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 .
Continued Examination Under 37 CFR 1.114
A request for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, including the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e), was filed in this application after final rejection. Since this application is eligible for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114. Applicant's submission filed on 05/01/2026 has been entered.
Response to Arguments
Regarding the previous 35 U.S.C. 103 rejection, Applicant’s arguments with respect to the 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 arguments. A new ground of rejection is made in view of US 20170255201 (Arbuckle).
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(b):
(b) CONCLUSION.—The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph:
The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the applicant regards as his invention.
Claims 1, 6-7 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor (or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the applicant), regards as the invention.
Claim 1 recites the limitation "the predetermined threshold speed". There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim because a threshold speed was previously introduced. The terms “a threshold speed” and “the threshold speed” are interpreted as “a predetermined threshold speed” and “the predetermined threshold speed”, respectively.
Dependent claims 6-7 are rejected as being dependent upon claim 1.
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”), US 20100023192 (“Rae”), and US 20170255201 (Arbuckle).
As per claim 1, Morikami discloses a ship steering device comprising:
a processor (see at least [0042]: helm controller 20 constitutes a so-called computer including a CPU 21) 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.
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.
Morikami does not explicitly disclose
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,
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, 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.
Morikami does not explicitly disclose
the processor is further configured to
determine whether a speed of the vessel is equal to or below with a threshold speed, and
start a ship stopping control that
sets a position of the vessel where it is determined that the speed of the vessel is equal to or below with the threshold speed as the predetermined ship stopping site in response to determining that the speed of the vessel is equal to or less than the predetermined threshold speed.
However, Arbuckle teaches the processor is further configured to
determine whether a speed of the vessel is equal to or below with a threshold speed (see at least [0037]: option (a), once the vessel 10 slows to the second threshold speed, [0041]: engaging station keeping at a stopover waypoint could be applied to a joystick-based route system. In this case, the throttle/shift levers 40 would already be in the neutral position), and
start a ship stopping control that sets a position of the vessel where it is determined that the speed of the vessel is equal to or below with the threshold speed as the predetermined ship stopping site in response to determining that the speed of the vessel is equal to or less than the predetermined threshold speed (see at least [0037]: option (a), once the vessel 10 slows to the second threshold speed, as shown at location 402, the system 20 will set the station keeping anchor point. The anchor point 404 will therefore be at the geographical location of the vessel 10 at the moment the second threshold speed is met, [0045]: As shown at 614, in response to sensing that the vessel 10 has thereafter slowed to a second threshold speed that is less than the first threshold speed, the method includes controlling the propulsion devices 12, 14 so as to maintain the vessel 10 at an anchor point 404, [0046]: setting a current, actual geographic location of the vessel 10 as the anchor point and/or setting a current, actual heading of the vessel 10 as the given heading in response to reaching the second threshold speed at 614).
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 Arbuckle with a reasonable expectation of success in order for an operator to be able to smoothly ease into position at a final waypoint and electronically anchor there and to maintain the marine vessel at the anchor point at a given heading (see at least [0032]). 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 ‘085) (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).
US 20200200111 (Buis) (see at least claim 6: A method for automatically stopping an engine, comprising: receiving a signal indicating the handle is in the neutral position; receiving status information for the engine; and providing a signal to stop the engine when the handle is indicated in the neutral position and the engine is not running, claim 9: method as recited in claim 6, further comprising receiving a vessel speed, comparing the vessel speed to a preselected vessel speed threshold, and providing a signal to stop the engine when the engine is running and the vessel speed is less than the preselected vessel speed threshold).
US 20240227993 (Shirao ‘993) (see at least claim 2: the fixed-point holding target position setting unit is configured to set a position of the vessel, determined by the vessel position determination unit when the speed of the vessel determined by the vessel speed determination unit has decreased to a first threshold value or less, as the fixed-point holding target position).
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
Prosecution Insights