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and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114.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 08/12/2026 has been entered.
Status of Claims
This Office Action is in response to the application filed on 08/12/2026. Claims 2-21 are presently pending and are presented for examination. Claims 2 and 12 were amended.
Response to Remarks
Examiner acknowledges the Applicant’s stance on the priority of the claims. The Examiner maintains the prior statements about the appropriate priority of the claims.
Applicant’s arguments, see Pages 7-9 of the Applicant's Remarks, filed 08/12/2026, with respect to the claim interpretations of claim(s) 2, 11, and 21 have been fully considered and are not persuasive. Applicant argues that the cited claim interpretations are inappropriate. Examiner respectfully disagrees, with all terms except, “navigational control system” owning to the claim amendments. The claim limitations subject to interpretation use terms that are a substitute for “means” and are generic placeholders, the substitute term is modified by functional language and are linked by transition or linking words, and the substitute terms are not modified by sufficient structure or material for performing the claimed function. The terms such as logic device, and position adjustment selectors could refer to different devices for each of these terms, and therefore the Examiner must look into the Applicant’s specification to understand what the Applicant is actually trying to claim.
Applicant’s arguments, see Pages 9-12 of the Applicant's Remarks, filed 08/12/2026, with respect to the claim rejection(s) of claim(s) 2-21 under 35 U.S.C. § 101 have been fully considered and are not persuasive. The claim amendments do not incorporate positively cited vehicle controls and at best any connection the amended language makes to vehicle control is limited to describing intended use of the abstract idea or the additional elements. Therefore, the 101 rejection is maintained. The Applicant argues that the claims possess vehicle control steps, the Examiner respectfully disagrees as the following steps could be conducted in a mental simulation without ever effecting the propulsion and control segments of an actual vessel. The following mental processes are less burdensome than (Global Positioning System) GPS navigational calculations.
Applicant’s arguments, see Pages 12-13 of the Applicant's Remarks, filed 08/12/2026, with respect to the claim rejection(s) of claim(s) 2-21 under 35 U.S.C. § 103 have been fully considered and are persuasive. Therefore, the rejections have been withdrawn. However, upon further consideration, a new ground(s) of rejection is made in view of Duning and Kaji.
Priority
Applicant’s claim for the benefit of a prior-filed application under 35 U.S.C. 119(e) or under 35 U.S.C. 120, 121, 365(c), or 386(c) is acknowledged. Applicant has not complied with one or more conditions for receiving the benefit of an earlier filing date under 35 U.S.C. 119(e) as follows:
The later-filed application must be an application for a patent for an invention which is also disclosed in the prior application (the parent or original nonprovisional application or provisional application). The disclosure of the invention in the parent application and in the later-filed application must be sufficient to comply with the requirements of 35 U.S.C. 112(a) or the first paragraph of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, except for the best mode requirement. See Transco Products, Inc. v. Performance Contracting, Inc., 38 F.3d 551, 32 USPQ2d 1077 (Fed. Cir. 1994).
The disclosure of the prior-filed application, Application No. 15/620,675, 15/640,186, and 16/533,572, fails to provide adequate support or enablement in the manner provided by 35 U.S.C. 112(a) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, first paragraph for one or more claims of this application. These applications are not directed to displaying a thrust magnitude and direction relative to an orientation of the boat's symbol.
Claim Interpretation
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(f):
(f) Element in Claim for a Combination. – An element in a claim for a combination may be expressed as a means or step for performing a specified function without the recital of structure, material, or acts in support thereof, and such claim shall be construed to cover the corresponding structure, material, or acts described in the specification and equivalents thereof.
The following is a quotation of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph:
An element in a claim for a combination may be expressed as a means or step for performing a specified function without the recital of structure, material, or acts in support thereof, and such claim shall be construed to cover the corresponding structure, material, or acts described in the specification and equivalents thereof.
The claims in this application are given their broadest reasonable interpretation using the plain meaning of the claim language in light of the specification as it would be understood by one of ordinary skill in the art. The broadest reasonable interpretation of a claim element (also commonly referred to as a claim limitation) is limited by the description in the specification when 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is invoked.
As explained in MPEP § 2181, subsection I, claim limitations that meet the following three-prong test will be interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph:
(A) the claim limitation uses the term “means” or “step” or a term used as a substitute for “means” that is a generic placeholder (also called a nonce term or a non-structural term having no specific structural meaning) for performing the claimed function;
(B) the term “means” or “step” or the generic placeholder is modified by functional language, typically, but not always linked by the transition word “for” (e.g., “means for”) or another linking word or phrase, such as “configured to” or “so that”; and
(C) the term “means” or “step” or the generic placeholder is not modified by sufficient structure, material, or acts for performing the claimed function.
Use of the word “means” (or “step”) in a claim with functional language creates a rebuttable presumption that the claim limitation is to be treated in accordance with 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph. The presumption that the claim limitation is interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is rebutted when the claim limitation recites sufficient structure, material, or acts to entirely perform the recited function.
Absence of the word “means” (or “step”) in a claim creates a rebuttable presumption that the claim limitation is not to be treated in accordance with 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph. The presumption that the claim limitation is not interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is rebutted when the claim limitation recites function without reciting sufficient structure, material or acts to entirely perform the recited function.
Claim limitations in this application that use the word “means” (or “step”) are being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, except as otherwise indicated in an Office action. Conversely, claim limitations in this application that do not use the word “means” (or “step”) are not being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, except as otherwise indicated in an Office action.
This application includes one or more claim limitations that do not use the word “means,” but are nonetheless being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, because the claim limitation(s) uses a generic placeholder that is coupled with functional language without reciting sufficient structure to perform the recited function and the generic placeholder is not preceded by a structural modifier. Such claim limitation(s) is/are: "logic device is configured to" in claim 2, “position adjustment selectors configured to” in claims 11, and 21.
Because this/these claim limitation(s) is/are being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, it/they is/are being interpreted to cover the corresponding structure described in the specification as performing the claimed function, and equivalents thereof.
If applicant does not intend to have this/these limitation(s) interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, applicant may: (1) amend the claim limitation(s) to avoid it/them being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph (e.g., by reciting sufficient structure to perform the claimed function); or (2) present a sufficient showing that the claim limitation(s) recite(s) sufficient structure to perform the claimed function so as to avoid it/them being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 101
35 U.S.C. 101 reads as follows:
Whoever invents or discovers any new and useful process, machine, manufacture, or composition of matter, or any new and useful improvement thereof, may obtain a patent therefor, subject to the conditions and requirements of this title.
Claims 2-21 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 101 because the claimed invention is directed to an abstract idea without significantly more.
As per claim 2
Step 1: The claim is directed to an apparatus as it recites (a system comprising).
Step 2A Prong 1: The claim is directed to an abstract idea of a mental process. The claim recites:
A system comprising:
a display for a mobile structure; and
a logic device configured render a docking user interface on the display, wherein the logic device is configured to:
monitor control signals provided to a navigation control system for the mobile structure, wherein the navigation control system to implements navigation maneuvers corresponding to the monitored control signals, and wherein the monitored control signals correspond to a demand for a linear and/or angular thrust to be generated by a propulsion system of the mobile structure, wherein the demand is generated based on a target velocity and a current velocity of the mobile structure; and
render the docking user interface based, at least in part, on the monitored control signals, wherein the docking user interface comprises a maneuvering guide comprising:
a mobile structure perimeter indicator, and
a thrust indicator indicating a maneuvering thrust magnitude and direction relative to an orientation of the mobile structure perimeter indicator.
The recited limitation, as drafted, is a process that, under its broadest reasonable interpretation, covers performance of the limitation in the mind or by hand or with pen and paper as this step fall within the mental process groupings of abstract ideas because it covers a concept performed in the human mind, including observation, evaluation, judgment, and opinion. See MPEP 2106.04(a)(2), subsection III. The mere nominal recitation of a logic device, and its unrecited processor, does not take the claim limitations out of the mental process grouping. Thus, the claim recites a mental process which is an abstract idea.
Step 2A Prong 2: Judicial exception is not integrated into a practical application. The claim recites the additional element of:
A system comprising:
a display for a mobile structure; and
a logic device configured render a docking user interface on the display, wherein the logic device is configured to:
monitor control signals provided to a navigation control system for the mobile structure, wherein the navigation control system to implements navigation maneuvers corresponding to the monitored control signals, and wherein the monitored control signals correspond to a demand for a linear and/or angular thrust to be generated by a propulsion system of the mobile structure, wherein the demand is generated based on a target velocity and a current velocity of the mobile structure; and
render the docking user interface based, at least in part, on the monitored control signals, wherein the docking user interface comprises a maneuvering guide comprising:
a mobile structure perimeter indicator, and
a thrust indicator indicating a maneuvering thrust magnitude and direction relative to an orientation of the mobile structure perimeter indicator.
The recited logic device is recited at a high level of generality and merely applies the exception using generic computer components to automate the abstract idea. Further, the instructions to monitor control signals (i.e., as a general means to monitor control signals), amount to mere data gathering, which is a form of insignificant extra-solution activity. Further, the instruction for display for a mobile structure, to render a docking user interface on the display, a mobile structure perimeter indicator, and a thrust indicator to indicate are also recited at a high level of generality (i.e., as a general means for display for a mobile structure, to render a docking user interface on the display, a mobile structure perimeter indicator, and a thrust indicator indicating a maneuvering thrust magnitude), and are similar to displaying information, which is a form of insignificant extra-solution activity. Accordingly, the additional limitation(s) do/does not integrate the abstract idea into a practical application because they do not impose any meaningful limits on practicing the abstract idea.
Step 2B: The claim does not include additional elements that are sufficient to amount to
significantly more than the judicial exception. As discussed above with respect to Step 2A Prong
2, the additional elements amount to no more than mere instructions using a generic processor to acquire and display data. Further the mere collection or receipt of data for the purposes of making determinations, such as formulating an understanding of a boat’s behavior, is also well understood and conventional in the art, as indicated in the following rejections under 103. For these reasons, claim 2 is not patent eligible under 35 U.S.C. § 101 because the claim does not include an inventive concept.
As per claims 3-11
These apparatus claims further define the abstract ideas of the mental processes illustrated in claim 2, they do not recite any additional elements or other limitations that transform the display of boat movement and the display information or in a particular format, and these elements are well-understood, routine and conventional in the art, as indicated in the following rejections under 103.
As per claim 12
Step 1: The claim is directed to a process as it recites (a method comprising).
Step 2A Prong 1: The claim is directed to an abstract idea of a mental process. The claim recites:
A method comprising:
monitoring, by a logic device, control signals provided to a navigation control system for a mobile structure, wherein the navigation control system implements navigation maneuvers corresponding to the monitored control signals, and wherein the monitored control signals correspond to a demand for a linear and/or angular thrust to be generated by a propulsion system of the mobile structure, and wherein the demand is generated based on a target velocity and a current velocity of the mobile structure; and
rendering a docking user interface based, at least in part, on the monitored control signals, wherein the docking user interface comprises a maneuvering guide comprising:
a mobile structure perimeter indicator, and
a thrust indicator indicating a maneuvering thrust magnitude and direction relative to an orientation of the mobile structure perimeter indicator.
The recited limitation, as drafted, is a process that, under its broadest reasonable interpretation, covers performance of the limitation in the mind or by hand or with pen and paper as this step fall within the mental process groupings of abstract ideas because it covers a concept performed in the human mind, including observation, evaluation, judgment, and opinion. See MPEP 2106.04(a)(2), subsection III. Thus, the claim recites a mental process which is an abstract idea.
Step 2A Prong 2: Judicial exception is not integrated into a practical application. The claim recites the additional element of:
A method comprising:
monitoring, by a logic device, control signals provided to a navigation control system for a mobile structure, wherein the navigation control system implements navigation maneuvers corresponding to the monitored control signals, and wherein the monitored control signals correspond to a demand for a linear and/or angular thrust to be generated by a propulsion system of the mobile structure, and wherein the demand is generated based on a target velocity and a current velocity of the mobile structure; and
rendering a docking user interface based, at least in part, on the monitored control signals, wherein the docking user interface comprises a maneuvering guide comprising:
a mobile structure perimeter indicator, and
a thrust indicator indicating a maneuvering thrust magnitude and direction relative to an orientation of the mobile structure perimeter indicator.
The instructions to monitor control signals (i.e., as a general means to monitor control signals), amount to mere data gathering, which is a form of insignificant extra-solution activity. Further, the instruction for a mobile structure perimeter indicator, and a thrust indicator to indicate are also recited at a high level of generality (i.e., as a general means for a mobile structure perimeter indicator, and a thrust indicator indicating a maneuvering thrust magnitude), and are similar to displaying information, which is a form of insignificant extra-solution activity. Accordingly, the additional limitation(s) do/does not integrate the abstract idea into a practical application because they do not impose any meaningful limits on practicing the abstract idea.
Step 2B: The claim does not include additional elements that are sufficient to amount to
significantly more than the judicial exception. As discussed above with respect to Step 2A Prong
2, the additional elements amount to no more than mere instructions to acquire data. Further the mere collection or receipt of data for the purposes of making determinations, such as formulating an understanding of a boat’s behavior, is also well understood and conventional in the art, as indicated in the following rejections under 103. For these reasons, claim 12 is not patent eligible under 35 U.S.C. § 101 because the claim does not include an inventive concept.
As per claims 13-21
These process claims further define the abstract ideas of the mental processes illustrated in claim 12, they do not recite any additional elements or other limitations that transform the display of boat movement and the display information or in a particular format, and these elements are well-understood, routine and conventional in the art, as indicated in the following rejections under 103.
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.
Claims 2, 4-5, 10, 12, 14-15, and 20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103 as being unpatentable over Duning et al., US-5209682-A, in view of Kaji, US-20100138083-A1, hereinafter referred to as Duning and Kaji.
As per claim 2
Duning discloses [a] system comprising: a display for a mobile structure (An optical display is provided in the area occupied by the ship operator, on which display are shown the angle which is formed between the direction of force and a reference direction, and the strength of the thrust – Duning Abstract);
a logic device configured render a docking user interface on the display, wherein the logic device is configured to (FIGS. 1-5 of the drawings, one display panel 52, which is installed in the area occupied by the ship operator, is shown several times – Duning Column 2 Lines 16-18):
monitor control signals provided to a navigation control system for the mobile structure (wherein signals indicative of the forces applied by each of said drive means are applied to said computer means and the resultant force on said ship is shown as a further symbol on said optical display means – Duning Claim 8);
render the docking user interface based, at least in part, on the monitored control signals, wherein the docking user interface comprises a maneuvering guide comprising (The symbol for each of the propelling devices on the liquid crystal display 1 is one of the two arrows 2 and 3, the symbol for the ship itself is the filled-in ship's outline 4, and the reference symbol for the ship is a ship's outline 5 – Duning Figs 1-5 (2, 3, 4, 5, 6) + Column 2 Lines 30-35):
a mobile structure perimeter indicator (The symbol for each of the propelling devices on the liquid crystal display 1 is one of the two arrows 2 and 3, the symbol for the ship itself is the filled-in ship's outline 4, and the reference symbol for the ship is a ship's outline 5 – Duning Figs 1-5 (2, 3, 4, 5, 6) + Column 2 Lines 30-35),
a thrust indicator indicating a maneuvering thrust magnitude and direction relative to an orientation of the mobile structure perimeter indicator (the two arrows 2 and 3, which are symbols of the propulsion units, point in the thrust direction and are not filled in, thus indicating neither a coupling or engagement state (heads not filled in) nor a force amount (bar presentation) in the shaft of the arrows, example of the display of an operating state, FIG. 2 shows a resulting motion of the ship, outline 4, relative to the reference symbol 5, and a thrust motion and a lateral displacement at less then full speed ahead, which can be traced back to the operating state of the propulsion units in accordance with the arrows 2 and. 3 – Duning Figs 1-5 (2, 3, 4, 5, 6) + Column 3 Lines 43-47 & Column 3 Lines 47-54).
Duning does not specifically disclose wherein the navigation control system implements navigation maneuvers corresponding to the monitored control signals, and wherein the monitored control signals correspond to a demand for a linear and/or angular thrust to be generated by a propulsion system of the mobile structure, and wherein the demand is generated based on a target velocity and a current velocity of the mobile structure.
However, Kaji teaches wherein the navigation control system implements navigation maneuvers corresponding to the monitored control signals, and wherein the monitored control signals correspond to a demand for a linear and/or angular thrust to be generated by a propulsion system of the mobile structure, and wherein the demand is generated based on a target velocity and a current velocity of the mobile structure (the marine vessel running controlling apparatus 20 acquires…target engine speed, marine vessel running controlling apparatus 20 provides the target values, including…target rotation speed, target value setting unit 22A of the second target value computing section 22 determines the forward/reverse direction target thrust (propulsive force) F.sub.dx=c.sub.x.times.L.sub.x in accordance with the forward/reverse direction inclination amount L.sub.x of the lever 7, determines the thrust coefficient K.sub.T…using the speed of the marine vessel 1 detected by the speed sensor 16…thrust coefficient K.sub.T to determine the target rotation speeds…target thrust F.sub.d , judges whether or not the forward drive speed (absolute value of the speed in the forward drive direction) exceeds a predetermined forward drive speed threshold (for example, 4 km/h) (step S3)… That is, the switching unit 23 selects the target values computed by the first target value computing section 21 and provides the selected values to the propulsion systems 10 to 12, engine is preferably computed as the target value related to the output of the propulsion system…a target speed – Kaji ¶62 & ¶87 & ¶101 & ¶112 & ¶116 & ¶138).
Duning discloses a speed and direction indicator for a ship. Kaji teaches a marine vessel maneuvering supporting apparatus used in a marine vessel which includes a propulsion system and a steering mechanism.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the invention of Duning, a speed and direction indicator for a ship, with a marine vessel maneuvering supporting apparatus used in a marine vessel which includes a propulsion system and a steering mechanism, as taught by Kaji, with a reasonable expectation of success to so that an uncomfortable feeling can thereby be prevented and so that marine vessel maneuvering for avoiding the obstacle can thereby be performed easily, see Kaji ¶22 & ¶27 for details.
As per claim 4
Duning further discloses wherein: the thrust indicator is a translational thrust indicator; and the maneuvering thrust magnitude and direction comprise a translational maneuvering thrust magnitude and direction (FIG. 3 symbolizes the translatory ship's propulsion…the arrows 2 and 3 point in the same direction towards the front, indicating that the jets emerge in the same direction for the translatory forward motion of the ship, FIG. 2 shows a resulting motion of the ship, outline 4, relative to the reference symbol 5, and a thrust motion and a lateral displacement at less then full speed ahead, which can be traced back to the operating state of the propulsion units in accordance with the arrows 2 and. 3 – Duning Figs 1-5 (2, 3, 4, 5, 6) + Column 3 Line 68- Column 4 Line 3 & Column 3 Lines 47-54).
As per claim 5
Duning further discloses wherein: the thrust indicator is a rotational thrust indicator; and the maneuvering thrust magnitude and direction comprise a rotational maneuvering thrust magnitude and direction (FIG. 2 shows a resulting motion of the ship, outline 4, relative to the reference symbol 5, and a thrust motion and a lateral displacement at less then full speed ahead, which can be traced back to the operating state of the propulsion units in accordance with the arrows 2 and. 3 – Duning Figs 1-5 (2, 3, 4, 5, 6) + Column 3 Lines 47-54).
As per claim 10
Duning further discloses wherein the docking user interface comprises one or more of: a manual control mode indicator; a navigation assist indicator; a perimeter ranging sensor indicator; and/or a virtual bumper perimeter thickness indicator (The symbol for each of the propelling devices on the liquid crystal display 1 is one of the two arrows 2 and 3, the symbol for the ship itself is the filled-in ship's outline 4, and the reference symbol for the ship is a ship's outline 5 – Duning Figs 1-5 (2, 3, 4, 5, 6) + Column 2 Lines 30-35).
Duning does not specifically disclose the monitored control signals are generated using a joystick.
However, Kaji teaches the monitored control signals are generated using a joystick (rotation operational section may be disposed integral to the lever and be configured to be rotatable around an axis direction of the lever. A joystick type operational unit can thereby be configured, operator's operations of the lever 7 and actions of the bow thruster 10 and the outboard motors 11 and 12 in the parallel movement mode – Kaji ¶34 & ¶99).
Duning discloses a speed and direction indicator for a ship. Kaji teaches a marine vessel maneuvering supporting apparatus used in a marine vessel which includes a propulsion system and a steering mechanism.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the invention of Duning, a speed and direction indicator for a ship, with a marine vessel maneuvering supporting apparatus used in a marine vessel which includes a propulsion system and a steering mechanism, as taught by Kaji, with a reasonable expectation of success to so that an uncomfortable feeling can thereby be prevented and so that marine vessel maneuvering for avoiding the obstacle can thereby be performed easily, see Kaji ¶22 & ¶27 for details.
As per claim 12
Duning discloses [a] method comprising: monitoring, by a logic device, control signals provided to a navigation control system for a mobile structure (wherein signals indicative of the forces applied by each of said drive means are applied to said computer means and the resultant force on said ship is shown as a further symbol on said optical display means – Duning Claim 8);
rendering a docking user interface based, at least in part, on the monitored control signals, wherein the docking user interface comprises a maneuvering guide comprising (The symbol for each of the propelling devices on the liquid crystal display 1 is one of the two arrows 2 and 3, the symbol for the ship itself is the filled-in ship's outline 4, and the reference symbol for the ship is a ship's outline 5 – Duning Figs 1-5 (2, 3, 4, 5, 6) + Column 2 Lines 30-35):
a mobile structure perimeter indicator (The symbol for each of the propelling devices on the liquid crystal display 1 is one of the two arrows 2 and 3, the symbol for the ship itself is the filled-in ship's outline 4, and the reference symbol for the ship is a ship's outline 5 – Duning Figs 1-5 (2, 3, 4, 5, 6) + Column 2 Lines 30-35),
a thrust indicator indicating a maneuvering thrust magnitude and direction relative to an orientation of the mobile structure perimeter indicator (the two arrows 2 and 3, which are symbols of the propulsion units, point in the thrust direction and are not filled in, thus indicating neither a coupling or engagement state (heads not filled in) nor a force amount (bar presentation) in the shaft of the arrows, example of the display of an operating state, FIG. 2 shows a resulting motion of the ship, outline 4, relative to the reference symbol 5, and a thrust motion and a lateral displacement at less then full speed ahead, which can be traced back to the operating state of the propulsion units in accordance with the arrows 2 and. 3 – Duning Figs 1-5 (2, 3, 4, 5, 6) + Column 3 Lines 43-47 & Column 3 Lines 47-54).
Duning does not specifically disclose wherein the navigation control system implements navigation maneuvers corresponding to the monitored control signals, and wherein the monitored control signals correspond to a demand for a linear and/or angular thrust to be generated by a propulsion system of the mobile structure, and wherein the demand is generated based on a target velocity and a current velocity of the mobile structure.
However, Kaji teaches wherein the navigation control system implements navigation maneuvers corresponding to the monitored control signals, and wherein the monitored control signals correspond to a demand for a linear and/or angular thrust to be generated by a propulsion system of the mobile structure, and wherein the demand is generated based on a target velocity and a current velocity of the mobile structure (the marine vessel running controlling apparatus 20 acquires…target engine speed, marine vessel running controlling apparatus 20 provides the target values, including…target rotation speed, target value setting unit 22A of the second target value computing section 22 determines the forward/reverse direction target thrust (propulsive force) F.sub.dx=c.sub.x.times.L.sub.x in accordance with the forward/reverse direction inclination amount L.sub.x of the lever 7, determines the thrust coefficient K.sub.T…using the speed of the marine vessel 1 detected by the speed sensor 16…thrust coefficient K.sub.T to determine the target rotation speeds…target thrust F.sub.d , judges whether or not the forward drive speed (absolute value of the speed in the forward drive direction) exceeds a predetermined forward drive speed threshold (for example, 4 km/h) (step S3)… That is, the switching unit 23 selects the target values computed by the first target value computing section 21 and provides the selected values to the propulsion systems 10 to 12, engine is preferably computed as the target value related to the output of the propulsion system…a target speed – Kaji ¶62 & ¶87 & ¶101 & ¶112 & ¶116 & ¶138).
Duning discloses a speed and direction indicator for a ship. Kaji teaches a marine vessel maneuvering supporting apparatus used in a marine vessel which includes a propulsion system and a steering mechanism.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the invention of Duning, a speed and direction indicator for a ship, with a marine vessel maneuvering supporting apparatus used in a marine vessel which includes a propulsion system and a steering mechanism, as taught by Kaji, with a reasonable expectation of success to so that an uncomfortable feeling can thereby be prevented and so that marine vessel maneuvering for avoiding the obstacle can thereby be performed easily, see Kaji ¶22 & ¶27 for details.
As per claim 14
Duning further discloses wherein: the thrust indicator is a translational thrust indicator; and the maneuvering thrust magnitude and direction comprise a translational maneuvering thrust magnitude and direction (FIG. 3 symbolizes the translatory ship's propulsion…the arrows 2 and 3 point in the same direction towards the front, indicating that the jets emerge in the same direction for the translatory forward motion of the ship, FIG. 2 shows a resulting motion of the ship, outline 4, relative to the reference symbol 5, and a thrust motion and a lateral displacement at less then full speed ahead, which can be traced back to the operating state of the propulsion units in accordance with the arrows 2 and. 3 – Duning Figs 1-5 (2, 3, 4, 5, 6) + Column 3 Line 68- Column 4 Line 3 & Column 3 Lines 47-54).
As per claim 15
Duning further discloses wherein: the thrust indicator is a rotational thrust indicator; and the maneuvering thrust magnitude and direction comprise a rotational maneuvering thrust magnitude and direction (FIG. 2 shows a resulting motion of the ship, outline 4, relative to the reference symbol 5, and a thrust motion and a lateral displacement at less then full speed ahead, which can be traced back to the operating state of the propulsion units in accordance with the arrows 2 and. 3 – Duning Figs 1-5 (2, 3, 4, 5, 6) + Column 3 Lines 47-54).
As per claim 20
Duning further discloses wherein the docking user interface comprises one or more of: a manual control mode indicator; a navigation assist indicator; a perimeter ranging sensor indicator; and/or a virtual bumper perimeter thickness indicator (The symbol for each of the propelling devices on the liquid crystal display 1 is one of the two arrows 2 and 3, the symbol for the ship itself is the filled-in ship's outline 4, and the reference symbol for the ship is a ship's outline 5 – Duning Figs 1-5 (2, 3, 4, 5, 6) + Column 2 Lines 30-35).
Duning does not specifically disclose the monitored control signals are generated using a joystick.
However, Kaji teaches the monitored control signals are generated using a joystick (rotation operational section may be disposed integral to the lever and be configured to be rotatable around an axis direction of the lever. A joystick type operational unit can thereby be configured, operator's operations of the lever 7 and actions of the bow thruster 10 and the outboard motors 11 and 12 in the parallel movement mode – Kaji ¶34 & ¶99).
Duning discloses a speed and direction indicator for a ship. Kaji teaches a marine vessel maneuvering supporting apparatus used in a marine vessel which includes a propulsion system and a steering mechanism.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the invention of Duning, a speed and direction indicator for a ship, with a marine vessel maneuvering supporting apparatus used in a marine vessel which includes a propulsion system and a steering mechanism, as taught by Kaji, with a reasonable expectation of success to so that an uncomfortable feeling can thereby be prevented and so that marine vessel maneuvering for avoiding the obstacle can thereby be performed easily, see Kaji ¶22 & ¶27 for details.
Claims 3 and 13 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103 as being unpatentable over Duning, and Kaji, as per claims 2, and 12, respectively, and further in view of Reiley et al., US-20180173237-A1, and Dohi et al., US-9767534-B2, hereinafter referred to as Reiley and Dohi.
As per claim 3
Duning further discloses wherein: the thrust indicator [that operates during] a docking assist navigation mode (the two arrows 2 and 3, which are symbols of the propulsion units, point in the thrust direction and are not filled in, thus indicating neither a coupling or engagement state (heads not filled in) nor a force amount (bar presentation) in the shaft of the arrows, example of the display of an operating state, FIG. 2 shows a resulting motion of the ship, outline 4, relative to the reference symbol 5, and a thrust motion and a lateral displacement at less then full speed ahead, which can be traced back to the operating state of the propulsion units in accordance with the arrows 2 and. 3 – Duning Figs 1-5 (2, 3, 4, 5, 6) + Column 3 Lines 43-47 & Column 3 Lines 47-54).
Duning does not specifically disclose [display element] is rendered according to a first render palette while the mobile structure is piloted according to a manual navigation mode and according to a second render palette while the mobile structure is piloted according to [an autonomous control mode].
However, Reiley teaches [display element] is rendered according to a first render palette while the mobile structure is piloted according to a manual navigation mode and according to a second render palette while the mobile structure is piloted according to [an autonomous control mode] (the autonomous vehicle can transition a background rendered on each display: to a blue hue when entering a fully-autonomous driving mode; to an orange hue when entering a semi-autonomous driving mode; and to a white hue when entering a fully-manual driving mode - Reiley ¶31).
Duning discloses a speed and direction indicator for a ship. Reiley teaches a method for communicating state, intent, and context of an autonomous vehicle.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the invention of Duning, a speed and direction indicator for a ship, with a method for communicating state, intent, and context of an autonomous vehicle, as taught by Reiley, with a reasonable expectation of success for improving the understanding of the autonomous vehicle, and understanding of the scene around the autonomous vehicle for these drivers, see Reiley ¶15 for details, and because the design choice principle of changing the symbology color of the display can be applied to a thrust indicator on a digital display on a boat.
Duning does not specifically disclose the logic device is further configured to determine an aggregate external disturbance acting on the mobile structure; and the maneuvering guide further comprises an external disturbance indicator configured to indicate a direction and magnitude of an aggregate external disturbance acting on the mobile structure.
However, Dobi teaches the logic device is further configured to determine an aggregate external disturbance acting on the mobile structure; and the maneuvering guide further comprises an external disturbance indicator configured to indicate a direction and magnitude of an aggregate external disturbance acting on the mobile structure (includes an observation data acquiring module configured to acquire observation data obtained by observing at least one of meteorological phenomena and hydrographic phenomena, along with information of observed locations of the observation data, in FIG. 3, between the first and second reference lines 69 and 70, observation data display…indicating a wind direction and a wind speed are displayed on the left and right sides of the allowed off-course area 68 - Dobi Column 2 Lines 29-33 & Column 8 Lines 48-52).
Duning discloses a speed and direction indicator for a ship. Dobi teaches a situation display device which acquires and displays observation data obtained by observing at least one of meteorological and hydrographic phenomena.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the invention of Duning, a speed and direction indicator for a ship, with a situation display device which acquires and displays observation data obtained by observing at least one of meteorological and hydrographic phenomena, as taught by Dobi, with a reasonable expectation of success to improve such conventional configurations in view of tidily displaying the meteorological and hydrographic information, see Dobi Column 2 Lines 17-20 for details.
As per claim 13
Duning further discloses wherein: the thrust indicator [that operates during] a docking assist navigation mode (the two arrows 2 and 3, which are symbols of the propulsion units, point in the thrust direction and are not filled in, thus indicating neither a coupling or engagement state (heads not filled in) nor a force amount (bar presentation) in the shaft of the arrows, example of the display of an operating state, FIG. 2 shows a resulting motion of the ship, outline 4, relative to the reference symbol 5, and a thrust motion and a lateral displacement at less then full speed ahead, which can be traced back to the operating state of the propulsion units in accordance with the arrows 2 and. 3 – Duning Figs 1-5 (2, 3, 4, 5, 6) + Column 3 Lines 43-47 & Column 3 Lines 47-54).
Duning does not specifically disclose [display element] is rendered according to a first render palette while the mobile structure is piloted according to a manual navigation mode and according to a second render palette while the mobile structure is piloted according to [an autonomous control mode].
However, Reiley teaches [display element] is rendered according to a first render palette while the mobile structure is piloted according to a manual navigation mode and according to a second render palette while the mobile structure is piloted according to [an autonomous control mode] (the autonomous vehicle can transition a background rendered on each display: to a blue hue when entering a fully-autonomous driving mode; to an orange hue when entering a semi-autonomous driving mode; and to a white hue when entering a fully-manual driving mode - Reiley ¶31).
Duning discloses a speed and direction indicator for a ship. Reiley teaches a method for communicating state, intent, and context of an autonomous vehicle.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the invention of Duning, a speed and direction indicator for a ship, with a method for communicating state, intent, and context of an autonomous vehicle, as taught by Reiley, with a reasonable expectation of success for improving the understanding of the autonomous vehicle, and understanding of the scene around the autonomous vehicle for these drivers, see Reiley ¶15 for details, and because the design choice principle of changing the symbology color of the display can be applied to a thrust indicator on a digital display on a boat.
Duning does not specifically disclose the method further comprises determining by the logic device an aggregate external disturbance acting on the mobile structure; and the maneuvering guide further comprises an external disturbance indicator configured indicating a direction and magnitude of an aggregate external disturbance acting on the mobile structure.
However, Dobi teaches the method further comprises determining by the logic device an aggregate external disturbance acting on the mobile structure; and the maneuvering guide further comprises an external disturbance indicator configured indicating a direction and magnitude of an aggregate external disturbance acting on the mobile structure (includes an observation data acquiring module configured to acquire observation data obtained by observing at least one of meteorological phenomena and hydrographic phenomena, along with information of observed locations of the observation data, in FIG. 3, between the first and second reference lines 69 and 70, observation data display…indicating a wind direction and a wind speed are displayed on the left and right sides of the allowed off-course area 68 - Dobi Column 2 Lines 29-33 & Column 8 Lines 48-52).
Duning discloses a speed and direction indicator for a ship. Dobi teaches a situation display device which acquires and displays observation data obtained by observing at least one of meteorological and hydrographic phenomena.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the invention of Duning, a speed and direction indicator for a ship, with a situation display device which acquires and displays observation data obtained by observing at least one of meteorological and hydrographic phenomena, as taught by Dobi, with a reasonable expectation of success to improve such conventional configurations in view of tidily displaying the meteorological and hydrographic information, see Dobi Column 2 Lines 17-20 for details.
Claims 6, 11, 16, and 21 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103 as being unpatentable over Duning, and Kaji, as per claims 2, and 12, respectively, and further in view of Suzuki et al., US-20160096610-A1, hereinafter referred to as Suzuki.
As per claim 6
Duning does not specifically disclose wherein the maneuvering guide comprises: a set of thrust scale markers centered on the mobile structure perimeter indicator.
However, Suzuki teaches wherein the maneuvering guide comprises: a set of thrust scale markers centered on the mobile structure perimeter indicator (operation screens 82a and 82b (see FIGS. 3 and 6) configured to operate the movement of the boat 1 are displayed on the touch panel 82 of the display device 8. The thrust of the thrusters 7a and 7b can be manipulated through the operation screens 82a and 82b. The thrusters 7a and 7b can be turned through the operation screens 82a and 82b, user touches the move key 822 by an operation object 10…move key 822 is arranged at the center of boat display…input the movement direction and output (propulsion power) of the boat 1 - Suzuki ¶51 & ¶57 - Examiner reasons that in this system, the filled in arrows would take the place of the arrows in Fig 4 and Fig 5 of Duning to indicate thrust).
Duning discloses a speed and direction indicator for a ship. Suzuki teaches a boat maneuvering system.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the invention of Duning, a speed and direction indicator for a ship, with a boat maneuvering system, as taught by Suzuki, with a reasonable expectation of success so that the intent of the operation of the user can be easily confirmed by the first key and the second key or so that the user can easily maneuver the boat by tilting and operating the display device, see Suzuki ¶21 & ¶22 for details.
As per claim 11
Duning does not specifically disclose wherein the docking user interface comprises: a plurality of position adjustment selectors configured to be selected to adjust a position of the mobile structure by a preset fixed distance.
However, Suzuki teaches wherein the docking user interface comprises: a plurality of position adjustment selectors configured to be selected to adjust a position of the mobile structure by a preset fixed distance (operation screens 82a and 82b (see FIGS. 3 and 6) configured to operate the movement of the boat 1 are displayed on the touch panel 82 of the display device 8. The thrust of the thrusters 7a and 7b can be manipulated through the operation screens 82a and 82b. The thrusters 7a and 7b can be turned through the operation screens 82a and 82b, user touches the move key 822 by an operation object 10…move key 822 is arranged at the center of boat display…input the movement direction and output (propulsion power) of the boat 1 - Suzuki ¶51 & ¶57 - Examiner reasons that in this system, the filled in arrows would take the place of the arrows in Fig 4 and Fig 5 of Duning to indicate thrust).
Duning discloses a speed and direction indicator for a ship. Suzuki teaches a boat maneuvering system.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the invention of Duning, a speed and direction indicator for a ship, with a boat maneuvering system, as taught by Suzuki, with a reasonable expectation of success so that the intent of the operation of the user can be easily confirmed by the first key and the second key or so that the user can easily maneuver the boat by tilting and operating the display device, see Suzuki ¶21 & ¶22 for details.
As per claim 16
Duning does not specifically disclose wherein the maneuvering guide comprises: a set of thrust scale markers centered on the mobile structure perimeter indicator.
However, Suzuki teaches wherein the maneuvering guide comprises: a set of thrust scale markers centered on the mobile structure perimeter indicator (operation screens 82a and 82b (see FIGS. 3 and 6) configured to operate the movement of the boat 1 are displayed on the touch panel 82 of the display device 8. The thrust of the thrusters 7a and 7b can be manipulated through the operation screens 82a and 82b. The thrusters 7a and 7b can be turned through the operation screens 82a and 82b, user touches the move key 822 by an operation object 10…move key 822 is arranged at the center of boat display…input the movement direction and output (propulsion power) of the boat 1 - Suzuki ¶51 & ¶57 - Examiner reasons that in this system, the filled in arrows would take the place of the arrows in Fig 4 and Fig 5 of Duning to indicate thrust).
Duning discloses a speed and direction indicator for a ship. Suzuki teaches a boat maneuvering system.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the invention of Duning, a speed and direction indicator for a ship, with a boat maneuvering system, as taught by Suzuki, with a reasonable expectation of success so that the intent of the operation of the user can be easily confirmed by the first key and the second key or so that the user can easily maneuver the boat by tilting and operating the display device, see Suzuki ¶21 & ¶22 for details.
As per claim 21
Duning does not specifically disclose wherein the docking user interface comprises: a plurality of position adjustment selectors configured to be selected to adjust a position of the mobile structure by a preset fixed distance.
However, Suzuki teaches wherein the docking user interface comprises: a plurality of position adjustment selectors configured to be selected to adjust a position of the mobile structure by a preset fixed distance (operation screens 82a and 82b (see FIGS. 3 and 6) configured to operate the movement of the boat 1 are displayed on the touch panel 82 of the display device 8. The thrust of the thrusters 7a and 7b can be manipulated through the operation screens 82a and 82b. The thrusters 7a and 7b can be turned through the operation screens 82a and 82b, user touches the move key 822 by an operation object 10…move key 822 is arranged at the center of boat display…input the movement direction and output (propulsion power) of the boat 1 - Suzuki ¶51 & ¶57 - Examiner reasons that in this system, the filled in arrows would take the place of the arrows in Fig 4 and Fig 5 of Duning to indicate thrust).
Duning discloses a speed and direction indicator for a ship. Suzuki teaches a boat maneuvering system.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the invention of Duning, a speed and direction indicator for a ship, with a boat maneuvering system, as taught by Suzuki, with a reasonable expectation of success so that the intent of the operation of the user can be easily confirmed by the first key and the second key or so that the user can easily maneuver the boat by tilting and operating the display device, see Suzuki ¶21 & ¶22 for details.
Claims 7 and 17 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103 as being unpatentable over Duning, and Kaji, as per claims 2, and 12, respectively, and further in view of Nickel et al., US-20160077199-A1, hereinafter referred to as Nickel.
As per claim 7
Duning does not specifically disclose wherein the maneuvering guide comprises: a virtual bumper perimeter indicator disposed about the mobile structure perimeter indicator and corresponding to a safety perimeter for the mobile structure; and a virtual bumper perimeter intrusion indicator disposed substantially within the virtual bumper perimeter indicator.
However, Nickel teaches wherein the maneuvering guide comprises: a virtual bumper perimeter indicator disposed about the mobile structure perimeter indicator and corresponding to a safety perimeter for the mobile structure; and a virtual bumper perimeter intrusion indicator disposed substantially within the virtual bumper perimeter indicator (one or more marine electronics devices may establish a critical zone, a warning zone, and/or a safe zone for the marine environment, critical zone may have the smallest area of the alert zones, and may be the zone that is most immediately proximate to the vessel…portions of the depth line positioned within the critical zone may represent parts of the underwater floor that are more likely to collide with the vessel when compared to portions of the depth line positioned outside of the critical zone, safe zone may be a substantially rectangular area in front of and below the vessel…safe zone may have a boundary that is defined by a screen forward range and a screen depth. The screen forward range and screen depth may each be defined as the range and depth of the marine environment proximate to the vessel…vessel) that may be displayed by the one or more marine electronics devices (e.g., via a display element 230 of FIG. 2) - Nickel Fig 3A (310, 346, 346, 336) + ¶33 & ¶34 & ¶42).
Duning discloses a speed and direction indicator for a ship. Nickel teaches alert zones for a marine environment.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the invention of Duning, a speed and direction indicator for a ship, with alert zones for a marine environment, as taught by Nickel, with a reasonable expectation of success to provide one or more alerts if at least a portion of the depth line is positioned within the one or more alert zones and to improve display characteristics, data, and/or images, see Nickel ¶6 & ¶93 for details.
As per claim 17
Duning does not specifically disclose wherein the maneuvering guide comprises: a virtual bumper perimeter indicator disposed about the mobile structure perimeter indicator and corresponding to a safety perimeter for the mobile structure; and a virtual bumper perimeter intrusion indicator disposed substantially within the virtual bumper perimeter indicator.
However, Nickel teaches wherein the maneuvering guide comprises: a virtual bumper perimeter indicator disposed about the mobile structure perimeter indicator and corresponding to a safety perimeter for the mobile structure; and a virtual bumper perimeter intrusion indicator disposed substantially within the virtual bumper perimeter indicator (one or more marine electronics devices may establish a critical zone, a warning zone, and/or a safe zone for the marine environment, critical zone may have the smallest area of the alert zones, and may be the zone that is most immediately proximate to the vessel…portions of the depth line positioned within the critical zone may represent parts of the underwater floor that are more likely to collide with the vessel when compared to portions of the depth line positioned outside of the critical zone, safe zone may be a substantially rectangular area in front of and below the vessel…safe zone may have a boundary that is defined by a screen forward range and a screen depth. The screen forward range and screen depth may each be defined as the range and depth of the marine environment proximate to the vessel…vessel) that may be displayed by the one or more marine electronics devices (e.g., via a display element 230 of FIG. 2) - Nickel Fig 3A (310, 346, 346, 336) + ¶33 & ¶34 & ¶42).
Duning discloses a speed and direction indicator for a ship. Nickel teaches alert zones for a marine environment.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the invention of Duning, a speed and direction indicator for a ship, with alert zones for a marine environment, as taught by Nickel, with a reasonable expectation of success to provide one or more alerts if at least a portion of the depth line is positioned within the one or more alert zones and to improve display characteristics, data, and/or images, see Nickel ¶6 & ¶93 for details.
Claims 8 and 18 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103 as being unpatentable over Duning, and Kaji, as per claims 2, and 12, respectively, and further in view of Nickel, and Stokes et al., WO-2016065088-A2, and hereinafter referred to as Stokes (Translated by Espacenet).
As per claim 8
Duning does not specifically disclose wherein: the maneuvering guide comprises an obstruction map generated, at least in part, on perimeter sensor data; the obstruction map comprises one or more navigation hazards, as the maneuvering thrust is being generated by the navigation control system.
However, Nickel teaches wherein: the maneuvering guide comprises an obstruction map generated, at least in part, on perimeter sensor data; the obstruction map comprises one or more navigation hazards, as the maneuvering thrust is being generated by the navigation control system (navigation chart display may also display a line in the direction of travel of the vessel, receive sonar data from a transducer array disposed on the vessel… analyze the received sonar data to determine a depth line, wherein the depth line is a representation of one or more depths of an underwater floor of the marine environment; and provide one or more alerts if at least a portion of the depth line is positioned within the one or more alert zones - Nickel Fig 3A (310, 346, 346, 336) + ¶70 & Claim 1).
Duning discloses a speed and direction indicator for a ship. Nickel teaches alert zones for a marine environment.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the invention of Duning, a speed and direction indicator for a ship, with alert zones for a marine environment, as taught by Nickel, with a reasonable expectation of success to provide one or more alerts if at least a portion of the depth line is positioned within the one or more alert zones and to improve display characteristics, data, and/or images, see Nickel ¶6 & ¶93 for details.
Duning does not specifically disclose the thrust indicator is displayed on top of the obstruction map, beneath the obstruction map, and/or translucent relative to the obstruction map [as the maneuvering thrust is being generated by the navigation control system].
However, Stokes teaches the thrust indicator is displayed on top of the obstruction map, beneath the obstruction map, and/or translucent relative to the obstruction map [as the maneuvering thrust is being generated by the navigation control system] (speed 2332 of mobile structure 101, potential hazards related to feature 2330, geographic area 2308 near mobile structure 101 may correspond to "spoil area" indicative of an edge of a channel, sediments and/or contents in the water…Feature 2310 may correspond to a bridge, a shipping lane, a gas line, and/or another type of chart feature indicating a possibly hazardous situation that would typically require detailed navigation and/or other type of user or autopilot interaction to address safely - Stokes Page 27 Line 37 & Page 27 Lines 45-46 & Page 27 Lines 23-31).
Duning discloses a speed and direction indicator for a ship. Stokes teaches a method for providing enhanced sonar images.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the invention of Duning, a speed and direction indicator for a ship, with a method for providing enhanced sonar images, as taught by Stokes, with a reasonable expectation of success for providing information through recognizable imagery for operating a watercraft, see Stokes Page 1 Lines 40-41 for details.
As per claim 18
Duning does not specifically disclose wherein: the maneuvering guide comprises an obstruction map generated, at least in part, on perimeter sensor data; the obstruction map comprises one or more navigation hazards, as the maneuvering thrust is being generated by the navigation control system.
However, Nickel teaches wherein: the maneuvering guide comprises an obstruction map generated, at least in part, on perimeter sensor data; the obstruction map comprises one or more navigation hazards, as the maneuvering thrust is being generated by the navigation control system (navigation chart display may also display a line in the direction of travel of the vessel, receive sonar data from a transducer array disposed on the vessel… analyze the received sonar data to determine a depth line, wherein the depth line is a representation of one or more depths of an underwater floor of the marine environment; and provide one or more alerts if at least a portion of the depth line is positioned within the one or more alert zones - Nickel Fig 3A (310, 346, 346, 336) + ¶70 & Claim 1).
Duning discloses a speed and direction indicator for a ship. Nickel teaches alert zones for a marine environment.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the invention of Duning, a speed and direction indicator for a ship, with alert zones for a marine environment, as taught by Nickel, with a reasonable expectation of success to provide one or more alerts if at least a portion of the depth line is positioned within the one or more alert zones and to improve display characteristics, data, and/or images, see Nickel ¶6 & ¶93 for details.
Duning does not specifically disclose the thrust indicator is displayed on top of the obstruction map, beneath the obstruction map, and/or translucent relative to the obstruction map [as the maneuvering thrust is being generated by the navigation control system].
However, Stokes teaches the thrust indicator is displayed on top of the obstruction map, beneath the obstruction map, and/or translucent relative to the obstruction map [as the maneuvering thrust is being generated by the navigation control system] (speed 2332 of mobile structure 101, potential hazards related to feature 2330, geographic area 2308 near mobile structure 101 may correspond to "spoil area" indicative of an edge of a channel, sediments and/or contents in the water…Feature 2310 may correspond to a bridge, a shipping lane, a gas line, and/or another type of chart feature indicating a possibly hazardous situation that would typically require detailed navigation and/or other type of user or autopilot interaction to address safely - Stokes Page 27 Line 37 & Page 27 Lines 45-46 & Page 27 Lines 23-31).
Duning discloses a speed and direction indicator for a ship. Stokes teaches a method for providing enhanced sonar images.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the invention of Duning, a speed and direction indicator for a ship, with a method for providing enhanced sonar images, as taught by Stokes, with a reasonable expectation of success for providing information through recognizable imagery for operating a watercraft, see Stokes Page 1 Lines 40-41 for details.
Claims 9 and 19 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103 as being unpatentable over Duning, and Kaji, as per claims 2, and 12, respectively, and further in view of Hubbell et al., US-9227568-B1, hereinafter referred to as Hubbell.
As per claim 9
Duning does not specifically disclose wherein the docking user interface comprises: a plurality of video feeds positioned in the docking user interface in accordance with a user selected geospatial video feed arrangement.
However, Hubbell teaches wherein the docking user interface comprises: a plurality of video feeds positioned in the docking user interface in accordance with a user selected geospatial video feed arrangement (to assist with boat docking and maneuvering, other touchscreen icons may selectively activate video cameras and other integrated situation assessment tools of the SCM, touchscreen control panel 80 and video display 81 are integrated with the dash of the vehicle…input from video cameras A and B can be displayed on the screen side-by-side, as shown in FIG. 15; or the driver can override input and show only the feed from one selected camera. - Hubbell Fig. 33 (10) + Column 9 Lines 26-27 & Column 15 Lines 4-6 & Column 16 Lines 16-22).
Duning discloses a speed and direction indicator for a ship. Hubbell teaches a system and method for enhancing driver situational awareness in a transportation vehicle.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the invention of Duning, a speed and direction indicator for a ship, with a system and method for enhancing driver situational awareness in a transportation vehicle, as taught by Hubbell, with a reasonable expectation of success to assist with boat docking and maneuvering, see Hubbell Column 9 Lines 26-27 for details.
As per claim 19
Duning does not specifically disclose wherein the docking user interface comprises: a plurality of video feeds positioned in the docking user interface in accordance with a user selected geospatial video feed arrangement.
However, Hubbell teaches wherein the docking user interface comprises: a plurality of video feeds positioned in the docking user interface in accordance with a user selected geospatial video feed arrangement (to assist with boat docking and maneuvering, other touchscreen icons may selectively activate video cameras and other integrated situation assessment tools of the SCM, touchscreen control panel 80 and video display 81 are integrated with the dash of the vehicle…input from video cameras A and B can be displayed on the screen side-by-side, as shown in FIG. 15; or the driver can override input and show only the feed from one selected camera. - Hubbell Fig. 33 (10) + Column 9 Lines 26-27 & Column 15 Lines 4-6 & Column 16 Lines 16-22).
Duning discloses a speed and direction indicator for a ship. Hubbell teaches a system and method for enhancing driver situational awareness in a transportation vehicle.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the invention of Duning, a speed and direction indicator for a ship, with a system and method for enhancing driver situational awareness in a transportation vehicle, as taught by Hubbell, with a reasonable expectation of success to assist with boat docking and maneuvering, see Hubbell Column 9 Lines 26-27 for details.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to FARIS ASIM SHAIKH whose telephone number is (571)272-6426. The examiner can normally be reached 8:00-5:30 M-F EST.
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 S. 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.
/F.A.S./Examiner, Art Unit 3668
/Fadey S. Jabr/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3668
Prosecution Insights