DETAILED ACTION
Status of Claims
This action is responsive to the preliminary amendment of 7/18/2024. Claims 1-10 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.
Claims 1-2, 5, and 9-10, are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Nelson (US 2008/0206720) in view of Wieland et al. (US 2016/0104391) and de Oliveira Alves, Jr. (US 2021/0192969).
Regarding claim 1, Nelson discloses a training system for a vehicle including a frame with a training space therein and screens onto which a training video is projected. See paragraphs 0030-0031 and 0048, and note in figs. 2 and 5 the frame (i.e. cockpit) and screens.
Nelson discloses a screen support structure in paragraph 0048, but does not disclose wherein the screens are attached on the frame. However, this configuration is established with regard to vehicle simulation, as is disclosed by the simulation system of de Oliveira Alves Jr, in paragraph 0049 and fig. 4D. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of applicant’s filing, to consider such with the Nelson system, in order to provide a convenient and lightweight system.
Nelson discloses wherein the projector is located outside the frame and does not project the trainee onto the screen. See fig. 2 and note the projectors 70 outside the cockpit 130.
Nelson does not disclose wherein the video is a training system for an unloading arm. However, Nelson is not actually limited to any particular manner of training vehicle (paragraph 0032). Unloading arm training systems are established, as is disclosed by the training system of Weiland in paragraph 0012, and one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of applicant’s filing, would have found it obvious to consider such a training scheme with the Nelson system, so as to provide various training scenarios.
Regarding claim 2, Nelson discloses wherein the projectors project up and down and use mirrors to project onto the screens. See paragraphs 0047-0048 and figs 2.
Regarding claims 5, Nelson discloses wherein the trainee manipulates movable control inputs, and the video is updated accordingly. See paragraphs 0042.
Regarding claims 9-10, Nelson discloses an instructor console which receives inputs related to a change in surrounding environments and trainee use permissions. See paragraph 0041.
Claim 3 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Nelson (US 2008/0206720) in view of Wieland et al. (US 2016/0104391) and de Oliveira Alves, Jr. (US 2021/0192969) and also Francis et al. (US 5,857,917).
Regarding claim 3, Nelson discloses wherein there are numerous projectors as described in paragraph 0048, but does not disclose wherein the system is configured for polarized glasses. However, this is established with regard to training systems, as is disclosed by the simulation system of Francis in col. 1: 47-54. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of applicant’s filing, to consider such with the Nelson system, in order to provide an effective presentation scheme.
Claim 4 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Nelson (US 2008/0206720) in view of Wieland et al. (US 2016/0104391) and de Oliveira Alves, Jr. (US 2021/0192969), and also Geary (US 3,741,638).
Regarding claim 4, Nelson does not disclose projection onto the back surfaces of translucent screens. However, this concept is established with regard to simulation systems, as is disclosed by Geary in col. 2: 47-58. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of applicant’s filing, to consider with the Nelson system, so as to have a convenient projection arrangement.
Claim 8 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Nelson (US 2008/0206720) in view of Wieland et al. (US 2016/0104391) and de Oliveira Alves, Jr. (US 2021/0192969), and also Welles et al. (US 2013/0302759).
Regarding claim 8, Nelson does not disclose a position sensor to detect user position inside the frame to adjust viewpoint. However, this is established with regard to simulation systems, as is disclosed by the driver training system of Welles in paragraph 0044. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of applicants filing, to consider such with the Nelson system, so as to provide a realistic simulation.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 6-7 are objected to as depending from a rejected base claim, but would be allowable if rewritten to include the base claim and any intervening claims. The prior art does not teach of suggest the combination of claimed subject matter including a fixed manipulation unit outside the frame configured as claimed.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to TIMOTHY A MUSSELMAN whose telephone number is (571)272-1814. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Thursday, 8:00AM - 4:00PM.
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, PETER S VASAT can be reached at 571-570-7625. 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.
TIMOTHY A. MUSSELMAN
Primary Examiner
Art Unit 3715
/TIMOTHY A MUSSELMAN/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3715