DETAILED ACTION
Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status
The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
Drawings
The drawings are objected to as failing to comply with 37 CFR 1.84(p)(4) because reference character “33” has been used to designate both "at least one wheel," page 15, line 14 and "an actuating device," page 18, line 26. Corrected drawing sheets in compliance with 37 CFR 1.121(d) are required in reply to the Office action to avoid abandonment of the application. Any amended replacement drawing sheet should include all of the figures appearing on the immediate prior version of the sheet, even if only one figure is being amended. Each drawing sheet submitted after the filing date of an application must be labeled in the top margin as either “Replacement Sheet” or “New Sheet” pursuant to 37 CFR 1.121(d). If the changes are not accepted by the examiner, the applicant will be notified and informed of any required corrective action in the next Office action. The objection to the drawings will not be held in abeyance.
Specification
The abstract of the disclosure is objected to because in line 1 "An amusement" should read "An amusement ride" or "An amusement device". A corrected abstract of the disclosure is required and must be presented on a separate sheet, apart from any other text. See MPEP § 608.01(b).
The disclosure is objected to because of the following informalities: .
Appropriate correction is required.
The incorporation of essential material in the specification by reference to an unpublished U.S. application, foreign application or patent, or to a publication is improper. Applicant is required to amend the disclosure to include the material incorporated by reference, if the material is relied upon to overcome any objection, rejection, or other requirement imposed by the Office. The amendment must be accompanied by a statement executed by the applicant, or a practitioner representing the applicant, stating that the material being inserted is the material previously incorporated by reference and that the amendment contains no new matter. 37 CFR 1.57(g).
Claim Objections
Claims 10 and 12 are objected to because of the following informalities:
In .
In claim 12, line 2, “claim 11 [[2]]” should read “claim 11”.
Appropriate correction is required.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
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 the appropriate paragraphs of 35 U.S.C. 102 that form the basis for the rejections under this section made in this Office action:
A person shall be entitled to a patent unless –
(a)(1) the claimed invention was patented, described in a printed publication, or in public use, on sale, or otherwise available to the public before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
(a)(2) the claimed invention was described in a patent issued under section 151, or in an application for patent published or deemed published under section 122(b), in which the patent or application, as the case may be, names another inventor and was effectively filed before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claim(s) 1, 4-6, and 9-10 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Zierer (DE 20 2013 001 239 U1).
Regarding claim 1, Zierer discloses an amusement ride (Figure 1) to move vehicles at least vertically, comprising:
a column (Figure 1, element 10) extending along a vertical direction;
at least one vehicle (Figure 1, element 40) supported by said column, movable at least along said vertical direction between a maximum height (Figure 2) and a minimum height (Figure 1), said vehicle being configured to accommodate at least one passenger;
a movement system (Figure 1, element 20) for each vehicle, configured to move said vehicle along said vertical direction;
a control and command unit (Figure 4, element 100) operatively connected to at least said movement system;
said amusement ride being characterized in that said movement system comprises at least one pneumatic assembly (Figure 1, element 20) comprising a cylinder (Figure 1, element 20) and a piston (Figure 1, element 22) movable within said cylinder, said piston defining with said cylinder a first chamber (Figure 4, element 25); said piston being further operatively connected to said vehicle so as to move between a maximum contraction position, in which said vehicle is at the maximum height (Figure 2), and a maximum exposure position, in which said vehicle is at the minimum height (Figure 1), said movement system comprising a first valve (Figure 4, element 170), which is connected to said first chamber, whose opening and closing can be commanded by said control and command unit to control at least one movement of said vehicle (paragraph [0041]).
Regarding claim 4, Zierer discloses the amusement ride according to claim 1, wherein the first valve comprises a timer (paragraph [0039]) for commanding the opening and/or closing of said first valve.
Regarding claim 5, Zierer discloses the amusement ride according to claim 1, wherein said movement system comprises:
at least one cable (Figure 1, element 31) connected, at one end thereof, to said vehicle (Figure 1, element 31b) and configured to tow said vehicle;
a fixed anchoring point (Figure 1, element 12) connected to said cable (Figure 1, element 31a) at a second end opposite said first end;
at least one first fixed idler assembly (Figure 1, element 13), configured for sliding said at least one cable; and
at least one second movable idler assembly (Figure 1, element 24) configured for sliding said at least one cable;
wherein said piston of the at least one pneumatic assembly is connected to said second idler assembly (Figures 1 and 2 show connection of elements 22 and 24).
Regarding claim 6, Zierer discloses the amusement ride according to claim 5, wherein said first idler assembly comprises at least one first pulley (Figure 4, elements 14 and 15) in contact with said at least one cable and/or said second idler assembly comprises at least one second pulley (Figure 1, element 24) in contact with said at least one cable.
Regarding claim 9, Zierer discloses the amusement ride according to claim 1, wherein said column comprises a fixed base portion (Figure 1, element 21) and a rotating portion (Figure 2, element 2), said rotating portion being configured to rotate around said vertical direction (paragraph [0036]).
Regarding claim 10, Zierer discloses the amusement ride according to claim 1, further comprising detecting means for detecting the weight of said at least one vehicle (“parameters such as the weight”, paragraph [0008]), said detecting means operatively connected to said control unit.
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) 2 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Zierer (DE 20 2013 001 239 U1) in view of Brister et al. (US 10,463,981) hereafter referred to as Brister.
Regarding claim 2, Zierer discloses the amusement ride according to claim 1, but does not disclose wherein said at least one vehicle comprises an actuating device operable by said passenger, for commanding at least one movement of the at least one vehicle towards said maximum height, said at least one vehicle further comprising a sensor operatively connected to said actuating device and configured to detect an actuation thereof by a passenger, said sensor being in communication with said control and command unit.
Furthermore, Brister teaches an amusement ride wherein said at least one vehicle (Figure 1, element 102) comprises an actuating device (Figure 1, element 134) operable by said passenger, for commanding at least one movement (Claim 18) of the at least one vehicle, said at least one vehicle further comprising a sensor (Figure 1, element 136) operatively connected to said actuating device and configured to detect an actuation thereof by a passenger (claim 18), said sensor being in communication with said control and command unit (Figure 1, element 128). Brister reveals that it is known in the art of amusement rides to provide an actuating device operatively connected to a sensor, said sensor in communication with a control system to move a ride vehicle in response to an input from a user. It would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the instantly claimed invention to have modified the amusement ride of Zierer to incorporate the teachings of Brister to provide an actuating device operable by said passenger, for commanding at least one movement of the at least one vehicle towards said maximum height, said at least one vehicle further comprising a sensor operatively connected to said actuating device and configured to detect an actuation thereof by a passenger, said sensor being in communication with said control and command unit to move a ride vehicle in response to an input from a user.
Claim(s) 3 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Zierer (DE 20 2013 001 239 U1) in view of Brister et al. (US 10,463,981) as applied to claim 2 above, and further in view of Bohme (US 5893802).
Regarding claim 3, Zierer in view of Brister teaches the amusement ride according to claim 2, but does not teach the movement system comprising a compressor, in fluid communication with said first chamber for injecting high pressure air into said first chamber and wherein said control unit is configured to command said compressor for injecting high pressure air into said first chamber when the actuation of said actuating device is detected by said sensor.
Furthermore, Bohme teaches an amusement ride wherein the movement system comprises a compressor (Figure 2, element 56), in fluid communication with said first chamber (Figure 2, element 24) for injecting high pressure air into said first chamber and wherein said control unit (Figure 2, element 100) is configured to command said compressor for injecting high pressure air into said first chamber. Bohme reveals that it is known in the art of amusement rides to provide a compressor, in fluid communication with said first chamber for injecting high pressure air into said first chamber and wherein said control unit is configured to command said compressor for injecting high pressure air into said first chamber to control the movement of the amusement ride. It would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the instantly claimed invention to have modified the amusement ride of Zierer in view of Brister to incorporate the teachings of Bohme to provide a compressor, in fluid communication with said first chamber for injecting high pressure air into said first chamber and wherein said control unit is configured to command said compressor to control the moment of the ride vehicle in response to the actuation of an actuating device being detected by a sensor.
Claim(s) 7 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Zierer (DE 20 2013 001 239 U1) in view of Yamich et al. (US 11,273,384) hereafter referred to as Yamich.
Regarding claim 7, Zierer discloses the amusement ride according to claim 6, and additionally discloses a movement system comprising two cables (Figure 1, element 31, note Figure 4 showing 2 cables per vehicle) but does not disclose said anchoring point comprising a tilt sensor operatively connected to said control and command unit, said tilt sensor being configured to detect changes in the tilt of the anchoring point as a result, for example, of the breaking of one of the cables.
Furthermore, Yamich discloses an amusement ride vehicle (Figure 1, element 10) comprising a tilt sensor (“tilt sensor”, col. 7, line 44-45) operatively connected to a control and command unit (Figure 2, element 56), said tilt sensor being configured to detect changes in the tilt of the vehicle. Yamich reveals that it is known in the art of amusement rides to provide a tilt sensor operatively connected to said control and command unit to provide data indicative of vehicle orientation. It would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the instantly claimed invention to have modified the amusement ride of Zierer to incorporate the teachings of Yamich to provide a tilt sensor operatively connected to said control and command unit, said tilt sensor being configured to detect changes in the tilt of the anchoring point as a result, for example, of the breaking of one of the cables.
Claim(s) 8 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Zierer (DE 20 2013 001 239 U1).
Regarding claim 8, Zierer discloses the amusement ride according to claim 1, wherein said piston defines with said cylinder a second chamber (Figure 4, element 26), but does not explicitly disclose said second chamber being connected to a second valve to facilitate the air input and/or output into/from said second chamber.
However, Zierer reveals that it is known in the art of amusement devices to provide a movement system comprising a plurality of valves (Figure 4, elements 160 and 170), which are connected to a chamber to conform the movement of a piston in a hydraulic cylinder. It would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the instantly claimed invention to have modified the amusement ride of Zierer to incorporate the teachings of Zierer to provide a valve connected to the second chamber to facilitate the air input and/or output into/from said second chamber.
Claim(s) 11 and 13-15 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Zierer (DE 20 2013 001 239 U1) in view of White et al. (US 11,338,214) hereafter referred to as White.
Regarding claim 11, Zierer discloses the amusement ride according to claim 1, and also discloses an operating method to operate an amusement ride according to claim 1, comprising the steps of:
boarding at least one passenger on said at least one vehicle (“loading”, paragraph [0009]);
lifting said at least one vehicle by injecting high pressure air into said first chamber (“pressurizing”, paragraph [0028]);
dropping said at least one vehicle (paragraph [0010]) by opening said first valve;
stopping the drop, and bouncing the vehicle by closing said first valve (paragraph [0047]); and
disembarking said at least one passenger from said at least one vehicle (paragraph [0009]).
Zierer does not disclose an operating method wherein said lifting step, dropping step, drop stopping and bouncing step are repeated at least once before the disembarking step.
Furthermore, White discloses an operating method to operate an amusement ride comprising the steps of: boarding at least one passenger on said at least one vehicle (“load/unload”, Figure 1, element 12); lifting said at least one vehicle (“lift system”, Figure 1, element 36); dropping said at least one vehicle (“drop” col. 7, line 12); stopping the drop (“settling at an unload position”, col. 7, line 21), and bouncing the vehicle (“repeat these drops and upward shots a number of times”, col. 7, line 20-21); and disembarking said at least one passenger from said at least one vehicle (“disembark”, col. 7, line 22); wherein said lifting step, dropping step, drop stopping and bouncing step are repeated at least once before the disembarking step (“repeat these drops and upward shots a number of times”, col. 7, line 20-21)). White reveals that it is known in the art of amusement rides to provide a method of operating an amusement ride wherein said lifting step, dropping step, drop stopping and bouncing step are repeated at least once before the disembarking step to transition ride vehicles between stationary and adaptable rooms. It would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the instantly claimed invention to have modified the amusement ride of Zierer to incorporate the teachings of White to provide a method of operating an amusement ride wherein said lifting step, dropping step, drop stopping and bouncing step are repeated at least once before the disembarking step to transition ride vehicles between stationary and adaptable rooms.
Regarding claim 13, Zierer in view of White teaches the operating method according to claim 11, and Zierer additionally teaches after the boarding step of at least one passenger, a step of detecting the weight of said at least one vehicle (“parameters such as the weight”, paragraph [0008]) and wherein said lifting step and dropping and bouncing step are performed in accordance with said weight detecting step (“reliable control even against influencing parameters such as the weight”, paragraph [0008]).
Regarding claim 14, Zierer in view of White teaches the operating method according to claim 11, and Zierer additionally teaches when said at least one vehicle reaches said maximum height (Figure 2, note the position of “vehicle” element 40) during the lifting step, said drop stopping and bouncing step is carried out in the proximity of said minimum height (Figure 1, note the position of “vehicle” element 40).
Regarding claim 15, Zierer in view of White teaches the operating method according to claim 11, and Zierer additionally teaches wherein said piston defines with said cylinder a second chamber (Figure 4, element 26) and further comprising, while performing the lifting step and the dropping step and the drop stopping and bouncing step, a step of rotating the movable portion of said column (“Rotational motion superimposed along the tower around the central longitudinal axis”, paragraph [0036]).
However, while Zierer does not explicitly disclose said second chamber being connected to a second valve to facilitate the air input and/or output into/from said second chamber, Zierer reveals that it is known in the art of amusement devices to provide a movement system comprising a plurality of valves (Figure 4, elements 160 and 170), which are connected to a chamber to conform the movement of a piston in a hydraulic cylinder. It would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the instantly claimed invention to have modified the amusement ride of Zierer to incorporate the teachings of Zierer to provide a valve connected to the second chamber to facilitate the air input and/or output into/from said second chamber.
Claim(s) 12 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Zierer (DE 20 2013 001 239 U1) in view of White et al. (US 11,338,214) as applied to claim 11 above, and further in view of Brister et al. (US 10,463,981).
Regarding claim 12, Zierer in view of White teaches the operating method according to claim 11, but fails to teach at least one vehicle comprising an actuating device operable by said passenger, for commanding at least one movement of the at least one vehicle towards said maximum height, said at least one vehicle further comprising a sensor operatively connected to said actuating device and configured to detect an actuation thereof by a passenger, said sensor being in communication with said control and command unit, and wherein said lifting step of said at least one vehicle is commanded by an actuation of said actuating device
Furthermore, Brister teaches an operating method for an amusement ride wherein at least one vehicle (Figure 1, element 102) comprises an actuating device (Figure 1, element 134) operable by said passenger, for commanding at least one movement (Claim 18) of the at least one vehicle, said at least one vehicle further comprising a sensor (Figure 1, element 136) operatively connected to said actuating device and configured to detect an actuation thereof by a passenger (Claim 18), said sensor being in communication with said control and command unit (Figure 1, element 128). Brister reveals that it is known in the art of amusement rides to provide an operation method for an amusement ride wherein a vehicle comprises an actuating device operatively connected to a sensor, said sensor in communication with a control system to move a ride vehicle in response to an input from a user. It would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the instantly claimed invention to have modified the lifting step of the operating method to operate an amusement ride of Zierer in view of White to incorporate the teachings of Brister to provide an actuating device operable by said passenger, for commanding at the lifting step in response to an input from a user.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to KALYN G YOUNGER whose telephone number is (571)272-0733. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 8 AM-5 PM.
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, Nicholas Weiss can be reached at (571) 270-1775. 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.
/K.G.Y./Examiner, Art Unit 3711
/NICHOLAS J. WEISS/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3711
Prosecution Insights