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 .
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.
This application currently names joint inventors. In considering patentability of the
claims the examiner presumes that the subject matter of the various claims was commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the claimed invention(s) absent any evidence to the contrary. Applicant is advised of the obligation under 37 CFR 1.56 to point out the inventor and effective filing dates of each claim that was not commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the later invention in order for the examiner to consider the applicability of 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(C) for any potential 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) prior art against the later invention.
Claim(s) 1-5, 11, 14-16, and 19-21 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being
unpatentable over Girault (US-20140071059-A1) in view of Newman (US-7102568-B1).
Claim(s) 6-10, 12-13, and 17-18 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being
unpatentable over Girault (US-20140071059-A1) in view of Newman (US-7102568-B1) in further view of Kinoshita (US-20130110329-A1).
Regarding Claim 1, Girault discloses a system for use on a watercraft (PARA [0011]
[0018], FIG. 1-3, vessel 102), the system comprising: a marine electronics device, wherein the marine electronics device is remotely located from the VHF radio, wherein the marine electronics device is in data communication with the VHF radio (PARA [0011]-[0018], FIG.3, “Remote control device 302 may be configured to interact with one or more controllable marine electronics devices 304, illustrated as an arbitrary number n of controllable marine electronics devices, via communication subsystem 305… Communication subsystem 305 may be operatively coupled to the controllable marine electronics device via a computer network 301.”), the marine electronics device comprising: a display (touch-sensitive display 340); a processor (processor 328); and a memory including computer program code (memory 320) (i.e., Girault’s remote control device 302 is the marine electronic device (MED), remotely located from each controlled device and in bidirectional data communication with it over the vessel LAN 306);
However, Girault does not disclose a very high frequency (VHF) radio, the very high frequency radio comprising: an antenna; a communication interface; a processor; and a memory including computer program code, the computer program code configured to, when executed cause the processor to: receive, via the communication interface, message data; and transmit, via the communication interface, message data.
Newman discloses a very high frequency (VHF) radio (col.3, Line 40-46, “A shipboard radio station 104 positioned at the bridge 106 of marine vessel 102 is fitted with a fixed mount marine radio frequency transceiver, or "marine radio" 108”) an antenna (antenna 112); a communication interface (transceiver 308); a processor (microprocessor 300); and a memory including computer program code (data memory module 310, software memory module 312) configured to, receive and transmit message data (col.9, Line 25-65, “ Transceiver 308 is electrically coupled to microprocessor 300 to convert marine radio frequency signals received via antenna 112 into electrical signals for processing by microprocessor 300 and to convert electrical signals into marine radio frequency signals for transmission via antenna 112.”) (i.e., Newman supplies the VHF radio in its entirely, including its constituent hardware and bidirectional message- data capability, connected to the vessel data network 316 via I/O module 314 (Newman, Fig.3, col.9, Line 50-65 ), placing it on the same LAN architecture Girault employs);
Girault further discloses that the marine electronic device receives, receive, through the data communication with the VHF radio, at least one operational setting of the VHF radio; cause, on the display, presentation of the at least one operational setting; (“each of the controllable marine electronics devices may be configured to provide device information 309 to remote control device 302, via a query and response protocol... [including] network location 310 of the controllable marine electronics device, device identifier 312… and controllable device software identifier 316”; PARA[0032]-[0033], FIG.4B, “Remote control UI 344 may include one or more graphical indicators 346 identifying a particular control function state 308.”) (i.e., the MED queries the controlled device, receives its current operational settings over the data link, and present them as graphical indicators on the remote-control UI; satisfying both limitations when Newman’s VHF radio is the controlled device);
Girault further discloses that the marine electronics device receives n input, at the display, to change the at least one operational setting and sends a signal to the controlled device to execute the change (PARA[0034], [0042]-[0046], “rotational input 360 received when remote control user interface 344 is displayed (e.g., user interface provided by remote control UI mode 342 of controller interface program 326) is represented via control message 368 sent, via communication subsystem 305, to a target controllable marine electronics device… to control a control function of control functions 307 of the target controllable marine electronics device”) (i.e., the MED receives input at the touch-sensitive display 340 and physical knob 358 and transmits control message 368 to the target device to execute the operational-setting change in the combined system, to Newman’s VHF radio to change its operating channel, volume, squelch, or other operational parameter, which is confirmed via reply message 370).
Girault and Newman are considered to be analogous to the claimed invention because they are in the same filed of endeavor of vessel-network marine electronics and both address the operator-burden problem of managing multiple vessel-networked devices from a central helm position. Girault states its goal as providing a remote control device configures to provide a universal user interface such that each of the multiple marine electronics devices may be controlled via a single remote control device (PARA [0100]), and expressly designs its protocol to be device-agnostic, applying to any marine electronic device operable via a remote control device (PARA [0020]), while Newman identifies the same problem in the VHF context, noting that a captain occupied with navigation may be unable to manually adjust the radio when crossing jurisdictional boundaries, which “should present substantial hazards to the vessel and the other vessels in the vicinity” (Newman, col.5, Line 35-55), consistent with applicant’s own acknowledgment that the VHF radio is frequently displaced from them helm and that providing helm access to the VHF controls is a safety imperative (PARA [0003]-[0005]).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Girault to incorporate the VHF radio of Newman as an additional network-connected target device, because Girault’s proven bidirectional remote-control architecture; already operating over NMEA 2000 and 802.3 LAN protocols (PARA [0013], [0018]). Is now extended to include Newman’s VHF radio without any modification to the protocol, with a reasonable expectation of success because Newman’s VHF radio already includes I/O module 314 for vessel data network 316 communication (Newman, col.9, Line 50-65, Fig. 3), providing the same standard network interface Girault’s system relies upon.
Regarding Claim 2, Girault in view of Newman discloses all the limitation of Claim 1.
Girault does not disclose the specific VHF operational settings recited. Newman discloses wherein the at least one operational setting is one of an operating channel, a volume, a power setting, an identifier of the VHF radio, a location of the VHF radio, an operation frequency, or a squelch. (See Newman col. 7, Line. 22-26 stating that knob 200 “relays the channel selection to the fixed mount marine radio 108”); volume and power via power/volume control 186, described as controlling “transceiver power and audio output volume level” (col. 7, line. 14-16); squelch via the explicit disclosure that “, a fixed mount marine radio 108 is often equipped with a squelch control key in order to eliminate output noise” (see Newman col.7, Line. 37-39); identifier (MMSI number) stored in memory module 310 (see Newman col. 9, Line. 64-66); location via GPS receiver 130 connected to the fixed mount marine radio (see Newman col. 8, Line. 50-56); and operating frequency as a function of the selected channel, inherent to VHF radio operation. (i.e., Newman discloses each of the recited operational settings as parameter of the marine VHF radio).
The proposed combination and the motivations for combining the references presented in the rejection of the parent Claim apply to this Claim and are incorporated herein by the reference.
Regarding Claim 3, Girault in view of Newman discloses all the limitation of Claim 1.
Girault further discloses receiving, through the data communication with the VHF radio, a status indication of the operating channel; and cause, on the display, presentation of the status indication of the operating channel. (PARA [0034], [0046], [0061]); “the controllable marine electronics device may be configured to provide reply message 370 to remote control device 302 so as to effect updating of a visual appearance of corresponding graphical indicator 346c to reflect the current state of the control function.” i.e., Girault’s bidirectional reply-message protocol causes the MED to receive the current status of the controlled device’s setting and present it on the display. Newman discloses the operating channel as the VHF radio’s primary status indicator, disclosing the display (184) of the fixed mount marine radio shows “the status of the hailer function and the current channel” (see Newman col. 8, Line. 11-12). And Newman discloses that operating channel is the primary status indicator of a marine VHF radio. (See Newman col. 7, Line. 25-35) “Display 184 displays information about the function of fixed mount marine radio 108 such as the currently tuned channel.” (i.e., in the combined system, the VHF radio’s current channel status is transmitted to the MED via Girault’s reply message protocol and presented on the MED display).
The proposed combination and the motivations for combining the references presented in the rejection of the parent Claim apply to this Claim and are incorporated herein by the reference.
Regarding Claim 4, Girault in view of Newman discloses all the limitation of Claim 1.
Girault discloses the VHF radio program code to receive, at the communication interface of the VHF radio, an indication of an incoming message; transmit, via the communication interface, the incoming message to the marine electronics device; and cause, on the display, presentation of the incoming message. (PARA [0046], “remote control device 302 may be further configured to receive reply message 370 from the target controllable marine electronics device...”), and Newman disclose the VHF radio’s communication interface receiving an indication of an incoming radio-frequency message and transmitting the incoming message (col. 9, Line. 30-50, ““Transceiver 308 is electrically coupled to microprocessor 300 to convert marine radio frequency signals received via antenna 112 into electrical signals for processing by microprocessor 300…”) i.e., Incoming VHF communication received at the radio are forwarded to the remote device for presentation. It would have been obvious to the POSITA to implement display-based presentation of incoming VHF message at the centralized MED in the combined system, as Newman demonstrate that forward received communication to a remote device is the known function of marine VHF radio remote-control systems.
The proposed combination and the motivations for combining the references presented in the rejection of the parent Claim apply to this Claim and are incorporated herein by the reference.
Regarding Claim 5, Girault in view of Newman discloses all the limitation of Claim 4.
Girault discloses the controlled device storing information in memory for retravel by MED (PARA [0024], “control information 318a provided by controllable marine electronics device 304, control information 318b stored in memory 320 of remote-control device 302.”) and Newman discloses that the VHF radio employes DSC, receiving vessel identification data with each transmission and storing operational data in its memory modules (col. 7, Line. 22-35 and col. 9, Line. 45-55, “Distress call key 188 sends out a distress call in Digital Selective Calling (DSC). In general DSC is used to establish communications with ship or coast stations or to receive calls from other ships or coast stations…” and “Data memory module 310 and software memory module 312 store the data necessary for the operation of fixed mount marine radio 108. An input/output module 314 controls communications between fixed mount marine radio 108.”) (i.e., Newman’s VHF radio receives vessel identification (contact information) associated with incoming DSC message at its communication interface and stores operational data in its memory modules. The VHF radio’s memory is available for storing contact information. It would have been obvious to POSITA to save the calling vessel’s identification and contact number information to radio’s memory upon receipt of a call, as this represents a straightforward application of standard contact management practices to the VHF radio’s established DSC capability.
The proposed combination and the motivations for combining the references presented in the rejection of the parent Claim apply to this Claim and are incorporated herein by the reference.
Regarding Claim 11, Girault in view of Newman discloses all the limitation of Claim 1.
Girault discloses receiving, an indication of a location of the VHF radio; and cause, on the display of the marine electronics device, presentation of the indication of the location of the VHF radio. (PARA [0023], “The device information may include, but is not limited to, one or more of network location 310 of the controllable marine electronics device (e.g. URL, "hostname," or other network location identifier).”), and Newman discloses that the VHF radio possess GPS-derived geographic location data (col. 5, Line 45-60) “ fixed mount marine radio 108 is operably connected to a mobile global positioning system (GPS) receiver 130 operable to determine its position using signals received via GPS antenna 150… Using the information received from GPS receiver 130, marine radio 108 is operable to plot the position of marine vessel 102 against a map of jurisdictional boundaries.”) (i.e., in the combined system, the MED receives both the network location (Girault) and the geographic location (Newman) of the VHF radio and present the location indication on the display).
The proposed combination and the motivations for combining the references presented in the rejection of the parent Claim apply to this Claim and are incorporated herein by the reference.
Regarding Claim 14 , Girault in view of Newman discloses all the limitation of Claim 1.
Girault discloses receiving, at the VHF radio, an indication of a change in at least one operational setting; send, via the processor, instructions to the marine electronics device to cause a change in the operational setting; and cause, on the display of the marine electronics device, presentation of the changed operational setting. (PARA [0034], [0046]-[0047] and [0061], “the controllable marine electronics device may be configured to provide reply message 370 to remote control device 302 so as to effect updating of a visual appearance of corresponding graphical indicator 346c to reflect the current state of the control function.” and “Method 500 may further comprise receiving 530 a reply message from the target controllable marine electronics device and updating 532 a visual appearance of the graphical indicator to reflect the current state of the control function based on the reply message.”) (i.e., Girault bidirectional protocol provides the reverse-direction propagation: a change at the VHF radio causes the radio’s processor to send a reply message (instruction) to the MED, which then updates the display to present the changed operational setting; Newman supplies the VHF radio as the controlled device).
The proposed combination and the motivations for combining the references presented in the rejection of the parent Claim apply to this Claim and are incorporated herein by the reference.
Regarding Claim 15 , which is similar in scope to claim 1, presented from the
perspective of the marine electronic device and which recites; A marine electronics device comprising: a display; a processor; and a memory including computer program code, the computer program code configured to, when executed, cause the processor to: receive, through data communication, at least one operational setting from a very high frequency (VHF) radio, wherein the VHF radio is remote from the marine electronics device; cause, on the display, presentation of the at least one operational setting; receive an indication for the VHF radio to execute one or more actions corresponding to the operational setting; and transmit instructions to the VHF radio to cause execution of the one or more actions by the VHF radio, wherein the one or more actions at least change the operational setting of the VHF radio. Girault discloses the marine electronics device (remote control device 302) comprising display (340), processor (328), and memory (320), that receives the operational setting of a remotely-located controlled device through a data communication link, causes those setting to be displayed on the remote-control UI (344), receives user input to trigger actions, and transmits control message (368) to the target device to execute the actions. (PARA [0016]-[0018], [0023]-[0034], [0044]-[0047], Fig.3, “ controller interface program 326 of remote-control device 302 may be configured to provide query 324 to one or more marine electronics devices… and receive control information for controlling each of the one or more controllable marine electronics devices via the computer network.”) i.e., Girault remote control device (302) is in all structural and functional respects the marine electronics device of Claim 15.
Girault, does not disclose a VHF radio as the specific remote device. Accordingly, Newman is added, suppling the VHF radio (108) with the structural, location, and operational settings established for Claim 1. The motivation to combine Girault and Newman for this independent device Claim is identical to that set forth for Claim 1 and is incorporated herein by reference: Girault’s remote-control device on the vessel LAN. Newman’s VHF radio is precisely such a device, connected to the vessel data network (316) via an I/O module (314). A person of ordinary skilled in the art would have had every reason and a reasonable expectation of success in substituting or adding Newman’s network-connected VHF radio (108) (connected to the vessel data network (316) via an I/O module (314)) as a target device in Girault’s system, as further detailed in the motivation for Claim 1.
Regarding Claim 16, Girault in view of Newman discloses all the limitation of Claim 15
Claim 16 is similar in scope to claim 2 presented in the context of independent claim15, and is thus rejected under the same rationale. The claim requires that the at least one operational setting is one of an operating channel, a volume, a power setting, an identifier of the VHF radio, a location of the VHF radio, an operation frequency or a squelch. Girault does not disclose these specific VHF operational setting names. Accordingly, Newman is added. Newman discloses each of the operational settings as parameters of the marine VHF radio. (see Newman col. 3, Line 40-60; col. 5, Line 1-30; col. 7, Line 22-45) “The operating mode may determine, for example, the set of frequencies over which the marine radio communicates or the local time setting for the marine radio.” i.e., Newman’s VHF radio operational setting include each of the alternatives recited in Claim 16.
The proposed combination and the motivations for combining the references presented in the rejection of the parent Claim apply to this Claim and are incorporated herein by the reference.
Regarding Claim 19, which is similar in scope to claim 1, presented as a method claim,
thus, rejected under same rationale. The claim recites; A method of remotely using a very high frequency (VHF) radio, the method comprising: causing, on a display of a marine electronics device, presentation of at least one operational setting of the VHF radio, wherein the marine electronics device is connected with the VHF radio so as to provide data communication between the marine electronics device and the VHF radio; receiving, at the display of the marine electronics device, an indication of a change in the at least one operational setting; and sending a signal to the VHF radio to execute the change to the at least one operational setting.
(Girault PARA[0055]-[0060], FIG. 5 (method 500)) “Method 500 further comprises, when the remote control user interface is displayed, mapping 528 the rotational input from the rotational knob to a control function of the target controllable marine electronics device according to the control information such that when the mapping is applied, the rotational input received when the remote control user interface is displayed is sent in a control message (e.g., control message 368) over a computer network 301 via a communication subsystem (e.g., via communication subsystem 305) to the target controllable marine electronics device to control the control function of the target controllable marine electronics device.” This discloses a method comprising: causing on the display presentation of the target device’s operational settings (step 522); receiving user input indicating a change (step 528); and sending a control signal message to the target device to execute the change (step 528). i.e., Furuno’s method 500 performs each of the three recited method steps. Girault does not disclose a VHF radio as the target device. Accordingly, Newman is added, supplying the VHF radio (108) with the network connection operational setting established for Claim 1.
The motivation to combine Girault and Newman for this independent method claim is identical to that set forth for Claim 1. Girault method 500 is explicitly designed as a device-agnostic protocol for remotely controlling any network marine electronics device, and Newman’s VHF radio is a network-connected marine electronic device. A POSITA would have had a reasonable expectation of success in applying Girault’s method to Newman’s VHF radio for the reason stated in the motivation for claim 1, all of which are incorporated herein by reference.
Regarding Claim 20, Girault in view of Newman discloses all the limitation of Claim 19
This claim limitation is similar in scope to Claim 2 and 16 presented as a method claim,
thus, rejected under same rationale. The claim requires that the at least one operational setting is one of an operating channels, a volume, a power setting, an identifier of the VHF radio, a location of the VHF radio, an operation frequency or a squelch. Girault does not disclose this specific VHF operational setting names. Accordingly, Newman is added. See Newman col. 3 Line: 40-60, col. 7, Line 22-45. “Power/volume control 186 controls transceiver power and audio output volume level.” And “fixed mount marine radio 108 is often equipped with a squelch control key in order to eliminate output noise when no marine communication or an extremely weak marine communication is received.” i.e., Newman discloses each of the enumerated operational; setting alternatives as parameters of its VHF radio, satisfying this dependent limitation.
The proposed combination and the motivations for combining the references presented in the rejection of the parent Claim apply to this Claim and are incorporated herein by the reference.
Regarding Claim 21, The claim recites a system for use on a watercraft, the system
comprising: a communication device (in place of VHF radio of Claim 1) with an antenna; a communication interface; a processor; and a memory including computer program code, or to receive and transmit… message data, and a marine electronics device… remotely located from the communication device… in data communication with the communication device, the MED configured to receive, through the data communication with the communication device, at least one operational setting of the communication device; cause, on the display, presentation of the at least one operational setting; receive an input, at the display, to change the at least one operational setting of the communication device; and send a signal to the communication device to execute the change to the at least one operational setting of the communication device. Girault discloses a marine electronics device (302) remotely controlling a communication device (304) over a vessel LAN, with the same bidirectional operational-setting exchange architecture as Claim 1. See Girault PARA [0016]-[0047], FIG. 3 “Remote control device 302 may be configured to interact with one or more controllable marine electronics devices 304… via communication subsystem 305.” And See Girault PARA [0048] “the configuration of remote-control device 302 is intended to be non-limiting, and a remote-control device may include additional and/or different components without departing from the scope of the present disclosure.” i.e., all limitations of Claim 21 are taught by the Girault/Newman combination for the same reasons set forth form Claim 1. The substitution of “communication device” to “VHF radio” broadens the claim but does not distinguish over the combination, as Girault explicitly discloses device-agnostic system operable with any marine electronic device. Newman’s VHF radio (108) is a marine communication device with the required antenna, communication interface, processor and memory.
The motivation to combine Girault and Newman for claim 21 is identical to that stated for claim 1 and is incorporated herein by references.
Claim(s) 6-10, 12-13, and 17-18 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being
unpatentable over Girault (US-20140071059-A1) in view of Newman (US-7102568-B1) in further view of Kinoshita (US-20130110329-A1).
Regarding Claim 6, Girault in view of Newman in further view of Kinoshita discloses all the limitation of Claim 1.
The Girault and Newman combination teaches the remote VFH radio control architecture, and Newman discloses DSC as a core VHF radio feature (col.7, Line 22-35, “Distress call key 188 sends out a distress call in Digital Selective Calling (DSC). In general DSC is used to establish communications with ship or coast stations or to receive calls from other ships or coast stations.”) i.e., DSC calling is an operation mode of VHF radio controllable through the remote interface.
However, Girault in view of Newman does not disclose a contact list for DSC selection presented on the remote MED display. Kinoshita discloses receiving, through user input, an indication of engagement in digital selective calling (DSC); cause, on the display, presentation of a list of contacts; receive, at the display, an indication of a selected contact; and send a signal to the VHF radio to engage in DSC calling with the selected contact. (PARA [0091], [0130], [0131], [0132]; “The wireless device 63 is, for example, an international VHF wireless (marine VHF radio) device that accomplishes voice communication using radio waves in a prescribed frequency band.” and “the central controller 7 can be configured to send and receive email… the operator can communicate information regarding the state of his or her own vessel.”) i.e., a VHF wireless device (63) integrated with a touch-panel display device (8) through a central controller (7), with the display presenting communication interfaces for vessel-to-vessel contact selection.
Girault, Newman, and Kinoshita are considered to be analogues to the claimed invention because they are in the same field of endeavor of vessel-network marine electronics. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the Girault and Newman combination to present a DSC contact list on the remote MED display as taught by Kinoshita, because doing so is a routine extension of the design approach Kinoshita already demonstrates for connected onboard devices, with a reasonable expectation of success.
Regarding Claim 7, Girault in view of Newman in further view of Kinoshita discloses all the limitation of Claim 1.
Girault further discloses at least one radar, associated with the watercraft, wherein the at least one radar is configured to emit one or more electromagnetic waves in a direction relative to the watercraft, wherein the computer program code of the marine electronics device, is further configured to, when executed, cause the processor to: cause the at least one radar to emit the one or more electromagnetic waves; receive radar return data corresponding to radar returns received by the at least one radar; and generate a radar image corresponding to the radar return data; (PARA [0031], [0035], [0040]-[0041], FIG. 4A and 4B, “the target controllable marine electronics device of the illustrated example is a RADAR-based marine electronics device (e.g., RADAR antenna and/or input/output devices coupled thereto), the control function is an antenna heading alignment control function, and the rotational knob input is mapped to cause the control function to vary an antenna heading alignment control parameter… and the graphical indication of the state (e.g., graphical indicator 346c) of the control function is a numerical value.”) (i.e., Girault’s marine electronics device controls a RADAR-based device 338f, receives radar return data, generates a radar image, and presents it as shared content 354 on the touch-sensitive display);
However, Girault in view of Newman does not disclose detect one or more objects in the radar return data; cause, on the display, presentation of the one or more detected objects within the radar image; and cause, automatically in response to determining that a detected object from among the one or more detected objects is within a predetermined distance of the watercraft, the VHF radio to transmit a message to the detected object.
Kinoshita discloses detect one or more objects in the radar return data by monitoring the watercraft’s surroundings and automatically notifying the operator in response (PARA [0098]-[0099], “the central controller 7 monitors the water surface for obstacles using the still images and moving images captured by the imaging device 60. The central controller 7 determines if an obstacle exists by executing image processing of the still images and moving images captured by the imaging device 60. The central controller 7 also notifies the operator if it determines that an obstacle exists.”) and Kinoshita further discloses that the central controller communicates with the VHF wireless device 63 to send and receive communications with other vessels (PARA [0091], [0132]). (i.e., applying Kinoshita’s automated detection and notification logic to Girault’s radar display, combined with Newman’s VHF radio networked to the vessel data system, renders obvious cause, on the display, presentation of the one or more detected objects within the radar image; and cause, automatically in response to determining that a detected object from among the one or more detected objects is within a predetermined distance of the watercraft, the VHF radio to transmit a message to the detected object.)
Girault, Newman, and Kinoshita are considered to be analogous to the claimed invention because they are in the same field of endeavors vessel-network marine electronics and share the goal of improving watercraft safety through automated integration of sensor data and communication. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the Girault and Newman combination to trigger an automatic VHF transmission by Newman’s radio when the radar/imaging detection system of Girault and Kinoshita identifies a vessel or obstacle within a predetermined distance, as such integration directly addresses the collision- avoidance safety problem the references acknowledge, consistent with applicant’s own acknowledgement that the system may “automatically call the oncoming watercraft” to “notify the oncoming watercraft of the current location, position, heading” (PARA [0072]), with a reasonable expectation of success because all three references employ standard NMEA 200 and LAN-based inter-device communication and Girault’s architecture already routes commands and data between the display and multiple simultaneously-controlled marine electronics devices.
Regarding Claim 8, Girault in view of Newman in further view of Kinoshita discloses
all the limitation of Claim 7.
Kinoshita discloses wherein the message is stored within the memory of the marine electronics device. (PARA [0092],[0131], “The rental management information is transmitted to a computer in a management office of the boat rental business by communicating through the wireless device 63 or the internet.”) (i.e., the central controller 7 includes a memory (72) and storage device (73) and stores outgoing communication content in its own memory and transmitting it through VHF wireless device (63), which is the architecture Claim 8 requires).
The proposed combination and the motivations for combining the references presented in the rejection of the parent Claim apply to this Claim and are incorporated herein by the reference.
Regarding Claim 9, Girault in view of Newman discloses all the limitation of Claim 8.
Girault does not address storage of the outgoing message in the controlled device’s memory. Newman discloses wherein the message is stored within the memory of the VHF radio. (col.9 , Line 45-55, “Data memory module 310 and software memory module 312 store the data necessary for the operation of fixed mount marine radio 108.”) i.e., Newman’s VHF radio memory module is configured to store data necessary for operation, which in the combined system of Claim 7 includes pre-composed message for automatic transmission to detect vessels.
The proposed combination and the motivations for combining the references presented in the rejection of the parent Claim apply to this Claim and are incorporated herein by the reference.
Regarding Claim 10, Girault in view of Newman in further view of Kinoshita discloses
all the limitation of Claim 1.
Kinoshita discloses receiving, at the display of the marine electronics device, an indication of engagement of a foghorn; transmit, via the communication interface, a signal to VHF radio to engage the foghorn; and cause the VHF radio to engage the foghorn. (PARA [0105], “The software keys include operating switches that operate the devices of the first additional function system 9 and operating switches that operate the devices of the second additional function system 10.”) and Newman discloses the VHF radio executing an auditory signaling function upon command (col. 4, Line 40-55) “Hailer key 174 changes the mode of marine communication from wireless to auditory by switching the output of the attached fixed mount marine radio 108 from marine radio frequency antenna 112 to the attached loud speaker 110.”) i.e., Girault’s control-message architecture carries the foghorn engagement signal from MED to Newman’s VHF radio, which executes the horn function; consistent with the applicant’s own acknowledgement at PARA[0073] that “the foghorn may typically be controlled by VHF radio through horn button.”
One of the ordinary skills in the art would have combined these references because all three addresses vessel-network marine electronics, and the combination follows directly from the same rational as Claim 1: routing a command from the MED display through Furuno’s control-message protocol to a function the VHF radio already possesses. No modification to any system is required, and the safety benefit so enabling horn signaling from the helm is self-evident. A reasonable expectation of success follows because adding a foghorn software key is a routine extension of the design approach Kinoshita already demonstrates for all other onboard devices.
Regarding Claim 12, Girault in view of Newman in further view of Kinoshita discloses
all the limitation of Claim 1.
Girault discloses that the MED receiving an indication of an input and transmitting a control message to the controlled device to change its mode (PARA[0044]-[0046]) “mappings 366 may be configured such that rotational input 360 received when remote control user interface 344 is displayed (e.g., user interface provided by remote control UI mode 342 of controller interface program 326) is represented via control message 368 sent, via communication subsystem 305, to a target controllable marine electronics device.” )
Newman discloses that the VHF radio operated in multiple distinct modes including simplex/duplex channel modes, scanning, weather, and distress. (See Newman col. 7, Line 22-42). Girault and Newman do not disclose VHF mode selection via a software key on the remote MED display. Therefore, Kinoshita is added, (see Kinoshita PARA[0106]-[0107]) “mode changing switch 89 is a switch that changes a display mode. By operating the mode changing switch 89, the operator can change the screen displayed on the display device 8.” i.e., mode-change software keys on the touch-panel display that transmit signals to cause the target device to change its operating mode.
The proposed combination and the motivations for combining the references presented in the rejection of the parent Claim apply to this Claim and are incorporated herein by the reference.
Regarding Claim 13, Girault in view of Newman in further view of Kinoshita discloses
all the limitation of Claim 12.
Newman discloses scanning mode, weather mode, distress mode, and squelch mode. (col. 7, Line 22-45; scanning mode (“Scan memory key 194 scans preprogrammed channels.”), weather mode (“WX alert key 192 changes the channel to the last used weather channel.”), distress mode (“Distress call key 188 sends out a distress call in Digital Selective Calling (DSC)”), and squelch mode (describe as a feature to “squelch control key)), and Kinoshita discloses man-overboard warning and silence modes (PARA[0027]-[0028]; “When the controller detects trouble in at least one of the devices, the controller outputs a warning sound from the speaker of the headset notifying of the trouble.”) i.e., Kinoshita’s emergency warning mode corresponds to a man-overboard alert, and its control of audio output through the central controller satisfies the silence-mode alternative.
The proposed combination and the motivations for combining the references presented in the rejection of the parent Claim apply to this Claim and are incorporated herein by the reference.
Regarding Claim 17, Girault in view of Newman in further view of Kinoshita discloses
all the limitation of Claim 15.
This claim limitation is similar in scope to Claim 12 presented in the context of independent claim 15, thus rejected under the same rationale. Girault provides the signal transmission mechanism, Newman provides the VHF radio modes, and Kinoshita provides the mode selection software key interface (Girault PARA [0045]; Kinoshita PARA [0106]-[0107]).
Regarding Claim 18, Girault in view of Newman in further view of Kinoshita discloses
all the limitation of Claim 17.
This claim limitation is similar in scope to Claim 13, presented in the context of independent claim 15 and 17, thus rejected under the same rationale. Newman discloses scanning, weather, distress, and squelch modes, and Kinoshita discloses man-overboard warning and silence modes (see Newman col. 7, Line: 30-35; Kinoshita PARA [0027]-[0028]).
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to
applicant's disclosure.
Frisbie et al. (US 20170210449 A1) – Is directed to a marine vessel display system implementing a plurality of modes of operation, each presenting data from selected marine input sources, wherein mode of operation may be selected automatically based on the vessel’s geographic location relative to defined boundary.
Jopling (US 20160313955 A1) – Is directed to mirroring a smart device graphical user interface (GUI) on a marine electronics device, wherein commands received on the marine electronics device are transmitted back to the smart device enabling bidirectional control.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to DIKSHYA KANDEL whose telephone number is (571)270-0959. The examiner can normally be reached Monday Friday, 8 a.m. 5 p.m. ET..
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, Akwasi M Sarpong can be reached at (571) 270-3438. 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.
/D.K/
Examiner, Art Unit 2648 /AKWASI M SARPONG/SPE, Art Unit 2681
Prosecution Insights