DETAILED ACTION
This is a non-final rejection in response to application filed 11/27/24. Claims 1-5 are currently pending.
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, 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 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.
Claim(s) 1-5 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kimpara et al. (US 2022/0363360) in view of Karten et al. (US 5553820).
Regarding claim 1, Kimpara teaches a remote control 11 device for remotely controlling a ship propulsion device provided in a ship [0033-0034], the remote control device comprising: a remote control device main body including: a main body case installed on an installation surface provided in the ship [0034,0070]; and a remote control lever attached to the main body case [0041].
Kimpara teaches a display 32 but is silent to a display unit provided outside the main body case, and including a display case and a display provided in the display case; and a support arm that couples the display unit and the remote control device main body to each other, and that supports the display unit such that the display unit is disposed at a position separated from the remote control device main body, wherein, in a case where a direction perpendicular to the installation surface is defined as an up-down direction, a direction perpendicular to the up-down direction is defined as a front-back direction, and a direction perpendicular to the up-down direction and the front-back direction is defined as a left-right direction, the support arm extends in a direction intersecting the left-right direction, and a distal end portion of the support arm is coupled to the display case.
Karten teaches a support arm 14 having a base end anchored to a fixed body (via bracket 16/18/20) and a remote/distal end 60 that carries a socket ring 38 supporting a display tray 12 at a position separated from the anchor. Karten also teaches the arm assembly is pivoting permitting the display to be elevated into alternative angular orientations (col. 3, ll. 37-55). Additionally, as combined, Kimpara would teach a base end portion of the support arm is coupled to an end portion of the main body case on a first side in the left-right direction [0065].
It would have been obvious to one off ordinary skill in the art to modify Hara to have a support arm as taught by Karten. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of filing to combine the teachings of a support arm, as taught by Karten, to the device of Hara, as part of an obvious combination of known prior art structures, to achieve predictable results, in this case, to provide a display unit that can pivot and move adjusted as needed. See KSR; MPEP 2141 III A.
Regarding dependent claim 2, Kimpara in view of Karten teaches the invention as claimed and discussed above. Kimpara further teaches wherein the remote control lever is attached to an end portion of the main body case on a second side in the left-right direction, the second side being a side opposite to the first side with respect to the main body case [0064-0065].
Regarding dependent claim 3, Kimpara in view of Karten teaches the invention as claimed and discussed above. Karten further teaches wherein the distal end portion of the support arm is coupled to the end portion of the display case on the first side in the left-right direction, and the display unit is disposed at a position facing the main body case (col. 3, ll. 48-50 and claim 1).
Regarding dependent claim 4, Kimpara in view of Karten teaches the invention as claimed and discussed above. Karten further teaches wherein the base end portion of the support arm is rotatably coupled to the end portion of the main body case on the first side in the left-right direction such that: the display unit is configured to be moved from an upper side of the main body case to a front side of the main body case; or the display unit is configured to be moved from the upper side of the main body case to the back side of the main body case (col. 5, ll. 1 – col. 7, ll. 31).
Regarding dependent claim 5, Kimpara in view of Karten teaches the invention as claimed and discussed above. Karten further teaches wherein an operation unit is provided on an outer surface of the main body case, and a rotation range of the support arm is set such that the display unit is configured to be moved from a position where a back surface of the display case and the operation unit face each other to a position where the back surface of the display case and the operation unit do not face each other (col. 2, ll. 46-54).
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to CRAIG SANG KIM whose telephone number is (571)270-1418. The examiner can normally be reached 7:00 AM - 3:00 PM.
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, Devon Kramer can be reached at 571-272-7118. 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.
/CRAIG KIM/
Primary Examiner
Art Unit 3741
Prosecution Insights