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 .
DETAILED ACTION
Election/Restrictions
Claims 7, 9-11, 35 are withdrawn from further consideration pursuant to 37 CFR 1.142(b) as being drawn to a nonelected invention, there being no allowable generic or linking claim. Election was made without traverse in the reply filed on 6/8/2026.
Drawings
The drawings are objected to under 37 CFR 1.83(a) because they fail to show the pad and spring as described in the specification. Any structural detail that is essential for a proper understanding of the disclosed invention should be shown in the drawing. MPEP § 608.02(d). Corrected drawing sheets in compliance with 37 CFR 1.121(d) are required in reply to the Office action to avoid abandonment of the application. Any amended replacement drawing sheet should include all of the figures appearing on the immediate prior version of the sheet, even if only one figure is being amended. The figure or figure number of an amended drawing should not be labeled as “amended.” If a drawing figure is to be canceled, the appropriate figure must be removed from the replacement sheet, and where necessary, the remaining figures must be renumbered and appropriate changes made to the brief description of the several views of the drawings for consistency. Additional replacement sheets may be necessary to show the renumbering of the remaining figures. Each drawing sheet submitted after the filing date of an application must be labeled in the top margin as either “Replacement Sheet” or “New Sheet” pursuant to 37 CFR 1.121(d). If the changes are not accepted by the examiner, the applicant will be notified and informed of any required corrective action in the next Office action. The objection to the drawings will not be held in abeyance.
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)(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.
(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.
Claim(s) 1-6, 8, 37, 38 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by McCauley (US 5,773,773).
1. McCauley discloses a controller comprising (Fig. 1):
a housing comprising a socket (i.e. ball is received in a cylindrical socket within a housing), (col. 2);
a thumbstick that is rotatably held within the socket of the housing (i.e. joystick connected by a stem to a ball is rotatably held within he socket of the housing), (Fig. 1), (col. 2), and that is configured to: pivot within the socket; and rotate within the socket around a pivoting central axis of the thumbstick (i.e. the ball can be pivoted/tilted away from the neutral position by rotating around central axis (the pivoting central/longitudinal axis of the joystick and ball) while the joystick and ball is tilted or pivoted from the neutral position), (Fig. 1, 3, 4), (Col. 2-3).
2. McCauley discloses the controller of claim 1, wherein the thumbstick comprises a ball positioned within the socket, wherein the ball is configured to permit the thumbstick to pivot within the socket and around a central point of the ball from a neutral position as discussed above (Fig. 1, 3, 4).
3. McCauley discloses the controller of claim 2, comprising a rotating mechanism that is configured to permit the ball to rotate around the central pivoting axis of the thumbstick when the ball is pivoted from the neutral position (i.e. O-ring 58: Fig. 1).
4. McCauley discloses the controller of claim 3, wherein the rotating mechanism comprises a pad mounted within the socket that is configured to engage with the ball when the ball is pivoted from the neutral position and to disengage from the ball when the ball is in the neutral position (i.e. O-ring 58: Fig. 1).
5. McCauley discloses the controller of claim 4, wherein the rotating mechanism further comprises a spring system configured to engage the pad with the ball and drive rotation of the ball around the pivoting central axis of the thumbstick (i.e. O-ring can act as a spring system).
6. McCauley discloses the controller of claim 5, wherein the spring system comprises a spring that is biased to (i) provide engaging pressure on the pad towards the ball and rotational pressure on the ball, and (ii) provide an incremental amount of rotational pressure on the ball each time the ball is pivoted away from the neutral position (“O-ring 58 is compressed by cap 50 due to the frustoconical surface 56 engaging the frustoconical surface 36 of the ball. The pressure of the O-ring 58 against the ball 18 thus seats the ball with the axis 20 of the joystick 12 extending perpendicular to O-ring 58. Accordingly, the joystick 12 is resiliently maintained in the center position of FIG. 1”), (col. 2).
8. McCauley discloses the controller of claim 3, comprising a locking mechanism that is configured to prevent the ball from rotating when the ball is in the neutral position (24, 25: Fig. 1, 3, 4).
37. McCauley discloses a system comprising: one or more processors, and one or more non-transitory computer-readable media that store instructions which, when executed by the one or more processors, cause the one or more processors to perform operations comprising: pivoting a thumbstick within a socket of a housing of a controller, the thumbstick being rotatably held within the socket of the housing, and rotating the thumbstick within the socket around a pivoting central axis of the thumbstick as similarly discussed above (i.e. the joystick is implemented in a system with components to register electrical contacts to control electronics which inherently comprises processers and non-transitory computer-readable media).
38. McCauley discloses one or more non-transitory computer-readable media that store instructions which, when executed by one or more processors, cause the one or more processors to perform operations comprising: pivoting a thumbstick within a socket of a housing of a controller, the thumbstick being rotatably held within the socket of the housing, and rotating the thumbstick within the socket around a pivoting central axis of the thumbstick as similarly discussed above.
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 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.
Claim(s) 26-34, 36 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over McCauley (US 5,773,773) in view of Olsson (US 2010/0265176 A1).
26-34, 36. McCauley discloses system comprising: a controller comprising: a housing comprising a socket; a thumbstick that is rotatably held within the socket of the housing and that; is configured to: pivot within the socket; and rotate within the socket around a pivoting central axis of the thumbstick as similarly discussed above. McCauley does not expressly disclose the system comprising a gaming system; however, it is notoriously well known that such joystick system can be implemented in a gaming system as evidenced by Olsson. It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skilled in the art at the time the application was filed to modify McCauley with Olsson and would have been motivated to do so to implement it in a gaming environment.
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. Please see attached USPTO form PTO-892.
Filing of New or Amended Claims
The examiner has the initial burden of presenting evidence or reasoning to explain why persons skilled in the art would not recognize in the original disclosure a description of the invention defined by the claims. See Wertheim, 541 F.2d at 263, 191 USPQ at 97 (“[T]he PTO has the initial burden of presenting evidence or reasons why persons skilled in the art would not recognize in the disclosure a description of the invention defined by the claims.”). However, when filing an amendment an applicant should show support in the original disclosure for new or amended claims. See MPEP § 714.02 and § 2163.06 (“Applicant should specifically point out the support for any amendments made to the disclosure.”). Please see MPEP 2163 (II) 3. (b)
Correspondence
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to SENG H LIM whose telephone number is (571)270-3301. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday (9-5).
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, Xuan Thai can be reached at (571) 272-7147. 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.
/Seng H Lim/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3715
Prosecution Insights