DETAILED ACTIONNotice 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 .
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to claim(s) 1-20 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 Rejections - 35 USC § 103
In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 103 which forms the basis for all obviousness rejections set forth in this Office action:
A patent for a claimed invention may not be obtained, notwithstanding that the claimed invention is not identically disclosed as set forth in section 102, if the differences between the claimed invention and the prior art are such that the claimed invention as a whole would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which the claimed invention pertains. Patentability shall not be negated by the manner in which the invention was made.
The factual inquiries for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized as follows:
1. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art.
2. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue.
3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art.
4. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness.
Claim(s) 1-5 and 7-10 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kudirka et al (2019/0134487) (herein “Kudirka”) in view of Leary (2021/0264750) and further in view of Geng et al (2018/0232094) (herein “Geng”). In regards to claim 1, Kudirka teaches a covert visual and vibrotactile communication system for use in sports environments comprising one or more participant units (See; Figs. 1B- 1G and 2B), each unit comprising: a. one or more covert input devices (See; p[0093] for buttons 230 or touch sensitive slider 232 for controlling a user interface);See; p[0093] for a near-eye display 102 including a user interface 228); and d. one or more central processing units having at least one processor and memory (See; p[0073]-p[0074] for one or more processors 1120 and memory medium 112), said central processing unit networkable with the one or more covert input devices; See; p[0091] for communication interface 226 and p[0063] for multiple person support). Kudirka fails to explicitly teach one or more vibrotactile haptic devices. However, Leary teaches a covert vibrotactile communication system for use in sports environments comprising one or more participant units (See; Fig. 1 and p[0058]-p[0059] for the pitcher communicating with the catcher using covert vibrotactile signaling) each unit comprising: a. one or more covert input devices which allow teammates to send covert messages which are only understood by intended persons (See; Figs. 3, 4 and p[0064]-p[0069] for a pulse triggering device 200 for sending covert vibrotactile signals); b. one or more vibrotactile haptic devices (See; Figs. 3, 4 and p[0064]-p[0069] for vibration producing device 201 for receiving covert vibrotactile signals). Therefore it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of filing to modify Kudirka to have a vibrotactile haptic devices such as in Leary so as to give an additional means of communicating with a player and between teammates. The combination of Kudirka and Leary fail to explicitly teach sending covert messages by creating finger swiping gestures. However, Geng teaches one or more covert input devices which allow users to send covert messages by creating finger swiping gestures which are only understood by intended persons (See; p[0053], p[0056], p[0057] for a haptic communication apparatus with integrated touch sensing where the touch receiving user at the location B can realistically feel the touch motion performed by the touch transmitting user at the location A). Therefore it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of filing to modify Leary’s pulse triggering device to compose an array of pressure sensors such as in Geng so as to send more advanced haptic communications.
In regards to claim 2, Kudirka teaches wherein the one or more participant units is networkable with one or more transmitting units, said transmitting units used for providing real-time communication with the one or more participant units (See; p[0091] for communication interface 226 and p[0063] for multiple person support. See; p[0107] where the communication interface 226 of the near eye display can communicate with the communications interface 316 of the projectile tracking sub system 104). Leary also teaches wherein the one or more participant units is networkable with one or more transmitting units, said transmitting units used for providing real-time communication with the one or more participant units (See; Fig. 1 and p[0058]-p[0059] for the pitcher communicating with the catcher using covert vibrotactile signaling).
In regards to claim 3, Kudirka teaches wherein the one or more central processing units having at least one processor and memory serve as transmitting units, receiving units or both transmitting units and receiving units (See; Fig. 2a and p[0074] where it is inherent that a processor Is used in controlling the communication interface to transmit / receive).
In regards to claim 4, Kudirka teaches wherein the one or more covert input devices is a touchpad interface having one or more touchpad units (See; p[0093] for touch sensors and a touch sensitive slider).
In regards to claim 5, Kudirka fails to explicitly teach wherein the one or more covert input devices includes at least one scrolling wheel. However, Kudirka teaches a touch sensitive slider which is used to scroll through menus (See; p[0093]). Therefore it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of filing to modify Kudirka to include a scroll wheel as an alternative means of scrolling through menus, as it is a well-known input device in the art.
In regards to claim 7, Kudirka teaches wherein the hands- free visual interface of a participant unit consists of a heads-up-display unit attached to a baseball cap (See; Fig. 2C and p[0083] where the near-eye display 102 may have any form factor including glasses, contact lens, helmets or the like). Therefore it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of filing to integrate the near eye display into a baseball cap as it would be an obvious variant of integrating the near eye display into a baseball helmet.
In regards to claim 8, Kudirka teaches wherein the hands-free visual interface of a participant unit consists of a heads-up display integrated with a sports mask (See; Fig. 2C and p[0083] where the near-eye display 102 may have any form factor including glasses, contact lens, helmets or the like and is formed into a baseball helmet). Therefore it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of filing to integrate the near eye display into a helmet / mask combination such as worn by a catcher as it would be an obvious variant of integrating the near eye display into a baseball helmet.
In regards to claim 9, Kudirka teaches wherein the hands- free visual interface of a participant unit consists of a display unit attached to a central processing unit (See; Fig. 2A where the processor 110 is connected to the display interface 206).
In regards to claim 10, Kudirka teaches wherein the hands- free visual interface of a participant unit consists of augmented reality glasses (See; Fig. 2B).
Claim(s) 6 and 11-20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kudirka et al (2019/0134487) (herein “Kudirka”) in view of Leary (2021/0264750) in view of Geng et al (2018/0232094) (herein “Geng”) and further in view of Okamoto (2022/0334648). In regards to claims 6 and 13, Kudirka fails to explicitly teach wherein each participant unit includes a biometric identification system including a fingerprint sensor. However, Okamoto teaches smart glasses having a biometric identification system including a fingerprint sensor (See; p[0030] for “A sensor for detecting biometric information for realizing the authentication through a fingerprint, vein, iris or the like may be mounted on the smart glasses 101”). Therefore it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of filing to modify Kudirka to include a biometric sensor such as in Okamoto so as to allow only authorized users to activate the device. In regards to claim 11, Kudirka teaches a covert visual and vibrotactile communication system for use in sports environments where there is a stoppage in play and covert communication is necessary in proximity to a competitor or unintended observer having one or more participant units (See; Figs. 1B- 1G and 2B for a near eye display which is usable in a sports environment which would inherently include stoppages in play), each participant unit comprising: a. at least one finger swiping device (See; p[0093] for touch sensitive slider 232 for controlling a user interface);
C. at least one hand free visual interface (See; p[0093] for a near-eye display 102 including a user interface 228); See; p[0073]-p[0074] for one or more processors 1120 and memory medium 112), said central processing unit networkable with the finger swiping unit; the vibrotactile haptic device and the hands-free visual interface (See; p[0091] for communication interface 226 and p[0063] for multiple person support). Kudirka fails to explicitly teach one or more vibrotactile haptic devices. However, Leary teaches a covert vibrotactile communication system for use in sports environments when there is a stoppage in play and covert communication is necessary when in proximity to a competitor or unintended observer having one or more participant units (See; Fig. 1 and p[0058]-p[0059] for the pitcher communicating with the catcher using covert vibrotactile signaling) each participant unit comprising: a. at least one finger swiping device which allows participants to send covert message which are only understood by intended persons (See; Figs. 3, 4 and p[0064]-p[0069] for a pulse triggering device 200 for sending covert vibrotactile signals); b. at least one vibrotactile haptic devices (See; Figs. 3, 4 and p[0064]-p[0069] for vibration producing device 201 for receiving covert vibrotactile signals). Therefore it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of filing to modify Kudirka to have a vibrotactile haptic devices such as in Leary so as to give an additional means of communicating with a player and between teammates. The combination of Kudirka and Leary fail to explicitly teach at least one finger swiping device consisting of at least one touchpad interface which allows for participants to send covert message by creating finger swiping gestures which are only understood by intended persons. However, Geng teaches at least one finger swiping device consisting of at least one touchpad interface which allows for participants to send covert message by creating finger swiping gestures which are only understood by intended persons (See; p[0053], p[0056], p[0057] for a haptic communication apparatus with integrated touch sensing where the touch receiving user at the location B can realistically feel the touch motion performed by the touch transmitting user at the location A). Therefore it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of filing to modify Leary’s pulse triggering device to compose an array of pressure sensors such as in Geng so as to send more advanced haptic communications. The combination further fails to explicitly teach a biometric identification system. However, Okamoto teaches smart glasses having a biometric identification system (See; p[0030] for “A sensor for detecting biometric information for realizing the authentication through a fingerprint, vein, iris or the like may be mounted on the smart glasses 101”). Therefore it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of filing to modify Kudirka to include a biometric sensor such as in Okamoto so as to allow only authorized users to activate the device.
In regards to claim 12, Kudirka teaches wherein the one or more participant units is networkable with one or more transmitting units, said transmitting units used for providing real-time communication with the one or more participant units (See; p[0091] for communication interface 226 and p[0063] for multiple person support. See; p[0107] where the communication interface 226 of the near eye display can communicate with the communications interface 316 of the projectile tracking sub system 104). Leary also teaches wherein the one or more participant units is networkable with one or more transmitting units, said transmitting units used for providing real-time communication with the one or more participant units (See; Fig. 1 and p[0058]-p[0059] for the pitcher communicating with the catcher using covert vibrotactile signaling). In regards to claim 14, Kudirka teaches wherein the finger swiping unit consists of a touchpad interface (See; p[0093] for touch sensors and a touch sensitive slider).
In regards to claims 15 and 19, Kudirka teaches wherein the hands- free visual interface consists of a heads-up-display unit attached to a baseball cap (See; Fig. 2C and p[0083] where the near-eye display 102 may have any form factor including glasses, contact lens, helmets or the like). Therefore it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of filing to integrate the near eye display into a baseball cap as it would be an obvious variant of integrating the near eye display into a baseball helmet.
In regards to claims 16 and 20, Kudirka teaches wherein the hands-free visual interface consists of a heads-up display integrated with a sports mask (See; Fig. 2C and p[0083] where the near-eye display 102 may have any form factor including glasses, contact lens, helmets or the like and is formed into a baseball helmet). Therefore it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of filing to integrate the near eye display into a helmet / mask combination such as worn by a catcher as it would be an obvious variant of integrating the near eye display into a baseball helmet. In regards to claim 17, Kudirka teaches a covert visual and vibrotactile communication system for use in sports environments where there is a stoppage in play and covert communication is necessary in proximity to a competitor or unintended observer (See; Figs. 1B- 1G and 2B for a near eye display which is usable in a sports environment which would inherently include stoppages in play), said covert visual and vibrotactile communication system comprising: a. one or more transmitter units comprising i. a user input device (See; p[0093] for touch sensitive slider 232 for controlling a user interface); iiSee; p[0091] for communication interface 226 and p[0063] for multiple person support); iv. a remote interface (See; p[0093] for a near-eye display 102 including a user interface 228); v. at least one processor; and vi. memory including computer executable instructions which, when executed by the said at least one processor (See; p[0073]-p[0074] for one or more processors 1120 and memory medium 112), cause the covert visual and vibrotactile communication system to perform the functions of 1. update system status based on user input; 2. update system status based on state received from other units of the system; 3. save system status in memory; and 4. transmit system status updates to receiver units (See; p[0091], p[0107] where these steps are inherent in electronic devices utilizing user input devices, updating the system after a user input is entered, updating based on communication with the other units, saving statuses to memory and transmitting those statuses to other devices. See; p[0159] where the updates can be the stats being recorded such as tracking pitches or other data relevant to the sport being played) b. One or more receiver units (See; p[0063] for multiple person support, thus the transmitters and receiver units can just be another one of the near field displays on another player)comprising i. a visual display (See; p[0093] for a near-eye display 102 including a user interface 228); ii. privacy hardware to prevent unintended viewing (See; Fig. 2B and 2C where the displays are on eye glasses or a helmet where only the user wearing said device can see what is on display); iii. See; p[0073]-p[0074] for one or more processors 1120 and memory medium 112) which, when executed by the at least one processor, cause the covert visual and vibrotactile communication system to perform the functions of 1. update system status based on user input; 2. update system status based on state received from other units of the system; 3. display system status; and 4. provide See; p[0091], p[0107] where these steps are inherent in electronic devices utilizing user input devices with displays, updating the system after a user input is entered, updating the display with said information, updating based on communication with the other units, saving statuses to memory and transmitting those statuses to other devices. See; p[0159] where the updates can be the stats being recorded such as tracking pitches or other data relevant to the sport being played). Kudirka fails to explicitly teach one or more vibrotactile haptic devices and providing haptic signals to users as received from the one or more transmitter units. However, Leary teaches a covert vibrotactile communication system for use in sports environments comprising one or more transmitter units (See; Fig. 1 and p[0058]-p[0059] for the pitcher communicating with the catcher using covert vibrotactile signaling) comprising a covert input devices which allows for teammates to send covert messages which are only understood by intended persons (See; Figs. 3, 4 and p[0064]-p[0069] for a pulse triggering device 200 for sending covert vibrotactile signals); b. one or more receiver unis comprising a vibrotactile haptic device to provide haptic signals to users as received from the one or more transmitters (See; Figs. 3, 4 and p[0064]-p[0069] for vibration producing device 201 for receiving covert vibrotactile signals). Therefore it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of filing to modify Kudirka to have a vibrotactile haptic devices such as in Leary so as to give an additional means of communicating with a player and between teammates. The combination of Kudirka and Leary fail to explicitly teach sending covert messages by creating finger swiping gestures. However, Geng teaches a covert input device which allows users to send covert messages by creating finger swiping gestures which are only understood by intended persons (See; p[0053], p[0056], p[0057] for a haptic communication apparatus with integrated touch sensing where the touch receiving user at the location B can realistically feel the touch motion performed by the touch transmitting user at the location A). Therefore it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of filing to modify Leary’s pulse triggering device to compose an array of pressure sensors such as in Geng so as to send more advanced haptic communications. The combination further fails to teach a fingerprint sensor. However, Okamoto teaches smart glasses having a fingerprint sensor (See; p[0030] for “A sensor for detecting biometric information for realizing the authentication through a fingerprint, vein, iris or the like may be mounted on the smart glasses 101”). Therefore it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of filing to modify Kudirka to include a biometric sensor such as in Okamoto so as to allow only authorized users to activate the device.
In regards to claim 18, Kudirka teaches wherein the one or more transmitter units and the one or more receiver units are networkable with one another and one or more external transmitting units, said external transmitting units used for providing real-time communication with the one or more transmitter units and the one or more receiver units (See; p[0091] for communication interface 226 and p[0063] for multiple person support. See; p[0107] where the communication interface 226 of the near eye display can communicate with the communications interface 316 of the projectile tracking sub system 104). Leary also teaches wherein the one or more transmitter units and the one or more receiver units are networkable with one another and one or more external transmitting units, said external transmitting units used for providing real-time communication with the one or more transmitter units and the one or more receiver units (See; Figs. 3, 4 and p[0064]-p[0069] for a pulse triggering device 200 for sending covert vibrotactile signals and vibration producing device 201 for receiving covert vibrotactile signals).
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.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to JONATHAN A BOYD whose telephone number is (571)270-7503. The examiner can normally be reached Mon - Fri 8:00 - 5:00.
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, Ke Xiao can be reached at (571) 272-7776. 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.
/JONATHAN A BOYD/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2627