DETAILED ACTION
The present application is being examined under the pre-AIA first to invent provisions.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 1-3, 5-9, 12-14, 17-18, 21-24 are allowed.
The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter:
Claim 1 includes limitations directed towards a plurality of walls protruding upwardly from the upper surface of the panel, wherein the plurality of walls extend between the first edge and the second edge of the upper surface, wherein the plurality of walls are spaced apart from each other to define a plurality of ball-detection lanes for a golf ball that extend perpendicular to the second edge of the upper surface; and. Reimers teaches 1. (Currently Amended) A putting game structure comprising: a putting surface having a front end and a rear end; a tee surface adjacent the front end of the putting surface; See Fig. 1, one or more putting targets adjacent the rear end of the putting surface; and See Fig. 1, a sensor assembly aligned with the one or more putting targets adjacent the rear end of the putting surface, wherein the sensor assembly comprises: See Fig. 1, a panel adjacent the rear end of the putting surface, wherein the panel defines an upper surface along which a golf ball is to travel after transferring from the rearend of the putting surface, wherein the upper surface includes a first edge and a second edge opposite the first edge; See Fig. 1; (60), a plurality of sensors each of which corresponds with a corresponding ball-detection lane, wherein each of the plurality of sensors is configured to detect when a golf ball travels through the corresponding ball-detection lane. See Fig. 1; (64). The closest art or record JP 3079813 U teaches walls extending up (i.e. the vertical walls near 122) but Reimers does not teach these walls are on the panel on which the ball travels. As shown in Fig. 1 of Reimers the ball is under the panel and the walls are on the panel above the wall. The prior art of record, alone or in combination, does not teach or suggest the above-identified limitations, and claim 1 is therefore allowed.
Claim 12 includes limitations directed towards 12. (Currently Amended) The putting game structure of claim 11, wherein the upper surface is angled downward between the first edge and the second edge to guide a golf ball off the upper surface of the panel and onto an adjacent ball-return surface. The closest art of record JP 3079813 U teaches a putting game, however it is silent with regards to the edges and surface of the panel as claimed. The prior art of record, alone or in combination, does not teach or suggest the above-identified limitations, and claim 12 is therefore allowed.
Claim 13 includes limitations directed towards 13. (Currently Amended) The putting game structure of claim 11, wherein the upper surface is angled downward from the first edge and to the second edge to guide a golf ball off the second edge and onto an adjacent ball-return surface. The closest art of record JP 3079813 U teaches a putting game, however it is silent with regards to the edges and ball return surface of the panel as claimed. The prior art of record, alone or in combination, does not teach or suggest the above-identified limitations, and claim 13 is therefore allowed.
Claim 14 includes limitations directed towards 14. (Currently Amended) The putting game structure of claim 11, wherein the sensor includes a lidar sensor. The closest art of record JP 3079813 U teaches the sensors however it is silent with regards to the sensors being lidar sensors. The prior art of record, alone or in combination, does not teach or suggest the above-identified limitations, and claim 14 is therefore allowed.
Claim 17 includes limitations directed towards 17. (Currently Amended) The putting game structure of claim 11, wherein the sensor assembly further comprises a deflector tray that is positioned above the panel and includes a plurality of deflectors, wherein the plurality of deflectors are spaced apart from each other and arranged in a side-by-side manner to define a plurality of ball-detection lanes on the upper surface for the golf ball. The closest art of record JP 3079813 U teaches sensor assembly but is silent with regards to the deflector tray as claimed. The prior art of record, alone or in combination, does not teach or suggest the above-identified limitations, and claim 17 is therefore allowed.
Claim 18 includes limitations directed towards 18. (Currently Amended) The putting game structure of claim 11, wherein the sensor assembly further comprises a plurality of deflectors that are spaced apart from each other, arranged in a side-by-side manner, and positioned above the panel to define a plurality of ball-detection lanes on the upper surface for the golf ball. The closest art of record JP 3079813 U teaches sensor assembly but is silent with regards to the deflector tray as claimed. The prior art of record, alone or in combination, does not teach or suggest the above-identified limitations, and claim 18 is therefore allowed.
Claim 23 includes limitations directed towards 23. (New) The putting game structure of claim 11, wherein the panel is positioned below the rear end of the putting surface such that a golf ball is to drop from the rear end of the putting surface and onto the upper surface of the panel. The closest art of record JP 3079813 U teaches sensor assembly but is silent with regards to the panel positioned below the rear end of the putting surface as claimed. The prior art of record, alone or in combination, does not teach or suggest the above-identified limitations, and claim 23 is therefore allowed.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status.
The following is a quotation of the appropriate paragraphs of 35 U.S.C. 102 that form the basis for the rejections under this section made in this Office action:
A person shall be entitled to a patent unless –
(a)(2) the claimed invention was described in a patent issued under section 151, or in an application for patent published or deemed published under section 122(b), in which the patent or application, as the case may be, names another inventor and was effectively filed before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claims 11, 15-16 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) as being anticipated by Reimers (US 5330188 A).
Regarding claim 11, Reimers teaches 11. (Currently Amended) A putting game structure comprising: a putting surface having a front end and a rear end; See Fig. 1, a tee surface adjacent the front end of the putting surface; See Fig. 1, one or more putting targets adjacent the rear end of the putting surface; and See Fig. 1, a sensor assembly aligned with the one or more putting targets adjacent the rear end of the putting surface, wherein the sensor assembly comprises: See 5:64+, a panel positioned adjacent the rear end of the putting surface, wherein the panel defines an upper surface along which a golf ball is to travel after transferring from the rear end of the putting surface, wherein the upper surface includes a first edge and a second edge opposite the first edge; and See Fig. 1; (60) wherein (60) is the panel with the first and second edges., a sensor positioned adjacent the panel to detect at which of a plurality of lateral positions a golf ball travels along the upper surface. See Fig. 1; 9:9+ which teaches the receiver/sensor assembly in the face plate (64).
Regarding claim 15, Reimers teaches 15. (Currently Amended) The putting game structure of claim 11, wherein the sensor assembly further comprises one or more second sensors configured to detect when a golf ball has rolled off the upper surface of the panel. See 5:64+ which teaches multiple sensors that can sense when the ball has rolled off the upper surface of the panel.
Regarding claim 16, Reimers teaches 16. (Currently Amended) The putting game structure of claim 11, wherein the sensor is further configured to detect when a golf ball has rolled off the upper surface of the panel. See 5:64+ which teaches multiple sensors that can sense when the ball has rolled off the upper surface of the panel.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
JP 3079813 U – Which teaches a golf putting apparatus.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to JEFFREY S VANDERVEEN whose telephone number is (571)270-0503. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday 11am - 7pm CST.
Examiner interviews are available via telephone, in-person, and video conferencing using a USPTO supplied web-based collaboration tool. To schedule an interview, applicant is encouraged to use the USPTO Automated Interview Request (AIR) at http://www.uspto.gov/interviewpractice.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Nicholas Weiss can be reached at (571) 270-1775. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300.
Information regarding the status of published or unpublished applications may be obtained from Patent Center. Unpublished application information in Patent Center is available to registered users. To file and manage patent submissions in Patent Center, visit: https://patentcenter.uspto.gov. Visit https://www.uspto.gov/patents/apply/patent-center for more information about Patent Center and https://www.uspto.gov/patents/docx for information about filing in DOCX format. For additional questions, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000.
/JEFFREY S VANDERVEEN/Examiner, Art Unit 3711
Prosecution Insights