DETAILED ACTION
Status of the Application
Claims 1-10 are pending and currently under consideration for patentability under 37 CFR 1.104.
Priority
The instant application has a filing date of November 4, 2024 and claims for the benefit of a prior-filed foreign application number 113121422 (TW) which was filed on June 11, 2024. Receipt is acknowledged of certified copies of papers submitted under 35 U.S.C. 119(a)-(d), which papers have been placed of record in the file.
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 .
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted on May 7, 2025 has been considered by the examiner. Abstracts only were provided for each of the foreign patent documents, and therefore only the abstracts were considered.
Subject Matter Eligibility
Even if any of the individual device processes could be construed as reciting an abstract idea, the claims recite a combination of additional elements such that the claims as a whole are integrated into a practical application of the recited abstract idea in a manner that imposes a meaningful limit on the abstract idea. Specifically, the claims require the combination of “a sport simulation device applied to an external computer device, the sport simulation device comprising: a projection module adapted to project a projection image containing at least one command pattern onto a bearing surface; a camera module adapted to capture a top view image of a user standing on the bearing surface; a transmission module; and an operation processor electrically connected with the projection module, the camera module and the transmission module, the operation processor being adapted to analyze the top view image for acquiring a predefined feature relevant to a target object of the user, acquire a coordinate range of the at least one command pattern within the projection image, and decide whether to transmit a control command of the at least one command pattern to the external computer device via the transmission module in accordance with a comparison result of the predefined feature and the coordinate range”, which sufficiently limits the use of any recited abstract ideas to a practical application of that/those idea(s), thereby applying or using the judicial exception in some other meaningful way beyond generally linking the use of the judicial exception to a particular technological environment, such that the claim as a whole is more than a drafting effort designed to monopolize the exception.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
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 of this title, if the differences between the claimed invention and the prior art are such that the claimed invention as a whole would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which the claimed invention pertains. Patentability shall not be negated by the manner in which the invention was made.
The factual inquiries set forth in Graham v. John Deere Co., 383 U.S. 1, 148 USPQ 459 (1966), that are applied for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized as follows:
1. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art.
2. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue.
3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art.
4. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness.
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.
This application currently names joint inventors. In considering patentability of the claims the examiner presumes that the subject matter of the various claims was commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the claimed invention(s) absent any evidence to the contrary. Applicant is advised of the obligation under 37 CFR 1.56 to point out the inventor and effective filing dates of each claim that was not commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the later invention in order for the examiner to consider the applicability of 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(C) for any potential 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) prior art against the later invention.
v Claims 1-5, and 8-10 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Park et al. (U.S. PG Pub No. 2019/0099655, April 4, 2019 - hereinafter "Park”) in view of Worley III et al. (U.S. Patent No. 10,198,080, February 5, 2019 - hereinafter "Worley”)
With respect to claim 1, Park teaches a sport simulation device applied to an external computer device, the sport simulation device comprising:
a projection module adapted to project a projection image onto a bearing surface; (Fig 1 tag 310 & Fig 2 tag 320 & Fig 5a, [0023] “The image output device 300 may include a single image output device, which simultaneously outputs images to the front screen 101 and to the floor screen 102. Specifically, the image output device 300 may be configured such that an image to be output to the front screen 101 and an image to be output to the floor screen 102 are simultaneously projected by the single image output device. As shown in FIGS. 1 and 2, the image output device 300 may include a first image output device 310 for outputting an image to the front screen 101 and a second image output device 320 for outputting an image to the floor screen 102.”
a camera module adapted to capture a top view image of a user standing on the bearing surface; ([0036]-[0038] “The sensing device 200 may be realized in any of various forms. The sensing device may be an infrared-sensor-type sensing device, which emits infrared rays, receives the infrared rays reflected by a golf club head or a ball that is moved when the user hits the ball, and analyzes the reflected infrared rays in order to sense the motion of the golf club head or the ball, a laser-sensor-type sensing device, which emits laser beams and then senses and analyzes the laser beams blocked by a golf club head or a ball that is moved in order to sense the motion of the golf club head or the ball, or an image-sensor-type sensing device, which collects and analyzes images of a ball hit as the result of the user taking a golf swing using a golf club in order to sense the motion of the ball. In the case in which the sensing device 200 is an image-sensor-type sensing device, it is possible to sense a greater number of objects than when using other types of sensing devices. For example, the sensing device may acquire an image of the shot plate in order to sense the position on the shot mat SM on which a golf ball is placed, and may sense the motion of the golf ball placed on the shot mat in order to sense whether the user is ready to hit the golf ball. Furthermore, the sensing device may also sense the motion of the user in order to obtain information about whether the user is ready to hit the golf ball based on information about whether the user stands on the shot plate or whether the user remains stationary for a predetermined amount of time. Of course, it is possible to sense the motion of the user using the separate sensor 500, for example, a depth camera device.”, [
a transmission module; (Fig 2, [0033]-[0034])
and an operation processor electrically connected with the projection module, the camera module and the transmission module, the operation processor being adapted to ([0032]-[0033] controller)
analyze the top view image for acquiring a predefined feature relevant to a target object of the user ([0036] “receives the infrared rays reflected by a golf club head or a ball that is moved when the user hits the ball, and analyzes the reflected infrared rays in order to sense the motion of the golf club head or the ball, a laser-sensor-type sensing device, which emits laser beams and then senses and analyzes the laser beams blocked by a golf club head or a ball that is moved in order to sense the motion of the golf club head or the ball, or an image-sensor-type sensing device, which collects and analyzes images of a ball hit”, [0042]-[0043] “analyzes the acquired images in order to find a ball corresponding to a golf ball placed on the shot mat in the images (a ball-finding process) (S110). The ball-finding process may be a process of performing differential image processing and binarization in the images and determining an object satisfying conditions, such as a predetermined size, an aspect ratio, and brightness, as a ball, or may be a process of comparing an object in the acquired images with a template of a predefined ball in order to find a ball based on the determination of similarity.”)
Applicant’s specification acknowledges that conventional golf indoor simulators include operator interfaces that let a user input control commands to the computer device ([0002]). Park also suggests that the projected image may include an “image for menu selection” ([0031]). However, the details of this image for menu selection are not provided. Park does not appear to disclose,
a projection image containing at least one command pattern
acquire a coordinate range of the at least one command pattern within the projection image, and
decide whether to transmit a control command of the at least one command pattern to the external computer device via the transmission module in accordance with a comparison result of the predefined feature and the coordinate range
However, Worley discloses
a projection image containing at least one command pattern (Fig 2 shows projected image containing multiple command buttons, 8:64-67 & 9:1-10 “Interaction controls 220 may also be presented. These interaction controls 220 allow the user 102 a graphical point to interact with to provide user input. For example, the interaction controls 220 may include images of buttons, combo boxes, check boxes, and so forth. The user 102 touches the interaction control 220 with a finger, or point at the interaction control 220 to activate the interaction control 220. The sensors 124 are configured to determine this gesture as an input, and based on the position of the user's 102 finger, activate a particular interaction control 220 associated with that position. In this illustration, interaction controls 220(1)-(4) are presented as buttons to initiate functions…”)
acquire a coordinate range of the at least one command pattern within the projection image ( 9:1-10 “The sensors 124 are configured to determine this gesture as an input, and based on the position of the user's 102 finger, activate a particular interaction control 220 associated with that position. In this illustration, interaction controls 220(1)-(4) are presented as buttons to initiate functions…” – therefore the system determines/acquires position coordinate ranges of each button in the command pattern within the projection image for comparison with detected predefined feature, 6:3-27 “The sensors 124 may include range cameras or other devices configured to determine a position of one or more objects in a volume. The determined position and other information such as motion, orientation, and so forth may be used as input to the virtual user interface. For example, the particular translation and rotation of the user's 102 hand may be received and interpreted as input. The sensors 124 may include devices which utilize one or more of stereoscopic vision, time-of-flight, structured light, interferometry, coded aperture, or other techniques. The determined position may be absolute in space, or relative. Absolute position may indicate that the object is at a particular coordinate relative to an absolute unit of measure. For example, the user's first fingertip is at (X,Y,Z) coordinates (+29.31, +17.11, +28.71) expressed in inches relative to an origin, while the user's second fingertip is at coordinates (+28.11, +18.22, +29.05) relative to the origin. In comparison, relative position may indicate that the second fingertip is above and to the right of the first fingertip. The sensors 124 may have a sensor field-of-view (“SFOV”) 126 which is greater than that of the PFOV 120, less than, or the same as. For example, while the image projector 118 may throw an image onto the PFOV 120 bounded by the projection surfaces 112, the sensors 124 may generate position data for objects which are also in front of the projection surfaces 112 and outside of the PFOV 120.)
decide whether to transmit a control command of the at least one command pattern to the external computer device via the transmission module in accordance with a comparison result of the predefined feature and the coordinate range (17:17-44 “ FIG. 12 is a flow diagram 1200 of a process of receiving input. This input may include a user response to the projected image. The user input may be determined based on a position, motion, or orientation of the user 102 in a volume proximate to one or more of the projection surfaces 112. This process may be implemented by one or more of the sensor module 716 and the virtual user interface module 718. At 1202, one or more of a position, motion, or orientation of at least a portion of an object in a volume proximate to the projection surface 112 is determined. The object may be at least a portion of the user 102, such as a finger, hand, head, and so forth. At 1204, based at least in part on the position, one or more actions are determined. For example, the user 102 pointing to a particular interaction control 220”, 9:1-10 “The sensors 124 are configured to determine this gesture as an input, and based on the position of the user's 102 finger, activate a particular interaction control 220 associated with that position. In this illustration, interaction controls 220(1)-(4) are presented as buttons to initiate functions…” – therefore the system determines/acquires position coordinate ranges of each button in the command pattern within the projection image for comparison with detected predefined feature, 6:3-27 “The sensors 124 may include range cameras or other devices configured to determine a position of one or more objects in a volume. The determined position and other information such as motion, orientation, and so forth may be used as input to the virtual user interface. For example, the particular translation and rotation of the user's 102 hand may be received and interpreted as input. The sensors 124 may include devices which utilize one or more of stereoscopic vision, time-of-flight, structured light, interferometry, coded aperture, or other techniques. The determined position may be absolute in space, or relative. Absolute position may indicate that the object is at a particular coordinate relative to an absolute unit of measure. For example, the user's first fingertip is at (X,Y,Z) coordinates (+29.31, +17.11, +28.71) expressed in inches relative to an origin, while the user's second fingertip is at coordinates (+28.11, +18.22, +29.05) relative to the origin. In comparison, relative position may indicate that the second fingertip is above and to the right of the first fingertip. The sensors 124 may have a sensor field-of-view (“SFOV”) 126 which is greater than that of the PFOV 120, less than, or the same as. For example, while the image projector 118 may throw an image onto the PFOV 120 bounded by the projection surfaces 112, the sensors 124 may generate position data for objects which are also in front of the projection surfaces 112 and outside of the PFOV 120”
Worley suggests it is advantageous to project a projection image containing at least one command pattern, acquire a coordinate range of the at least one command pattern within the projection image, and decide whether to transmit a control command of the at least one command pattern to the external computer device via the transmission module in accordance with a comparison result of the predefined feature and the coordinate range, because doing so can provide a robust and convenient user interface capable of receiving multiple configurable/adaptable commands (1:5013 & 3:1-27).
Therefore, 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 device of Park to project a projection image containing at least one command pattern, acquire a coordinate range of the at least one command pattern within the projection image, and decide whether to transmit a control command of the at least one command pattern to the external computer device via the transmission module in accordance with a comparison result of the predefined feature and the coordinate range, as taught by Worley, because doing so can provide a robust and convenient user interface capable of receiving multiple configurable/adaptable commands.
Furthermore, since each individual element and its function are shown in the prior art, albeit shown in separate references, the difference between the claimed subject matter and the prior art rests not on any individual element or function but in the very combination itself. That is in the substitution of the projection-mapped graphical user interface of Worley for the menu selectin interface of Park. Thus, the simple substitution of one known element for another producing a predictable result renders the claim obvious.
With respect to claim 2, Park and Worley teach the sport simulation device of claim 1. Park does not appear to disclose,
wherein the sport simulation device further comprises a distance sensor adapted to acquire a distance of the projection module relative to the bearing surface via time delay between an emitting point of time and a receiving point of time of a detection beam from the projection module, and the operation processor is adapted to further execute projection correction on the projection image based on the distance
However, Worley discloses
wherein the sport simulation device further comprises a distance sensor adapted to acquire a distance of the projection module relative to the bearing surface via time delay between an emitting point of time and a receiving point of time of a detection beam from the projection module, and the operation processor is adapted to further execute projection correction on the projection image based on the distance ( 3:1-10 “The sensors may include range cameras or other devices…These devices may utilize one or more of stereoscopic vision, time-of-flight”, 11:55-67 & 12:1-40 “The structured light system 124(2) uses a known pattern projected onto objects to determine information such as surface contour, distance, size, and so forth…Based at least in part on variations in the pattern due to interactions with the objects, information such as distance, surface contours, size, and other three-dimensional information may be calculated… time-of-flight (“TOF”) system 124(3) uses propagation time to determine a distance to an object in the environment. The TOF 124(3) system may use propagation of signals such as sound, infrared light, visible light, terahertz waves, radio waves, and so forth. For example, in one implementation an optical TOF 124(3) system may direct an infrared laser to scan a volume, emitting pulses of infrared light. During the scan, those pulses reflect at least in part from at least some of the objects in the volume. A detector, such as one of the cameras 124(1) or a photodetector, detects the reflected pulses. A timing mechanism is configured to determine a time-of-flight of the emitted signal. Based on the time-of-flight, a distance to the portion of the object from which the pulse was reflected can be determined. Time-of-flight in the optical domain may be known as LIDAR, in the radio frequency domain as RADAR, and in the audio domain as SONAR. The TOF system 124(3) may be configured to acquire depth information about an entire area within the SFOV 126 for each image frame acquired….”, 13:64-67 & 14:1-9 “A calibration module 714 is configured to calibrate the image projector 118, the one or more sensors 124, or both. Calibration of the image projector 118 may include adjusting the tilt shift mechanism, applying image processing, and so forth to correct for the relative positions between the projection surfaces 112 and the image projector 118. In one implementation the image projector 118 calibration may include generation of projection correction data based on image data acquired by the one or more cameras 124(1). Calibration may be manually initiated, continuous, or may be automatically initiated. A calibration process is described in more detail below with regard to FIG. 10.”, 16:55-61 “At 1010, one or more projected images are modified based at least in part on the projection correction. For example, the vector quantities may be applied to regions in the projected images, shifting pixels within those regions in a particular direction and distance. Now modified, the projected image from the image projector 118 is calibrated to provide output which is as desired”
Since each individual element and its function are shown in the prior art, albeit shown in separate references, the difference between the claimed subject matter and the prior art rests not on any individual element or function but in the very combination itself. That is in the substitution of the projection-mapped graphical user interface of Worley (e.g., comprising a distance sensor adapted to acquire a distance of the projection module relative to the bearing surface via time delay between an emitting point of time and a receiving point of time of a detection beam from the projection module, and the operation processor is adapted to further execute projection correction on the projection image based on the distance) for the menu selectin interface of Park. Thus, the simple substitution of one known element for another producing a predictable result renders the claim obvious.
With respect to claim 3, Park and Worley teach the sport simulation device of claim 2. Park does not appear to disclose,
wherein the operation processor is adapted to further compute an image size of the projection image in accordance with the distance, and decide the coordinate range of the at least one command pattern based on the image size
However, Worley discloses
wherein the operation processor is adapted to further compute an image size of the projection image in accordance with the distance, and decide the coordinate range of the at least one command pattern based on the image size (11:55-67 & 12:1-40 “The structured light system 124(2) uses a known pattern projected onto objects to determine information such as surface contour, distance, size, and so forth…Based at least in part on variations in the pattern due to interactions with the objects, information such as distance, surface contours, size, and other three-dimensional information may be calculated…”13:64-67 & 14:1-9 “A calibration module 714 is configured to calibrate the image projector 118, the one or more sensors 124, or both. Calibration of the image projector 118 may include adjusting the tilt shift mechanism, applying image processing, and so forth to correct for the relative positions between the projection surfaces 112 and the image projector 118. In one implementation the image projector 118 calibration may include generation of projection correction data based on image data acquired by the one or more cameras 124(1). Calibration may be manually initiated, continuous, or may be automatically initiated. A calibration process is described in more detail below with regard to FIG. 10.”, 16:55-61 “At 1010, one or more projected images are modified based at least in part on the projection correction. For example, the vector quantities may be applied to regions in the projected images, shifting pixels within those regions in a particular direction and distance. Now modified, the projected image from the image projector 118 is calibrated to provide output which is as desired”, 17:17-44 “ FIG. 12 is a flow diagram 1200 of a process of receiving input. This input may include a user response to the projected image. The user input may be determined based on a position, motion, or orientation of the user 102 in a volume proximate to one or more of the projection surfaces 112. This process may be implemented by one or more of the sensor module 716 and the virtual user interface module 718. At 1202, one or more of a position, motion, or orientation of at least a portion of an object in a volume proximate to the projection surface 112 is determined. The object may be at least a portion of the user 102, such as a finger, hand, head, and so forth. At 1204, based at least in part on the position, one or more actions are determined. For example, the user 102 pointing to a particular interaction control 220”)
Since each individual element and its function are shown in the prior art, albeit shown in separate references, the difference between the claimed subject matter and the prior art rests not on any individual element or function but in the very combination itself. That is in the substitution of the projection-mapped graphical user interface of Worley (e.g., wherein the operation processor is adapted to further compute an image size of the projection image in accordance with the distance, and decide the coordinate range of the at least one command pattern based on the image size) for the menu selectin interface of Park. Thus, the simple substitution of one known element for another producing a predictable result renders the claim obvious.
With respect to claim 4, Park and Worley teach the sport simulation device of claim 3. Park does not appear to disclose,
wherein the projection module is adapted to project the projection image containing a plurality of command patterns, the operation processor is adapted to further decide a relative position and the coordinate range of each of the plurality of command patterns based on the image size
However, Worley discloses
wherein the projection module is adapted to project the projection image containing a plurality of command patterns, the operation processor is adapted to further decide a relative position and the coordinate range of each of the plurality of command patterns based on the image size (17:17-44 “ FIG. 12 is a flow diagram 1200 of a process of receiving input. This input may include a user response to the projected image. The user input may be determined based on a position, motion, or orientation of the user 102 in a volume proximate to one or more of the projection surfaces 112. This process may be implemented by one or more of the sensor module 716 and the virtual user interface module 718. At 1202, one or more of a position, motion, or orientation of at least a portion of an object in a volume proximate to the projection surface 112 is determined. The object may be at least a portion of the user 102, such as a finger, hand, head, and so forth. At 1204, based at least in part on the position, one or more actions are determined. For example, the user 102 pointing to a particular interaction control 220”, 9:1-10 “The sensors 124 are configured to determine this gesture as an input, and based on the position of the user's 102 finger, activate a particular interaction control 220 associated with that position. In this illustration, interaction controls 220(1)-(4) are presented as buttons to initiate functions…” , 13:64-67 & 14:1-9 “A calibration module 714 is configured to calibrate the image projector 118, the one or more sensors 124, or both. Calibration of the image projector 118 may include adjusting the tilt shift mechanism, applying image processing, and so forth to correct for the relative positions between the projection surfaces 112 and the image projector 118. In one implementation the image projector 118 calibration may include generation of projection correction data based on image data acquired by the one or more cameras 124(1). Calibration may be manually initiated, continuous, or may be automatically initiated. A calibration process is described in more detail below with regard to FIG. 10.”, 16:55-61 “At 1010, one or more projected images are modified based at least in part on the projection correction. For example, the vector quantities may be applied to regions in the projected images, shifting pixels within those regions in a particular direction and distance. Now modified, the projected image from the image projector 118 is calibrated to provide output which is as desired”)
Since each individual element and its function are shown in the prior art, albeit shown in separate references, the difference between the claimed subject matter and the prior art rests not on any individual element or function but in the very combination itself. That is in the substitution of the projection-mapped graphical user interface of Worley (e.g., wherein the projection module is adapted to project the projection image containing a plurality of command patterns, the operation processor is adapted to further decide a relative position and the coordinate range of each of the plurality of command patterns based on the image size) for the menu selectin interface of Park. Thus, the simple substitution of one known element for another producing a predictable result renders the claim obvious.
With respect to claim 5, Park and Worley teach the sport simulation device of claim 1. Park discloses
wherein the operation processor is adapted to further search the predefined feature from the top view image via object identification technology or convolutional neural network, (Fig 1 tag 200 top view image, [0036] “receives the infrared rays reflected by a golf club head or a ball that is moved when the user hits the ball, and analyzes the reflected infrared rays in order to sense the motion of the golf club head or the ball, a laser-sensor-type sensing device, which emits laser beams and then senses and analyzes the laser beams blocked by a golf club head or a ball that is moved in order to sense the motion of the golf club head or the ball, or an image-sensor-type sensing device, which collects and analyzes images of a ball hit”, [0042]-[0043] “analyzes the acquired images in order to find a ball corresponding to a golf ball placed on the shot mat in the images (a ball-finding process) (S110). The ball-finding process may be a process of performing differential image processing and binarization in the images and determining an object satisfying conditions, such as a predetermined size, an aspect ratio, and brightness, as a ball, or may be a process of comparing an object in the acquired images with a template of a predefined ball in order to find a ball based on the determination of similarity.”)
Park does not appear to disclose,
so as to acquire relation between the predefined feature and the at least one command pattern for generating the comparison result
However, Worley discloses
so as to acquire relation between the predefined feature and the at least one command pattern for generating the comparison result (11:63-67 & 12:1-3 “With structured light, a camera 124(1) acquires an image which includes at least a portion of the projected pattern. Based at least in part on variations in the pattern due to interactions with the objects, information such as distance, surface contours, size, and other three-dimensional information may be calculated. For example, the structured light system 124(2) may be used to determine where the user's 102 finger is pointing on the projection surface 112”, 17:17-44 “ FIG. 12 is a flow diagram 1200 of a process of receiving input. This input may include a user response to the projected image. The user input may be determined based on a position, motion, or orientation of the user 102 in a volume proximate to one or more of the projection surfaces 112. This process may be implemented by one or more of the sensor module 716 and the virtual user interface module 718. At 1202, one or more of a position, motion, or orientation of at least a portion of an object in a volume proximate to the projection surface 112 is determined. The object may be at least a portion of the user 102, such as a finger, hand, head, and so forth. At 1204, based at least in part on the position, one or more actions are determined. For example, the user 102 pointing to a particular interaction control 220”, 9:1-10 “The sensors 124 are configured to determine this gesture as an input, and based on the position of the user's 102 finger, activate a particular interaction control 220 associated with that position. In this illustration, interaction controls 220(1)-(4) are presented as buttons to initiate functions…” , 13:64-67 & 14:1-9 “A calibration module 714 is configured to calibrate the image projector 118, the one or more sensors 124, or both. Calibration of the image projector 118 may include adjusting the tilt shift mechanism, applying image processing, and so forth to correct for the relative positions between the projection surfaces 112 and the image projector 118. In one implementation the image projector 118 calibration may include generation of projection correction data based on image data acquired by the one or more cameras 124(1). Calibration may be manually initiated, continuous, or may be automatically initiated. A calibration process is described in more detail below with regard to FIG. 10.”, 16:55-61 “At 1010, one or more projected images are modified based at least in part on the projection correction. For example, the vector quantities may be applied to regions in the projected images, shifting pixels within those regions in a particular direction and distance. Now modified, the projected image from the image projector 118 is calibrated to provide output which is as desired”)
Since each individual element and its function are shown in the prior art, albeit shown in separate references, the difference between the claimed subject matter and the prior art rests not on any individual element or function but in the very combination itself. That is in the substitution of the projection-mapped graphical user interface of Worley (e.g., so as to acquire relation between the predefined feature and the at least one command pattern for generating the comparison result) for the menu selectin interface of Park. Thus, the simple substitution of one known element for another producing a predictable result renders the claim obvious.
With respect to claim 8, Park and Worley teach the sport simulation device of claim 1. Park discloses
wherein the camera module and the projection module are located directly above the user (Fig 2 tags 320 and 200, [0021]-[0031])
With respect to claim 9, Park and Worley teach the sport simulation device of claim 1. Park does not appear to disclose,
wherein the sport simulation device further comprises a case, the camera module and the projection module are integrated inside the foresaid same case
However, Worley discloses
wherein the sport simulation device further comprises a case, the camera module and the projection module are integrated inside the foresaid same case (Fig 1 tag 116)
Since each individual element and its function are shown in the prior art, albeit shown in separate references, the difference between the claimed subject matter and the prior art rests not on any individual element or function but in the very combination itself. That is in the substitution of the projection-mapped graphical user interface of Worley (e.g., wherein the sport simulation device further comprises a case, the camera module and the projection module are integrated inside the foresaid same case) for the menu selectin interface of Park. Thus, the simple substitution of one known element for another producing a predictable result renders the claim obvious.
With respect to claim 10, Park and Worley teach the sport simulation device of claim 1. Park discloses
wherein the target object is a golf club held by the user, and the predefined feature is a club head of the golf club ([0036] “receives the infrared rays reflected by a golf club head or a ball that is moved when the user hits the ball, and analyzes the reflected infrared rays in order to sense the motion of the golf club head or the ball, a laser-sensor-type sensing device, which emits laser beams and then senses and analyzes the laser beams blocked by a golf club head or a ball that is moved in order to sense the motion of the golf club head or the ball, or an image-sensor-type sensing device, which collects and analyzes images of a ball hit”)
v Claims 6 and 7 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Park in view of Worley, as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Kadantseva et al. (U.S. PG Pub No. 2011/0254939 , October 20, 2011- hereinafter "Kadantseva”)
With respect to claim 6, Park and Worley teach the sport simulation device of claim 1. Park does not appear to disclose,
wherein the camera module is a color sensor, the operation processor is adapted to further acquire image information about the user and related environment for auxiliary computation in accordance with the top view image provided by the color sensor
However, Kadantseva discloses
wherein the camera module is a color sensor, the operation processor is adapted to further acquire image information about the user and related environment for auxiliary computation in accordance with the top view image provided by the color sensor ([0030]-[0031] &[0038]-[0050] system has camera that senses color and uses colors in images of the user/environment to further compute location of target object used to control the projected user interface )
Kadantseva suggests it is advantageous to include wherein the camera module is a color sensor, the operation processor is adapted to further acquire image information about the user and related environment for auxiliary computation in accordance with the top view image provided by the color sensor, because doing so can help reduce false positives ([0004]).
Therefore, 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 device of Park in view of Worley to include wherein the camera module is a color sensor, the operation processor is adapted to further acquire image information about the user and related environment for auxiliary computation in accordance with the top view image provided by the color sensor, as taught by Kadantseva, because doing so can help reduce false positives.
With respect to claim 7, Park and Worley teach the sport simulation device of claim 1. Park does not appear to disclose,
wherein the operation processor is adapted to further determine a movement trajectory and a dwelling period of the predefined feature relative to the at least one command pattern, so as to decide whether the predefined feature is within the coordinate range
However, Kadantseva discloses
wherein the operation processor is adapted to further determine a movement trajectory and a dwelling period of the predefined feature relative to the at least one command pattern, so as to decide whether the predefined feature is within the coordinate range ([0037] “ two or more cells of a frame are repeatedly searched for activity at periodic intervals. If activity is detected within one cell, the method proceeds to operation 610 where it is determined if activity is also detected in another of the two or more cells. If activity is also detected in another cell, the method returns to operation 608. The detection of activity in more than one cell may be inconsistent with an intent to select a single projected control. For example, a user's finger may be in motion, passing over a control within the sample time period. If activity is not detected in another cell, the method proceeds to operation 612 where one or more validation tests are performed to determine whether the tentative conclusion that the user intends to provide input using a projected control should be treated as true. Otherwise, searching of the two or more cells continues at periodic intervals.” & [0040] “The valid time operation 618 determines if activity is present for a time period exceeding a threshold time interval. For example, if a sufficient number of skin-color pixels are present for a time period of 0.5 second or longer, then the operation returns a confirming result. On the other hand, if a sufficient number of skin-color pixels is present but for less than the time threshold, then the operation returns an invalid result and it may be concluded that activity is not present”)
Kadantseva suggests it is advantageous to include wherein the operation processor is adapted to further determine a movement trajectory and a dwelling period of the predefined feature relative to the at least one command pattern, so as to decide whether the predefined feature is within the coordinate range, because doing so can help reduce false positives ([0004] & [0037] & [0040]).
Therefore, 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 device of Park in view of Worley to include wherein the operation processor is adapted to further determine a movement trajectory and a dwelling period of the predefined feature relative to the at least one command pattern, so as to decide whether the predefined feature is within the coordinate range, as taught by Kadantseva, because doing so can help reduce false positives.
Prior Art of Record
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to the applicant’s disclosure.
Davis et al. (U.S. PG Pub No. 2019/0121522, April 25, 2019) teaches an adaptable projection-mapped graphical user interface comprising a projection module, camera module, transmission module, and operation processor in a single case. Discloses command pattern with plurality of control inputs. Suggests the projector can project golf simulation images.
Keegan. (U.S. PG Pub No. 2024/0149152, May 9, 2024) teaches a sport simulator bay (e.g., golf) that uses gesture tracking using sensors to receive player inputs. Suggests projection mapping information on the bay floor.
Kitajima (U.S. PG Pub No. 2011/0169746, July 14, 2011) teaches projection-mapped graphical user interface with command pattern with plurality of control inputs. Discloses various adjustments/calibrations of the projected image. Discloses dwell time period threshold for input detection.
Rico et al. (U.S. PG Pub No. 2019/0099681, April 4, 2019) teaches projection-mapped graphical user interface with command pattern with plurality of control inputs. Suggests use of the GUI for use in sports games, and wherein the control inputs can be club selection.
“AMPLUS begins exporting its new product FOCUS, which was unveiled at PGA SHOW 2023” (published April 4, 2023 online at https://www.einpresswire.com/article/625945478/amplus-begins-exporting-its-new-product-focus-which-was-unveiled-at-pga-show-2023 ) teaches a projection/sensor/camera apparatus used to projection-map information on a playing mat of a gold simulator. Discloses use of object identification technology to detect position/location of the players club head, as well as to identify which club they are playing with.
“The Club Keyboard Golf Simulator Control Box” (published November 30, 2023 online athttps://mygaragegolf.com/blogs/buying-guides/the-club-keyboard-golf-simulator-control-box-full-review?srsltid=AfmBOornYV0Gm-JPZ_udSckfwolUIULIiI7PGVCII8w79ObQdTz7KyMy ) teaches a user interface for a golf simulator that enables a player to control the simulator and provide inputs (e.g., club selection, etc.) using their golf club as a selection device without having to leave the playing mat.
Conclusion
No claim is allowed
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to JAMES M DETWEILER whose telephone number is (571)272-4704. The examiner can normally be reached on Monday-Friday from 8 AM to 5 PM ET.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Waseem Ashraf can be reached at telephone number (571)-270-3948. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300.
Information regarding the status of an application may be obtained from Patent Center. Status information for published applications may be obtained from Patent Center. Status information for unpublished applications is available through Patent Center for authorized users only. Should you have questions about access to Patent Center, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free).
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) Form at https://www.uspto.gov/patents/uspto-automated- interview-request-air-form.
/JAMES M DETWEILER/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3621
Prosecution Insights