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 .
Claims 1-24 are currently pending and prosecuted.
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 allowance or after an Office action under Ex Parte Quayle, 25 USPQ 74, 453 O.G. 213 (Comm'r Pat. 1935). 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, prosecution in this application has been reopened pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114. Applicant's submission filed on 12 August 2026 has been entered.
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 (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 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 1-14 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Tuxen et al., US PG-Pub 2022/0284625, hereinafter Tuxen.
Regarding Claim 1, Tuxen teaches a method of tracking golf play (Abstract), the method comprising:
receiving a plurality of coordinate sets (Figs. 3-4 and 16a-h, and corresponding descriptions, [0059], “The tracking unit 400 can include any combination of the aforementioned sensors, as described above. The various sensors are operable to capture data in accordance with their configured parameters”) corresponding to a plurality of shot-to locations of golf balls hit by a plurality of players (players 355) on a hole in a golf event (Figs. 2-4 and 16a-h, and corresponding descriptions; [0092]-[0102]), wherein the plurality of coordinate sets were automatically captured in sensor data of a plurality of sensor device coordinate sources positioned around the hole (Figs. 1 and 3-4, and corresponding descriptions; [0050]-[0058]);
receiving hole events corresponding to strokes of the plurality of players on the hole in the golf event, wherein the hole events were automatically detected in sensor data of a sensor device hole event source (Figs. 3-4 and 16a-h, and corresponding descriptions; [0055]-[0068]); and
associating, automatically, each of the hole events with one of the plurality of coordinate sets that correspond to the shot-to location of the golf ball for the stroke the hole event corresponds to generate detailed scoring data for the plurality of players on the hole in the golf event (Figs. 3-4 and 16a-h, and corresponding descriptions; [0124]-[0142]).
Regarding Claim 2, Tuxen teaches the method of claim 1, wherein the plurality of sensor device coordinate sources comprise different types of sensor devices ([0055], “exemplary tracking units 305 shown in FIG. 3 can contain one or more sensors, e.g., one or more non-image-based sensors (e.g., microphones, radar and/or lidar systems, etc.) as well as an imaging (e.g., camera-based) system containing one or more cameras”).
Regarding Claim 3, Tuxen teaches the method of claim 1, wherein the plurality of sensor device coordinate sources comprise at least a radar device (Figs. 3-5c, and corresponding descriptions; [0080]-[0091]), and wherein the plurality of coordinate sets include coordinate sets corresponding to predicted shot-to locations generated by a prediction generator using trajectory data of the corresponding golf ball ([0097]).
Regarding Claim 4, Tuxen teaches the method of claim 1, wherein the plurality of sensor device coordinate sources comprise one or more radar devices (Figs. 3-5c, and corresponding descriptions; [0059]), one or more camera devices (Figs. 3-5c, and corresponding descriptions; [0059]), and one or more laser devices (Figs. 3-5c, and corresponding descriptions; [0059]).
Regarding Claim 5, Tuxen teaches the method of claim 1, wherein the hole events include identification of the player the hole event relates (Figs. 3-4, and corresponding descriptions; [0050]-[0054]).
Regarding Claim 6, Tuxen teaches the method of claim 1, wherein each of the plurality of coordinate sets include associated data elements comprising a timestamp ([0089], [0100]) with respect to time the respective golf ball was identified or predicted to be at the shot-to location ([0097]).
Regarding Claim 7, Tuxen teaches the method of claim 1, wherein associating each of the hole events with one of the coordinate sets comprises filtering the plurality of coordinate sets to obtain a single coordinate set comprising a "final" shot-to coordinate location (Figs. 16a-h, and corresponding descriptions; [0099]-[0101]).
Regarding Claim 8, Tuxen teaches the method of claim 1, wherein associating each of the hole events with one of the plurality of coordinate sets includes filtering the plurality of coordinate sets by grouping the plurality of coordinate sets by sensor device coordinate source and retaining a coordinate set for each group that is closest in time to the timestamp of the hole event (Figs. 16a-h, and corresponding descriptions; [0097]-[0101]).
Regarding Claim 9, Tuxen teaches the method of claim 1, wherein associating each of the hole events with one of the plurality of coordinate sets comprises executing a candidate coordinate set function on a filtered set of the plurality of coordinate sets to select a single coordinate set for the hole event that corresponds to the shot-to location of the golf ball the hole event relates (Figs. 16a-h, and corresponding descriptions; [0097]-[0101]).
Regarding Claim 10, Tuxen teaches the method of claim 1, wherein the candidate coordinate set function comprises hierarchy rules with respect to type of sensor device coordinate source (Figs. 16a-h, and corresponding descriptions; [0246]-[0255]).
Regarding Claim 11, Tuxen teaches the method of claim 1, wherein associating each of the hole events with one of the plurality of coordinate sets comprises applying one or more of:
a cascading filter (Figs. 16a-h, and corresponding descriptions; [0246]-[0255]) wherein the selection of a coordinate set depends on selection or filtering of another coordinate set (Figs. 16a-h, and corresponding descriptions; [0246]-[0255]), a distance related filter to filter out coordinate sets that are within or outside a distance from a tee or cup of the hole (Figs. 16a-h, and corresponding descriptions; [0246]-[0255]), a geographic filter with respect to geographic data elements associated with the hole events and plurality of coordinate sets (Figs. 16a-h, and corresponding descriptions; [0246]-[0255]), a temporal filter with respect to timestamp data elements associated with the hole events and plurality of coordinate sets (Figs. 16a-h, and corresponding descriptions; [0246]-[0255]), or a geo-temporal filter to the plurality of coordinate sets (Figs. 16a-h, and corresponding descriptions; [0246]-[0255]).
Regarding Claim 12, Tuxen teaches the method of claim 1, wherein associating each of the hole events with one of the plurality of coordinate sets comprises filtering coordinate sets of the plurality of coordinate sets by excluding coordinates that are already associated with a hole event (Figs. 16a-h, and corresponding descriptions; [0246]-[0255]).
Regarding Claim 13, Tuxen teaches a tracking system for tracking golf play (Abstract), the tracking system comprising:
a sensor network (tracking server 320) comprising a plurality of sensors (tracking unit 400) positioned around a hole of a golf course (Figs. 3-4 and 16a-h, and corresponding descriptions, [0059], “The tracking unit 400 can include any combination of the aforementioned sensors, as described above. The various sensors are operable to capture data in accordance with their configured parameters”), the plurality of sensors comprising at least a radar device and a camera device ([0055], “exemplary tracking units 305 shown in FIG. 3 can contain one or more sensors, e.g., one or more non-image-based sensors (e.g., microphones, radar and/or lidar systems, etc.) as well as an imaging (e.g., camera-based) system containing one or more cameras”), wherein the radar device is configured for automated tracking of golf balls in flight after being struck by players on the hole (Figs. 3-5c, and corresponding descriptions; [0080]-[0091]), and wherein the camera device is configured to identify players and track the players as they play the hole (Figs. 3-4 and 16a-h, and corresponding descriptions; [0124]-[0130]); and
a tracking module (tracking units 305) configured to receive radar data generated by the radar device corresponding to a plurality of tracked golf ball in flight after being hit by the players (Figs. 3-5c, and corresponding descriptions; [0080]-[0091]),
wherein the radar data includes timestamps with respect to when the golf balls in flight were tracked and location data at least with respect to an initial ball flight of the tracked golf balls in flight after being struck ([0089], [0100]),
wherein the tracking module configured to receive camera data generated by the camera device corresponding to the players identified and tracked during the play on the hole (Figs. 3-4 and 16a-h, and corresponding descriptions; [0055]-[0069]), wherein the camera data includes timestamps with respect to location data corresponding to locations of the identified tracked players as they played the hole ([0089], [0100]), and
wherein the tracking module is configured to tie the location data corresponding to the locations of the initial ball flights of the tracked balls to the location data corresponding to the locations of the identified tracked players as they played the hole using the respective timestamps to match each of the players to the locations of the initial ball flight of each of their hits when playing the hole (Figs. 3-4 and 16a-h, and corresponding descriptions; [0055]-[0069]).
Regarding Claim 14, Tuxen teaches the tracking system of claim 13, wherein the tracking module is configured to automatically generate a hole score for each of the players based on the tracked golf balls in flight matched with the respective identified players ([0174]).
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 15-24 are allowed.
The following is an examiner’s statement of reasons for allowance:
Applicant’s claims, which are consistent with previously allowed parent applications, overcomes the prior art of record. Specifically, the limitations “a tracking system for tracking golf play, the tracking system comprising: a scoring module configured to monitor scoring data with respect to players competing in a golf event that is received into the tracking system, wherein the scoring data is automatically generated by leveraging sensor data with respect to player and ball locations during play that is collected by automated sensor devices positioned around a golf course hosting the golf event” is considered novel. Support for the claims can be found in the original filing. The closest prior art of record, Tuxen, teaches a golf tracking method but fails to teach the scoring data automatically generated by leveraging sensor data with respect to player and ball locations during play that is collected by automated sensor devices.”
As such, modification of the prior art of record can only be motivated by hindsight reasoning, or by changing the intended use and function of the prior art themselves. Therefore, it is not clear that one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of filing of the invention would have made the necessary modifications to the prior art of record to encompass the limitations set forth in the present application. Moreover, none of the prior arts of record, taken either alone or in combination, anticipate nor render obvious the claimed inventions. Hence, claims 15-24 are allowable over the prior arts of record..
Any comments considered necessary by applicant must be submitted no later than the payment of the issue fee and, to avoid processing delays, should preferably accompany the issue fee. Such submissions should be clearly labeled “Comments on Statement of Reasons for Allowance.”
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to STEPHEN T REED whose telephone number is (571)272-7234. The examiner can normally be reached M-F: 0800-1800.
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, Ke Xiao can be reached at 571-272-7776. 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.
STEPHEN T. REED
Primary Examiner
Art Unit 2627
/Stephen T. Reed/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2627
Prosecution Insights