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 § 112
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(b):
(b) CONCLUSION.—The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph:
The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the applicant regards as his invention.
Claims 1, 2, 4 and 6-13 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor (or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the applicant), regards as the invention.
Claim 1 recites claim limitation “a post-impact series” twice. It is unclear if they are referring to the same post-impact series thus causing claim limitation indefinite.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 101
35 U.S.C. 101 reads as follows:
Whoever invents or discovers any new and useful process, machine, manufacture, or composition of matter, or any new and useful improvement thereof, may obtain a patent therefor, subject to the conditions and requirements of this title.
Claims 1, 2, 4, 6-15, 19-21, 23, 24 and 29 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 101 because the claimed invention is directed to non-statutory subject matter. The claimed invention is directed to non-statutory subject matter because the claim(s) as a whole, considering all claim elements both individually and in combination, do not amount to significantly more than an abstract idea. As summarized in the 2019 Revised Patent Subject Matter Eligibility Guidance, examiners must perform a Two-Part Analysis for Judicial Exceptions.
Step 1
In Step 1, it must be determined whether the claimed invention is directed to a process, machine, manufacture or composition of matter. The instant invention encompasses two systems in claims 1, 2, 4, 6-13, 23, 24, 28 and 29 (i.e., a machine); and a method in claims 14-15 and 19-21 (i.e., a process). All claims are directed to one of the four statutory categories and meet the requirements of step 1.
Step 2A
Prong One
The claimed invention is directed to an abstract idea without significantly more. The instant invention is broadly directed to “a system configured to, in an illustrative embodiment, enhance the determination of club delivery parameters” ([0003]); “a method for determining golf club delivery parameters” ([0016]); and “a system for analyzing an impact between a golf club and a ball” ([0025]). Claim 1 recites the following (with emphasis added):
Claim 1: A system configured to enhance determination of club delivery parameters, comprising:
an imager capturing a sequence of images of an area in which an impact between a golf club and a ball is to take place, the imager being configured to take a pre-impact series of images from an initial time pre-impact through a time of impact and a post-impact series of images from the time of impact through a final time after the time of impact; and
a processor configured to determine ball launch parameters based on a post-impact series of images, and is further configured to perform following operations:
identify predetermined characteristic points on the golf club in each of the pre-impact images;
determine pre-impact travelling path data for the golf club based on positions of the identified characteristic points in the pre-impact images; and
calculate club delivery parameters from a mechanical impact model based on the pre- impact travelling path data.
Claim 1 encompass the abstract idea, which is also encompassed by the dependent claims 2, 4, 6-13, and claims 14-15 and 19-21; and claims 23, 24 and 29.
Claims 1, 2, 4, 6-15, 19-21, 23, 24 and 29 recites the steps for calculating club delivery parameters based on a sequence of images. A human -using the mind, pen and paper- is capable of calculating these parameters based on saved images and certain models. These limitations, when given their broadest reasonable interpretation, recite collecting, calculating and presenting data. Thus, these steps are directed to mathematical concepts and mental processes.
Prong Two
This judicial exception is not integrated into a practical application because mere instruction to implement on a computer, or merely using a computer as a tool to perform the abstract idea, adding insignificant extra solution activity, and/or generally linking the use of the abstract idea to a technological environment or field of use is not considered integration into a practical application. The claims do not include additional elements that are sufficient to amount to significantly more than the judicial exception because the present claims include the additional elements other than the abstract idea which include an imager, a processor, or an imaging system. The claims are drafted in a result-oriented fashion, without the requisite specificity needed to provide a nonabstract technological solution. Without any details on what imager, processor and imaging system, the conventional computers and conventional camera as presented are directed to the components of a system amount to merely field of use type limitations and/or extra solution activity to data gathering for calculating delivery parameters or analyzing impact.
Step 2B
Step 2B in the analysis requires us to determine whether the claims do significantly more than simply describe that abstract method. Mayo, 132 S. Ct. at 1297. We must examine the limitations of the claims to determine whether the claims contain an "inventive concept" to "transform" the claimed abstract idea into patent-eligible subject matter. Alice, 134 S. Ct. at 2357 (quoting Mayo, 132 S. Ct. at 1294, 1298). The transformation of an abstract idea into patent-eligible subject matter "requires 'more than simply stat[ing] the [abstract idea] while adding the words 'apply it."' Id. (quoting Mayo, 132 S. Ct. at 1294) (alterations in original). "A claim that recites an abstract idea must include 'additional features' to ensure 'that the [claim] is more than a drafting effort designed to monopolize the [abstract idea].'" Id. (quoting Mayo, 132 S. Ct. at 1297) (alterations in original). Those "additional features" must be more than "well-understood, routine, conventional activity." Mayo, 132 S. Ct. at 1298.
The present claims include the additional elements other than the abstract idea which include an imager, a processor, or an imaging system. These additional elements are merely conventional computers and conventional camera. Any potentially technical aspects of the claims are well-known generic computer components performing conventional functions (e.g., a processor performing generic data handling using mathematical concepts). The present claims have been analyzed both individually and in combination and, the instant claims do not provide any improvement of the functioning of the computer or improvement to computer technology or any other technical field. There do not appear to be any meaningful limitations other than those that are well-understood, routine and conventional in the field. Thus the present claims do not include additional elements that are sufficient to amount to significantly more than the judicial exception.
The claims are generally linked to implement an abstract idea. When looked at individually and as a whole, the claim limitations are determined to be an abstract idea without "significantly more," and thus not patent eligible.
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, 2, 4, 6-15, 19-21, 23, 24 and 29 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by TUXEN [US20210170257].
Regarding claim 1, TUXEN discloses a system configured to enhance determination of club delivery parameters, comprising:
an imager capturing a sequence of images of an area in which an impact between a golf club and a ball is to take place, the imager being configured to take a pre-impact series of images from an initial time pre-impact through a time of impact and a post-impact series of images from the time of impact through a final time after the time of impact (Fig. 1, [0022], “an imager 108 with a field of view (FoV) covering an impact area, i.e., an area encompassing the location at which an impact between the golf club 120 and the golf ball 110 is expected to occur. The imager 108 captures a sequence of images at various times during the execution of the golf shot… The sequence of images may include multiple frames showing the positions of the golf club 120 and the golf ball 110. For example, at time (t-2), the golf club 120 has a position 120(t-2) and the golf ball 110 has a position 110(t-2). Similarly, at time (t-1), the golf club 120 has a position 120(t-1) and the golf ball has a position 110(t-1). Time (t0) is the time of impact.”); and
a processor configured to determine ball launch parameters based on a post-impact series of images ([0023], “The apparatus 102 further comprises a processing arrangement 101 including a processor and a computer-readable memory. The processing arrangement 101 may optionally include a transceiver for sending and receiving data and a display for displaying impact characteristics” and [0051], “In addition to determining the various impact characteristics of the ball striking element, the system may also provide launch data on the ball, like ball speed, launch angle and launch direction. These data can be easily derived from the determined ball position in the images combined with the determined distance to the ball at impact. The determination of the ball launch data can include fitting an aerodynamical model to the determined angular positions of the ball to provide a more robust and accurate estimation”), and is further configured to perform following operations:
identify predetermined characteristic points on the golf club in each of the pre-impact images; determine pre-impact travelling path data for the golf club based on positions of the identified characteristic points in the pre-impact images ([0030], “From the motion image, one can use different computer vision techniques, such as a Canny edge detector or Hough transform, to determine an outline of the ball striking element, and from there identify the fix points and fix lines by comparing the outline of the ball striking element with a predetermined set of existing ball striking elements with fix points”); and
calculate club delivery parameters from a mechanical impact model based on the pre- impact travelling path data ([0044], “In step 635, the impact characteristics are determined. The impact characteristics may be determined in a coordinate system defined by the imager. However, in many instances, it will be desirable to present some or all of the impact characteristics in a more meaningful coordinate system. In FIGS. 7A and 7B, for example, a golf club coordinate system is shown relative to the positions of the fix points 121-125 and the fix line 126 of the golf club”).
Regarding claim 2, TUXEN discloses the system according to claim 1, wherein the processor is configured to apply the ball launch parameters as input to the mechanical impact model when calculating the club delivery parameters ([0037], “The smoothing may also be a physical model that approximates the expected movement of the ball striking element as, e.g., a 3D circle or ellipsis, and may use velocity data of the ball striking element from a radar.”).
Regarding claim 4, TUXEN discloses the system according to claim 1, wherein the processor is configured to determine a golf club type from the images provided by the imager, and wherein the processor is configured to provide the golf club type as input to the mechanical impact model together with the imager determined characteristics points to enhance the club delivery parameters ([0023], “The memory may further store geometric models or reference images of specific golf clubs or golf club types (driver, 3 wood, 4 iron, 5 iron, etc.) and locations of fix points and fix lines relative to a club coordinate system, as well as geometric models or reference images of golf balls”).
Regarding claim 6, TUXEN discloses the system according to claim 1, wherein the club delivery parameters include at least one of the following Club Speed, Club Path, and Face to Path ([0037], “For example, the club path and the attack angle just prior to impact may be determined by a linear interpolation of the club positions shown in two or more images taken within a time period surrounding the impact that is selected so that no significant change in club path or attack angle is expected to occur.”).
Regarding claim 7, TUXEN discloses the system according to claim 1, wherein the processor is configured to extract a first set of characteristic points for the golf club from each image in the pre-impact series of images and apply these data points in a swing model describing a path along which a club head travels towards impact with the ball ([0037], “That is, for short period before and after impact, the path of the club and attack will not vary significantly and the state of the club at impact can be determined based on interpolation from positions in: 1) two images taken immediately prior to impact;”).
Regarding claim 8, TUXEN discloses the system according to claim 7, wherein the processor is configured to extract characteristic points on the golf club based on one of a contour of the club head and a pattern present on a surface of the club head ([0037], “the position and direction of the fix point(s)/line(s) of a golf club may be used to determine an attack angle and a club path at the time of impact. The attack angle may be defined as the vertical direction of the club head just prior to impact measured relative to the horizon while the club path may be defined as the horizontal direction of the club head just prior to impact measured relative to a reference line, such as a target line from a current location of the ball to a target”).
Regarding claim 9, TUXEN discloses the system according to claim 1, wherein the mechanical impact model used to calculate the club delivery parameters is based on at least one of pre-impact travelling path data for the golf club, the ball launch parameters determined by the processor from the post-impact series of images and a travelling path of the golf club after impact determined by the processor from the post-impact series of images ([0037], “That is, for short period before and after impact, the path of the club and attack will not vary significantly and the state of the club at impact can be determined based on interpolation from positions in: 1) two images taken immediately prior to impact; or 2) two images taken immediately after impact; or 3) one image taken immediately prior to impact and one image taken immediately after impact”).
Regarding claim 10, TUXEN discloses the system according to claim 1, further comprising a radar system configured to provide position data to the processor for a club head in the series of images captured by the imager, wherein the radar system provides range data to the processor indicating a distance between the radar system and the golf club and/or the ball ([0043], “In a fourth embodiment, the distance to the ball from the imager at the time of impact may be determined by including another sensor, such as a radar, in the system. The other sensor may be independently capable of determining the distance to the ball and/or ball striking element.”).
Regarding claim 11, TUXEN discloses the system according to claim 10, wherein the radar system provides radial velocity data to the processor indicating radial velocity for the golf club and/or the ball ([0043], “For example, including a Doppler radar in the imager system may provide the further benefit that the range/distance and range rate/velocity of both the ball and the ball striking element may be accurately measured at any point in time”).
Regarding claim 12, TUXEN discloses the system according to claim 10, wherein the processor is configured to determine a pre-impact travelling path for the golf club based on the pre-impact series of images and the position data from the radar system for the club head in the pre-impact series of images ([0037], “The change of range to the club head from the imager can be determined either by determining the fix point in a third frame from the imager, or by determining the change of range (radial velocity) from a radar during the time frame where the position of the radar relative to the imager is known”).
Regarding claim 13, TUXEN discloses the system according to claim 10, wherein the processor is configured to determine club delivery parameters based on the pre-impact series of images and the position data from the radar system for the club head in the pre-impact series of images ([0037], “To determine the three-dimensional club direction of the club head, i.e. the 3D version of club path and attack angle, it is necessary to determine the change of range to the club head from the imager during the time frame. The change of range to the club head from the imager can be determined either by determining the fix point in a third frame from the imager, or by determining the change of range (radial velocity) from a radar during the time frame where the position of the radar relative to the imager is known. In case of using frames after impact for the attack angle and club path determination, one may take into account the small deflection happening of the club head as a result of the collision in order to satisfy the law of physics regarding conservation of linear and angular momentum”).
Regarding claim 14, please refer to the claim rejection of claim 1 and for the claim limitation “capturing a series of images extending for a first predetermined time before an impact between a golf club and a ball through impact between the golf club and the ball for a second predetermined time after the impact between the golf club and the ball,” TUXEN discloses this limitation in ([0029], “In an exemplary embodiment, the images are captured within a predetermined time span of the impact. For example, the frames may be captured from a time 50 ms prior to the impact to a time 50 ms after the impact.”)
Regarding claims 15 and 19-21, please refer to the claim rejections of claims 2 and 7-9.
Regarding claims 23, 24 and 29, please refer to the claim rejections of claims 1 and 14.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claim 28 is objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, but would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to YINGCHUAN ZHANG whose telephone number is (571)272-1375. The examiner can normally be reached 8:00 - 4:30 M-F.
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, Nicholas Weiss can be reached at (571) 270-1775. 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.
/YINGCHUAN ZHANG/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3711
Prosecution Insights