decreasing a marine vessel speed upon determining a slamming parameter caused by traversing a wave is not in an acceptable range. Thus, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to modify the invention of Noma in view of Kato with the teachings of Johnson such that the deceleration switch of Noma is to be turned on before the hull rides over a wave, as suggested by Johnson, with a reasonable expectation of success. The motivation for doing so would be to avoid “damage to onboard equipment or injury to onboard personnel” and “vessel foundering, taking on excess water, or other undesirable consequences” caused by slamming [0019], as taught by Johnson.
Regarding claim 12, Noma in view of Kato teaches The marine propulsion system according to claim 1,
However, Johnson teaches
wherein a fluctuation range corresponding to the predetermined speed by which the vessel speed is decreased from the indicated vessel speed when the deceleration switch is turned on and the deceleration mode is entered is variable; and
the propulsion device operator is operable to receive an operation to vary the fluctuation range (“Upon entering or resetting reduced speed mode, the vessel's speed is decreased (step 708). In some implementations, the vessel's speed is decreased by a fixed amount, e.g. 5 knots. In some implementations, the vessel's speed is decreased to a fixed speed, e.g. 5 knots. In some implementations, the vessel's speed is decreased by a proportion of its current speed (e.g., 25%). In some implementations, the vessel's speed will not be decreased below a certain minimum speed. In some implementations, the minimum speed is 5 knots.”, [0040]).
Noma teaches a fluctuation range corresponding to the predetermined speed by which the vessel speed is decreased. Johnson teaches a fluctuation range corresponding to the predetermined speed by which the vessel speed is decreased can be selected from a variety of ranges. Thus, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to modify the invention of Noma in view of Kato with the teachings of Johnson such that the fluctuation range of Noma is variable, as suggested by Johnson, with a reasonable expectation of success. The motivation for doing so would be to provide an operator variable options to decrease the speed of vehicle which may be needed for different marine vessels or environments.
Claim(s) 7-11, 20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Noma (US 20120124979 A1) in view of Kato et al. (US 20230030345 A1) in view of Guglielmo (US 20120295501 A1).
Regarding claim 7, and similarly claim 20, Noma in view of Kato teaches The marine propulsion system according to claim 1, and Noma further teaches wherein the vessel speed indicator includes a remote control lever (“function switch 12”, Fig. 1) including a lever to adjust the indicated vessel speed when a position of the lever is changed (“an acceleration sensor 316 which detects an operation position of an acceleration operating device (not shown) such as an acceleration lever or an acceleration pedal”, [0092]);
However, Gulielmo teaches
the deceleration switch is provided on the remote control lever (“Cruise control button 24 comprises a push button electrical switch that may activate or de-activate the cruise control functionality associated with the electronic engine control unit operable in conjunction with the system of the present invention.”, [0023], Figs. 1).
Noma teaches a remote control lever to adjust the vessel speed and a deceleration switch to decrease the vessel speed when the deceleration switch is activated. Gulielmo teaches a remote control lever to adjust the vessel speed and a deceleration switch to activate and deactivate speed control. Guilielmo further teaches the remote control lever comprises the deceleration switch. Thus, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to modify the invention of Noma in view of Kato with the teachings of Gulielmo such that the deceleration switch of Noma is provided on the remote control lever, as suggested by Gulielmo, with a reasonable expectation of success. The motivation for doing so would be to “allow[] the operator to make thumbed adjustment to the speed of the boat when the boat is in normal operational mode and to make thumbed adjustments to the cruise control speed of the boat when in cruise control operation” [0009], as taught by Gulielmo.
Regarding claim 8, Noma in view of Kato and Gulielmo teaches The marine propulsion system according to claim 7, and Kato further teaches wherein the remote control lever includes a fine adjustment switch (“operation buttons 12a, 12b”, Fig. 1) to receive an operation to finely adjust the vessel speed in the deceleration mode by increasing or decreasing the vessel speed by a fluctuation range smaller than a fluctuation range corresponding to the predetermined speed by which the vessel speed is decreased from the indicated vessel speed when the deceleration mode is entered (“When the operation lever 11, which has been switched to the forward position or the backward position, is further tilted forward or backward, the throttle opening TH and the engine output are adjusted in accordance with the operation amount of the operation lever 11, and the travel speed is adjusted. More specifically, the throttle opening TH is adjusted in the range of 0% to 100% and the engine output and the travel speed are adjusted in accordance with the operation amount of continuous operation of the operation lever 11 in the swing range corresponding to the forward position, i.e. the opening degree (lever opening) of the operation lever 11.”, [0022], “As shown in FIG. 1, in the vicinity of the operation lever 11 of the control panel in front of the operator's seat, operation buttons 12a, 12b to be pressed by the operator are provided. When the operation button 12a is pressed, the throttle opening TH is finely adjusted to the opened side by a predetermined amount (e.g., 1%) in accordance with the number of operations (pressing operations) of the operation button 12a, and the engine output (engine speed) and the travel speed is finely adjusted to the speed-up side. When the operation button 12b is pressed, the throttle opening TH is finely adjusted to the closed side by a predetermined amount (e.g., 1%) in accordance with the number of operations (pressing operations) of the operation button 12b, and the engine output (engine speed) and the travel speed is finely adjusted to the speed-down side.”, [0027]).
Noma teaches a deceleration mode in which a vessel speed is decreased by a predetermined speed. Kato teaches decreasing a vessel speed by a predetermined amount using an “operation lever 11” (Fig. 1) and finely adjusting a vessel speed in a speed control mode using a “function switch 12” (Fig. 1), wherein a fluctuation range related to the “operation lever 11” (Fig. 1) is larger than an adjustment range related to the “function switch 12” (Fig. 1). Thus, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to further modify the invention of Noma in view of Kato and Gulielmo with the teachings of Kato such that a fluctuation range of the vessel speed in a speed control mode is smaller than a fluctuation range corresponding to the predetermined speed, as suggested by Kato, with a reasonable expectation of success. The motivation for doing so would be to implement a finely adjusting the travel speed “so that the travel speed of the boat 2 can be maintained and finely adjusted as necessary” [0039], as taught by Kato.
Regarding claim 9, Noma in view of Kato and Gulielmo teaches The marine propulsion system according to claim 8, and Gulielmo further teaches wherein the deceleration switch and the fine adjustment switch are side by side on the lever (“Thumbwheel assembly 16 is shown to comprise thumbwheel 26 positioned within, and partially extending through, thumbwheel knob aperture 28.”, [0032], “thumbwheel 26 is positioned on a shaft that extends into rotation sensor 50. It is rotation sensor 50 that provides an electrical/electronic signal, by way of rotation sensor signal conductor 56, to the electronic engine control unit (not shown). Rotation sensor 50 may be any of a number of rotational displacement sensors appropriate for translating a rotation of the thumbwheel into an electronic signal or electrical condition that is sensed by the electronic engine control unit and translated into a fine adjustment of either the engine throttle condition or the cruise control setting”, [0034], Figs. 1, 4-5).
Thus, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to further modify the invention of Noma in view of Kato and Gulielmo with the teachings of Gulielmo such that the deceleration switch and the fine adjustment switch of Noma are provided side-by-side on the lever, as suggested by Gulielmo, with a reasonable expectation of success. The motivation for doing so would be to “provide[] a much easier and controllable manner of making fine adjustments than can be easily achieved through the typically less sensitive lever movement associated with most standard throttle/shift control mechanisms.” [0026], as taught by Gulielmo.
Regarding claim 10, Noma in view of Kato and Gulielmo teaches The marine propulsion system according to claim 8, and Kato further teaches wherein the propulsion device operator further includes:
a speed control switch (“function switch 12”, Fig. 1) to receive an operation to enter a speed control mode in which the vessel speed is able to be finely adjusted, and an operation to finely adjust the vessel speed in the speed control mode (“The operator adjusts the travel speed by the operation lever 11, and when the cruise mode is activated by the function switch 12, the travel speed can be finely adjusted to the travel speed of the time point when the cruise mode is activated by intermittent operations of pressing the operation buttons 12a, 12b.”, [0029]); wherein
the fine adjustment switch is also used as the speed control switch (“when either of the operation buttons 12a, 12b is operated, a “cruise mode”, in which current travel speed is maintained or fine-tuned, is activated and starts.”, [0028]); and
the marine propulsion system is operable to finely adjust the vessel speed by increasing or decreasing the vessel speed in response to an operation on the fine adjustment switch in the deceleration mode without entering the speed control mode (“As shown in FIG. 1, in the vicinity of the operation lever 11 of the control panel in front of the operator's seat, operation buttons 12a, 12b to be pressed by the operator are provided. When the operation button 12a is pressed, the throttle opening TH is finely adjusted to the opened side by a predetermined amount (e.g., 1%) in accordance with the number of operations (pressing operations) of the operation button 12a, and the engine output (engine speed) and the travel speed is finely adjusted to the speed-up side. When the operation button 12b is pressed, the throttle opening TH is finely adjusted to the closed side by a predetermined amount (e.g., 1%) in accordance with the number of operations (pressing operations) of the operation button 12b, and the engine output (engine speed) and the travel speed is finely adjusted to the speed-down side.”, [0027]).
Thus, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to further modify the invention of Noma in view of Kato and Gulielmo with the teachings of Kato such that the propulsion device operator of Noma includes a fine adjustment switch used as a speed control switch and is operable to finely adjust the vessel speed, as suggested by Kato, with a reasonable expectation of success. The motivation for doing so would be to implement a finely adjusting the travel speed “so that the travel speed of the boat 2 can be maintained and finely adjusted as necessary” [0039], as taught by Kato.
Regarding claim 11, Noma in view of Kato and Gulielmo teaches The marine propulsion system according to claim 7, and Kato further teaches wherein the deceleration mode is able to be canceled by changing the position of the lever of the remote control lever (“when the operation amount of the operation lever 11 after starting the cruise mode exceeds the predetermined amount, the cruise mode is deactivated, and operation of the throttle valve 3a is controlled based only on the current lever opening.”, [0036]).
Thus, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to further modify the invention of Noma in view of Kato and Gulielmo with the teachings of Kato such that the deceleration mode is canceled by changing the position of the remote control lever, as suggested by Kato, with a reasonable expectation of success. The motivation for doing so would be such that “variations in the throttle opening TH and the travel speed can be suppressed” [0043], as taught by Kato.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to Applicant's disclosure: See Notice of References Cited.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to AMELIA VORCE whose telephone number is (313)446-4917. The examiner can normally be reached on Monday-Friday, 9AM-5PM, Mountain Time, Central Time.
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, Anne Antonucci can be reached at (313) 446-6519. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300.
Information regarding the status of an application may be obtained from the Patent Application Information Retrieval (PAIR) system. Status information for published applications may be obtained from either Private PAIR or Public PAIR. Status information for unpublished applications is available through Private PAIR only. For more information about the PAIR system, see http://pair-direct.uspto.gov. Should you have questions on access to the Private PAIR system, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative or access to the automated information system, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000.
/AMELIA VORCE/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3666