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 .
Response to Arguments
Regarding the previous 35 U.S.C. 101 rejection, the previous 35 U.S.C. 101 rejection is withdrawn in light of the present claim amendments.
Regarding the previous 35 U.S.C. 112(b) rejection, the previous 35 U.S.C. 112(b) rejection is withdrawn in light of the present claim amendments.
Regarding the previous 35 U.S.C. 103 rejection, Applicant’s arguments with respect to claims have been considered but are moot because the new ground of rejection does not rely on the combination of references applied in the prior rejection of record for any teaching or matter specifically challenged in the argument. In response to applicant's argument that it is possible to suppress ship behavior that does not conform to the operator’s intended operation of the joystick—such as when the operator is holding the joystick while turning only their head to look backward wherein the ship is configured to enable an operator of the joystick to view scenery behind the ship in a front-rear direction of the ship, a recitation of the intended use of the claimed invention must result in a structural difference between the claimed invention and the prior art in order to patentably distinguish the claimed invention from the prior art. If the prior art structure is capable of performing the intended use, then it meets the claim. Accordingly, an updated 35 U.S.C. 103 rejection is maintained.
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, 6-7 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over US 20150246714 (“Morikami”) in view of US 7575491 (“Martin”) and US 20100023192 (“Rae”).
As per claim 1, Morikami discloses a ship steering device comprising a processor configured to:
receive first signal from a first operation of an input device mounted on a ship (see at least [0109]: at Step S11, the boat operator performs one of the operations of the front tilt operation, the rear tilt operation, the right tilt operation, the left tilt operation, the right rotation operation, and the left rotation operation, from the neutral state using the operating lever 9, [0110]: CPU 21 of the helm controller 20 acquires the information on the zone and the information on the operation position in the zone, [0112]: Step S14, the CPU 21 of the helm controller 20 controls the outboard motors 3L, 3R…on the basis of the information on the zone stored…and the information on the operation position in the zone acquire from the joystick),
the input device having a joystick that is movable from a neutral position to a moveable region (see at least abstract: an operation by an operating lever that is tiltable in all directions from a neutral state, when the operating lever is moved to a different zone, [0113]: Step S15, the CPU 21 of the helm controller 20 determines whether the joystick 10 has detected the neutral state of the operating lever 9),
the movable region being divided into a plurality of regions, and the first operation being a tilt of the joystick to the movable region (see at least [0109]: at Step S11, the boat operator performs one of the operations of the front tilt operation, the rear tilt operation, the right tilt operation, the left tilt operation, the right rotation operation, and the left rotation operation, from the neutral state using the operating lever 9, [0110]: CPU 21 of the helm controller 20 acquires the information on the zone and the information on the operation position in the zone);
determine a propulsion force in the ship based on a region where the joystick is position among the plurality of regions, in response to the received first signal (see at least [0034]: helm controller 20 controls shift positions, throttle opening degrees, steering angles of the two outboard motors 3L, 3R using the electric signals to thereby steer the boat 1, [0053]: when an instruction of changing the shift position to a rearward direction is given from the helm controller 20, the shift actuator 31 changes the shift position by changing the mesh of gears in the propulsion unit 33, [0112]: Step S14, the CPU 21 of the helm controller 20 controls the outboard motors 3L, 3R…on the basis of the information on the zone stored…and the information on the operation position in the zone acquire from the joystick); and
control one or more propulsion units of the ship based on the determined propulsion force (see at least [0053]: when an instruction of changing the shift position to a rearward direction is given from the helm controller 20, the shift actuator 31 changes the shift position by changing the mesh of gears in the propulsion unit 33, [0112]: Step S14, the CPU 21 of the helm controller 20 controls the outboard motors 3L, 3R…on the basis of the information on the zone stored…and the information on the operation position in the zone acquire from the joystick), wherein
the ship is configured to enable an operator of the joystick to view scenery behind the ship in a front-rear direction of the ship (see at least Fig. 1: a perspective view of a boat viewed from a diagonally rear direction, abstract: enabling steering easily reflecting the intention of a boat operator and improving a steering efficiency even when an operation of moving from zone to zone is performed),
the plurality of regions includes at least a first region and a second region (see at least [0109]: at Step S11, the boat operator performs one of the operations of the front tilt operation, the rear tilt operation, the right tilt operation, the left tilt operation, the right rotation operation, and the left rotation operation, from the neutral state using the operating lever 9,),
the propulsion force that is determined in a case where the joystick is positioned in the first region drives the ship forward in the front-rear direction (see at least [0109]: at Step S11, the boat operator performs one of the operations of the front tilt operation, the rear tilt operation, the right tilt operation, the left tilt operation, the right rotation operation, and the left rotation operation, from the neutral state using the operating lever 9),
the propulsion force that is determined in a case where the joystick is positioned in the second region drives the ship rearward in the front-rear direction (see at least [0109]: at Step S11, the boat operator performs one of the operations of the front tilt operation, the rear tilt operation, the right tilt operation, the left tilt operation, the right rotation operation, and the left rotation operation, from the neutral state using the operating lever 9).
Morikami does not explicitly disclose
the second region has a center angle greater than that of the first region, and
the processor is further configured to
receive a second signal from a second operation that causes the joystick to move from the movable region to the neutral position, and
start a ship stopping control that causes the ship to stop at a predetermined ship stopping site by controlling a propulsion force of the one or more propulsion units in response to the received second signal.
However, Martin discloses
the second region has a center angle greater than that of the first region (see at least column 5 lines 52-61: FIG. 3, a joystick deflection diagram for signal generation is shown. The steering indications are for the watercraft. The shaft 10 b is represented by the center circle and, in the off position (zero speed), the shaft is centered vertically. Deflecting the shaft 10 b upwardly (in the forward direction) causes the watercraft to go forward. Both motors propel the watercraft in a forward direction. Likewise, pulling straight back on the shaft 10 b in the bottom quadrant as shown will result in both motors being in a reverse mode and the watercraft would go backwards).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to provide the invention as disclosed by Morikami by incorporating the teachings of Martin with a reasonable expectation of success in order to provide maneuverability. The combination would yield predictable results.
Further, Martin discloses that a forward region has a center angle greater than that of a reverse region (see at least column 5 lines 52-61: Fig. 3, a joystick deflection diagram for signal generation is shown). Martin discloses a recognized need in the art for a manually-activated controller for controlling speed, steering and direction of propulsion (forward or reverse of the watercraft), wherein different steering patterns can be selected for different objectives such as maneuverability or reverse maneuverability. There appears to be a finite number of identified predictable potential solutions to the recognized need by having different steering patterns for different objectives with different directions with different angles such as forward, reverse, left and right. It would have been obvious to try to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to provide reverse as larger than forward as Fig. 3 shows forward as larger than reverse with a reasonable expectation of success in order to achieve different objectives such as maneuverability and reverse maneuverability with different steering patterns.
However, Rae teaches the processor is further configured to
receive a second signal from a second operation that causes the joystick to move from the movable region to the neutral position (see at least [0056]: While the control system is in dynamic positioning mode the helmsperson may operate a control device such as a joystick to move the vessel and then release the joystick or return the joystick to its neutral position), and
start a ship stopping control that causes the ship to stop at a predetermined ship stopping site by controlling a propulsion force of the one or more propulsion units in response to the received second signal (see at least [0056]: helmsperson may subsequently wish to move the vessel to a different position and/or heading and then maintain the vessel at that new position and/or heading. While the control system is in dynamic positioning mode the helmsperson may operate a control device such as a joystick to move the vessel and then release the joystick or return the joystick to its neutral position. Return of the joystick to its neutral position may cause re-engaging of dynamic positioning so that the control system again operates to maintain the vessel in the new position and/or heading (until the joystick is moved again, or the dynamic positioning mode is disabled)).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to provide the invention as disclosed by Morikami by incorporating the teachings of Rae with a reasonable expectation of success in order to provide improved dynamic positioning. The combination would yield predictable results.
As per claim 6, Morikami does not explicitly disclose wherein the center angle of the second region is greater than those of the other regions in the plurality of regions.
However, Martin teaches wherein the center angle of the second region is greater than those of the other regions in the plurality of regions (see at least column 5 lines 52-61: FIG. 3, a joystick deflection diagram for signal generation is shown. The steering indications are for the watercraft. The shaft 10 b is represented by the center circle and, in the off position (zero speed), the shaft is centered vertically. Deflecting the shaft 10 b upwardly (in the forward direction) causes the watercraft to go forward. Both motors propel the watercraft in a forward direction. Likewise, pulling straight back on the shaft 10 b in the bottom quadrant as shown will result in both motors being in a reverse mode and the watercraft would go backwards).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to provide the invention as disclosed by Morikami by incorporating the teachings of Martin with a reasonable expectation of success in order to provide maneuverability. The combination would yield predictable results.
Further, Martin discloses that the center angle of the forward region is greater than those of the other regions in the plurality of regions (see at least column 5 lines 52-61: Fig. 3, a joystick deflection diagram for signal generation is shown). Martin discloses a recognized need in the art for a manually-activated controller for controlling speed, steering and direction of propulsion (forward or reverse of the watercraft), wherein different steering patterns can be selected for different objectives such as maneuverability or reverse maneuverability. There appears to be a finite number of identified predictable potential solutions to the recognized need by having different steering patterns for different objectives with different directions with different angles such as forward, reverse, left and right. It would have been obvious to try to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to provide reverse as larger than the other regions as Fig. 3 shows forward as larger than the other regions with a reasonable expectation of success in order to achieve different objectives such as maneuverability and reverse maneuverability with different steering patterns.
As per claim 7, Morikami discloses wherein
the plurality of regions includes the first region, the second region, a third region and a fourth region (see at least [0065]: In FIG. 4, as boundary lines for dividing the zones, a boundary line BL1 to a boundary line BL4 are illustrated which are tilted to the left and right at 45 degrees with respect to a front-rear center line passing through the axis of the operating lever 9 in the neutral state. The zone 1 to the zone 4 are equally divided quarters as described above so that the boat operator easily recognizes the zones, thus making it possible to prevent wrong operation),
the propulsion force determined in a case where the joystick is positioned in the third region drives the ship rightward in a width direction of the ship (see at least [0067]: zone 2…right tilt operation),
the propulsion force determined in a case where the joystick is positioned in the fourth region drives the ship leftward in the width direction (see at least [0069]: zone 4…left tilt operation).
Morikami does not explicitly disclose the center angle of the second region is greater than those of the first region, the third region, and the fourth region.
However, Martin teaches the center angle of the second region is greater than those of the first region, the third region, and the fourth region (see at least column 5 lines 52-61: FIG. 3, a joystick deflection diagram for signal generation is shown. The steering indications are for the watercraft. The shaft 10 b is represented by the center circle and, in the off position (zero speed), the shaft is centered vertically. Deflecting the shaft 10 b upwardly (in the forward direction) causes the watercraft to go forward. Both motors propel the watercraft in a forward direction. Likewise, pulling straight back on the shaft 10 b in the bottom quadrant as shown will result in both motors being in a reverse mode and the watercraft would go backwards).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to provide the invention as disclosed by Morikami by incorporating the teachings of Martin with a reasonable expectation of success in order to provide maneuverability. The combination would yield predictable results.
Further, Martin discloses that the center angle of the forward region is greater than those of the reverse region, the leftward region, and the rightward region (see at least column 5 lines 52-61: Fig. 3, a joystick deflection diagram for signal generation is shown). Martin discloses a recognized need in the art for a manually-activated controller for controlling speed, steering and direction of propulsion (forward or reverse of the watercraft), wherein different steering patterns can be selected for different objectives such as maneuverability or reverse maneuverability. There appears to be a finite number of identified predictable potential solutions to the recognized need by having different steering patterns for different objectives with different directions with different angles such as forward, reverse, left and right. It would have been obvious to try to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to provide reverse as larger than those of the first region, the third region, and the fourth region as Fig. 3 shows forward as larger than those of the first region, the third region, and the fourth region with a reasonable expectation of success in order to achieve different objectives such as maneuverability and reverse maneuverability with different steering patterns.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. US 20220081085 ("Shirao") (see at least abstract: control device for an outboard motor controls a plurality of outboard motors included in a ship [0017], Fig. 3A-3I: forward backward axis). US 9132903 ("Gable") (see at least Fig. 5, Fig. 8B, Fig. 9B).
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 ANGELINA M SHUDY whose telephone number is (571)272-6757. The examiner can normally be reached M - F 10am - 6pm.
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, Fadey Jabr can be reached at 571-272-1516. 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.
Angelina Shudy
Primary Examiner
Art Unit 3668
/Angelina M Shudy/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3668