DETAILED ACTION
Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status
The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
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)(1) the claimed invention was patented, described in a printed publication, or in public use, on sale, or otherwise available to the public before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claims 1-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by US 2001/0002126 to Rosenberg et al. (hereinafter Rosenberg).
Regarding claim 1, an operating device comprising:
an operating member configured to be tiltably operated (e.g., object 34, such as a joystick, in ¶ 146 and Fig. 8); and
a control circuit configured (e.g., host processor 16 and/or local microprocessor 26 in Fig. 1) to:
control the operating member, and restrict at least either a tiltable direction or a tiltable angle of the operating member according to a position of the operating member to prevent displacement of the operating member in either the tiltable direction or the tiltable angle (e.g., slotted yoke 182a is rigidly coupled to shaft 189a and slotted yoke 182b is rigidly coupled to shaft 189b in ¶¶ 144-145, when forces are applied to the shafts, the joystick movement is restricted accordingly), wherein the restriction is based on a displacement angle with respect to a positive Z-axis of the operating member from a central position corresponding to the positive Z-axis (e.g., forces may be applied via actuators 188a and 188b based on position of the joystick, as shown graphically in Figs. 10a-10c and 11a-11c; see also ¶¶ 144-146 and 163-168).
Regarding claim 2, Rosenberg teaches wherein the control circuit is further configured to determine the restriction of either the tiltable direction or the tiltable angle of the operating member based on which one of a plurality of areas in an operable range of the operating member includes the position of the operating member (e.g., in Fig. 10c, a force is applied equally in magnitude to the positive direction of displacement and the negative direction of displacement, such that each side of the graph is an equal area having equal restriction on the tiltable direction and/or tiltable angle).
Regarding claim 3, Rosenberg teaches wherein at least some of the plurality of areas have an identical size and an identical geometry (e.g., in Fig. 10c, a force is applied equally in magnitude to the positive direction of displacement and the negative direction of displacement).
Regarding claim 4, Rosenberg teaches wherein: the operating device is connected with an information processing apparatus; and
upon receipt, by the control circuit, of instruction information specifying an operable direction in each of the plurality of areas from the information processing apparatus, the control circuit is configured to restrict the tiltable direction of the operating member according to a direction specified by the instruction information regarding an area that includes the position of the operating member among the plurality of areas (e.g., in Fig. 10c, a force is applied equally in magnitude to the positive direction of displacement and the negative direction of displacement).
Regarding claims 5, 12, 17, and 20, Rosenberg teaches an operating device comprising:
an operating member configured to be tiltably operated (e.g., object 34, such as a joystick, in ¶ 146 and Fig. 8); and
a control circuit (e.g., host processor 16 and/or local microprocessor 26 in Fig. 1) configured to control the operating member, wherein the operating member, in a case where no force is applied to the operating member (e.g., when the player does not apply any external force to the joystick), is pressed to a stop in a reference position (e.g., a restoring force is applied to force the joystick back to the origin O in ¶ 164); and
the control circuit is further configured to restrict (e.g., slotted yoke 182a is rigidly coupled to shaft 189a and slotted yoke 182b is rigidly coupled to shaft 189b in ¶¶ 144-145, when forces are applied to the shafts, the joystick movement is restricted accordingly) an operable range of the operating member to a range determined according to the reference position (e.g., the restriction of movement increases as the joystick is moved away from the origin O, as shown in Figs. 10a-10c and 11a-11c).
Regarding claim 6, Rosenberg teaches wherein the control circuit is configured to restrict a tiltable angle of the operating member to an angle determined according to the reference position and a tiltable direction (e.g., the restriction of movement increases as the joystick is moved away from the origin O, as shown in Figs. 10a-10c and 11a-11c).
Regarding claims 7-9, Rosenberg teaches an information processing apparatus, and method and medium therefor, connected with an operating device having a tiltable operating member (e.g., object 34, such as a joystick, in ¶ 146 and Fig. 8), comprising:
at least one processor (e.g., host processor 16 and/or local microprocessor 26 in Fig. 1) configured to:
acquire position information regarding the tiltable operating member (e.g., using sensors 184a and 184b to track the motion of the joystick 34 in ¶ 146); and
instruct the operating device to restrict at least either a tiltable direction or a tiltable angle of the tiltable operating member according to the acquired position information regarding the tiltable operating member (e.g., slotted yoke 182a is rigidly coupled to shaft 189a and slotted yoke 182b is rigidly coupled to shaft 189b in ¶¶ 144-145, when forces are applied to the shafts, the joystick movement is restricted accordingly), wherein the restriction is based on a displacement angle with respect to a positive Z-axis of the tiltable operating member from a central position corresponding to the positive Z-axis (e.g., forces may be applied via actuators 188a and 188b based on position of the joystick, as shown graphically in Figs. 10a-10c and 11a-11c; see also ¶¶ 144-146 and 163-168).
Regarding claims 10, 13, 15, and 18, Rosenberg teaches wherein the operating member (see at least Fig. 8) includes:
a columnar body operated by tilting (e.g., joystick 34);
a guide (e.g., yoke 182b);
a first actuator for driving the columnar body member about an X-axis (e.g., actuator 188a or 188b);
a second actuator for driving the columnar body member about a Y-axis (e.g., a different actuator 188a or 188b), wherein the Y- axis is perpendicular to the X-axis (e.g., axes L and M); and
a base (e.g., yoke 182a), and
the control circuit is configured to restrict at least either the tiltable direction or the tiltable angle of the operating member by controlling the first actuator and the second actuator (e.g., forces may be applied via actuators 188a and 188b based on position of the joystick, as shown graphically in Figs. 10a-10c and 11a-11c; see also ¶¶ 144-146 and 163-168; slotted yoke 182a is rigidly coupled to shaft 189a and slotted yoke 182b is rigidly coupled to shaft 189b in ¶¶ 144-145, and when forces are applied to the shafts, the joystick movement is restricted accordingly).
Regarding claims 11, 14, 16, and 19, Rosenberg teaches wherein the guide and the base are rotatably supported around a first shaft extending in the X-axis (e.g., the L or M axis in Fig. 8) and are rotatably supported around a second shaft extending in the Y-axis (e.g., a different one of the L or M axes), wherein the first actuator is coupled to the first shaft and rotates the guide around the first shaft (e.g., actuator 188a that drives shaft 189c or actuator 188b that drives shaft 189d), and wherein the second actuator is coupled to the second shaft and rotates the guide around the second (e.g., a different one of actuator 188a that drives shaft 189c or actuator 188b that drives shaft 189d).
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 9/16/2026 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
On page 8 of the Remarks section, Applicant contends that Rosenberg does not teach preventing displacement of the operating member. Applicant asserts that certain portions of Rosenberg discuss applying a restoring force based on displacement of the joystick, but that this is allegedly not a teaching of preventing displacement. The Examiner respectfully disagrees for two reasons.
First, Rosenberg’s teaching of applying a force to the joystick that resists movement imparted by the user meets the claimed limitation of ‘preventing displacement of the operating member.’ According to Dictionary.com, “prevent” means to hinder or stop from doing something. Rosenberg’s device applies force that resists movement of the joystick. This force at least hinders movement, and it will stop movement altogether when the applied force is below the actuator’s threshold force. In either case, Rosenberg’s device prevents displacement of the joystick and, by the same logic, restricts displacement of the joystick. Thus, Rosenberg meets the claims as broadly presented. While the specification may provide examples of a different mechanism for preventing displacement, such as that of instant Specification ¶ 51 cited by Applicant, the claims do not require any specific structure to achieve this outcome. Although the claims are interpreted in light of the specification, limitations from the specification are not read into the claims. See In re Van Geuns, 988 F.2d 1181, 26 USPQ2d 1057 (Fed. Cir. 1993).
Second, in order to make this teaching even clearer, the Examiner notes that Rosenberg expressly teaches a slotted yoke 182a that is rigidly coupled to shaft 189a and slotted yoke 182b is rigidly coupled to shaft 189b in ¶¶ 144-145. This is also shown in Figure 8. When forces are applied to the shafts via the actuators, the joystick movement is restricted accordingly because it can only move in a path within the confines of the perpendicular yokes. As such, Rosenberg teaches the claimed feature of restricting or preventing movement of the operating member to prevent displacement of the operating member in either the tiltable direction or the tiltable angle as claimed.
In addition to the teachings discussed above, it is noted that Rosenberg also teaches that actuators may include brakes to resist movement. Specifically, Rosenberg teaches the use of particle brakes, friction brakes, or pneumatic/hydraulic passive actuators to generate damping resistance or friction in a degree of motion. See Rosenberg, ¶¶ 73-74. While not expressly included in the grounds of rejection, this teaching also reads on the claimed feature discussed above.
In light of the above analysis, the claimed invention fails to demonstrate patentability over the cited prior art.
Conclusion
THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a).
A shortened statutory period for reply to this final action is set to expire THREE MONTHS from the mailing date of this action. In the event a first reply is filed within TWO MONTHS of the mailing date of this final action and the advisory action is not mailed until after the end of the THREE-MONTH shortened statutory period, then the shortened statutory period will expire on the date the advisory action is mailed, and any nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) pursuant to 37 CFR 1.136(a) will be calculated from the mailing date of the advisory action. In no event, however, will the statutory period for reply expire later than SIX MONTHS from the mailing date of this final action.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to WILLIAM H MCCULLOCH whose telephone number is (571)272-2818. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 9:30-5:30.
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, Peter Vasat can be reached at 571-270-7625. 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.
/WILLIAM H MCCULLOCH JR/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3715
Prosecution Insights