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 .
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments, see Pages 8-10, filed 23 Jul 2026, with respect to the rejection(s) of claim(s) 1-5, 7-13, 15, and 17 under 102 and 103 have been fully considered and are persuasive. Therefore, the rejection has been withdrawn. However, upon further consideration, a new ground(s) of rejection is made in view of Van, Lee, and Athey.
Claim Objections
Claims 19-20 are objected to because of the following informalities: Both Claims 19 and 20 depend on canceled Claim 18 and for the purposes of compact prosecution, the Examiner will interpret that the aforementioned claims depend on Claim 15. Appropriate correction is required.
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 (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 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.
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.
Claims 1, 7-9, 15, and 21 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over VanLandingham et al., US 20200038724 A1 (herein, Van) and in view of Lee et al., US 20200301421 A1 (herein, Lee), and in further view of Athey US 20220291398 A1 (herein, Athey).
.
Regarding Claims 1, 9, and 15, Van discloses, a vehicle system (FIG. 1, #10 – autonomous vehicle) comprising:
a vehicle display device (FIG. 2, #34 – display) configured to be installed in a personal vehicle of a user (FIG. 1, #24 – golfer and illustrates the personal vehicle); and
at least one processing circuit having at least one processor and at least one memory having instructions stored thereon that, when executed by the at least one processor, cause the at least one
processor to (FIG. 2, #33 – ECU has a processor and memory, and ¶[0018] – “…including an ECU 33, for controlling operation of the autonomous vehicle 10…”):
cause the display device (34) to display a personal use user interface associated with a personal use vehicle mode while the personal vehicle is in the first personal use vehicle mode (¶[0019] – “… a display 34 to provide feedback to the golfer 24 and to assist in the operation of the autonomous vehicle 10…” – i.e. personal use of the user interface), the personal use user interface having a first set of displayed features corresponding to at least a portion of a first set of functionalities enabled in the personal use vehicle mode (FIG. 2 and ¶[0023] – “…The wind speed and direction may then be communicated through the controller 32 and display 34 to the golfer 24….”);
transition from the personal use vehicle mode to the golf mode (FIG. 8, #142 – follow golfer mode) associated with the golf course (FIG. 4, #50 – golf course and ¶[0041] – “…location may be specified by pointing to a location on a map of the golf course 50 on the display 64, or the location may be specified from a pick list of common destinations. The common destinations may include, but is not limited to,…”).; and
cause the display device to display the golf mode user interface associated with the golf mode while the personal vehicle is in the golf mode (FIG. 8 and ¶[0015] – “…is a flow chart of the method of using the autonomous vehicle as a golf caddie and cart in a cart mode.” – i.e. displaying a golf mode user interface via the flow chart starting on #142), the golf mode user interface having a second set of displayed features corresponding to at least a portion of a second set of functionalities enabled in the golf mode (¶[0039] – “…In step 154, the autonomous vehicle 10 will only move if the distance d between the golfer 24 and the autonomous vehicle 10, as determined either by using an algorithm to analyze images from the camera 44 or by taking data from the ranging unit 62…”),
wherein at least one functionality of the first set of functionalities is included in the second set of functionalities (¶[0039] – “…the camera 44 or by taking data from the ranging unit 62 on board the autonomous vehicle 10 in communication with the controller 32,…” – i.e. the functionality of communication is part of the second set of functionality).
Van discloses a golf course (FIG. 4 illustrates a golf course #50) but does not disclose,
detect a golf mode information trigger event associated with a golf course;
in response to detecting the golf mode information trigger event, obtain golf mode information associated with the golf course from an external system associated with the golf course;
update a golf mode user interface associated with a golf mode of the personal vehicle to incorporate the golf mode information associated with the golf course.
However, Lee teaches,
detect a golf mode information trigger event associated with a golf course (FIGS. 1-4 and ¶[0025] – “… the configuration of the golf cart system capable of changing driving modes according to whether entering a golf course…”) ;
in response to detecting the golf mode information trigger event, obtain golf mode information associated with the golf course from an external system associated with the golf course (FIGS. 1-4 and ¶[0025] – “…golf course information on a cart driving area and a cart driving limit area of the golf club from a server 300, and information on whether the cart body 100 can enter the golf course with grass, and a driving mode selector 230 for selecting any one of a cart road driving mode 231 is which if the cart body 100 cannot enter the golf course with grass on the basis of the received information of the receiver 220…”);
update a golf mode user interface associated with a golf mode of the personal vehicle to incorporate the golf mode information associated with the golf course (FIGS. 1-4 and ¶[0025] – “…while tracking the terminal 400 on the basis of the position information of the terminal 400, and a cart road and golf course entry driving mode 233 in which if the cart body 100 can enter the golf course with grass, the cart, body 100 is automatically driven appropriately along the cart road and the golf course with grass,…” – i.e. ).
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 vehicle system as disclosed by Van to include updating the golf mode information trigger, golf mode user interface, and the golf mode of a vehicle as taught by Lee. Doing so, enhances the vehicle system by providing update of the golf mode user interface and golf mode and thus provides a better golfing experience to the golfer when playing golf.
wherein at least one displayed feature of the first set of displayed features is included in the second set of displayed features (¶[0039] – “…the camera 44 or by taking data from the ranging unit 62 on board the autonomous vehicle 10 in communication with the controller 32,…” – i.e. the functionality of communication is part of the second set of functionality).
Modified Van discloses, wherein at least one displayed feature of the first set of displayed features is included in the second set of displayed features; but does not disclose,
wherein at least one displayed feature of the first set of displayed features is included in the second set of displayed features; and wherein the at least one processing circuit includes at least one of (a) a first processing circuit configured to be located on the vehicle or (b) a second processing circuit configured to be located remote from the vehicle.
However, Athey teaches,
wherein at least one displayed feature of the first set of displayed features is included in the second set of displayed features; and wherein the at least one processing circuit includes at least one of (a) a first processing circuit configured to be located on the vehicle (FIG. 2, #210 – processors and ¶[0068] – “…the processor 210 may determine the physical location from the GPS circuit 220 and may determine when the vehicle is at a parking lot or “home” base location. When the processor 210 determines the physical location corresponds to the “home” base, the processor 210 may wait for the vehicle to be turned off and then may use power from the power storage 208 to send the radiation measurement data …”) or (b) a second processing circuit configured to be located remote from the vehicle (FIG. 1, #120 – processor).
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 vehicle system as disclosed by modified Van to include a circuit on the vehicle and remote from the same as taught by Athey. Doing so, enhances the vehicle system by providing additional processing capability both on the vehicle and remotely.
Regarding Claim 7, modified Van further discloses, wherein the instructions further cause the at least one processor to receive a user selection via the personal use user interface, and wherein the transition from the personal use vehicle mode to the golf mode is performed in response to receiving the user selection (¶[0027] – “…The autonomous vehicle 10, through making a selection through the user interface 64 as discussed above, may operate in a number of modes such that the autonomous vehicle 10 may be used as virtual caddie, as a golf cart, or both…”).
Regarding Claim 8, modified Van further discloses, wherein the instructions further cause the at least one processor to detect that the personal vehicle has arrived at the golf course (¶[0011] – “FIG. 4 is a schematic representation of a view of golf hole on a golf course as viewed from the autonomous vehicle when used as a golf caddie and cart.”), and wherein the transition from the personal use vehicle mode to the golf mode is performed at least in response to detecting that the personal vehicle has arrived at the golf course (¶[0038] – “…the autonomous vehicle 10 is directed by the controller 32 to follow the golfer 24 as the golfer 24 walks the golf course 50…”).
Regarding Claim 21, modified Van discloses further, wherein the at least one functionality is associated with one of an operator control of the personal vehicle (FIG. 6 and ¶[0030] – “If the golfer 24 selects the caddie advice mode 112, the controller 32 further completes step 118 by detecting the speed and direction of the wind using…”), a driveline of the personal vehicle, a suspension system of the personal vehicle, a braking system of the personal vehicle, or an audio system of the personal vehicle (FIG. 2 and #72 – Speakers).
Claims 2-3, 10-11, and 17 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over VanLandingham et al., US 20200038724 A1 (herein, Van) in view of Lee, Athey US 20220291398 A1 (herein, Athey), and in further view of Doane et al., US 20170108860 A1 (herein, Doane).
Regarding Claims 2, 10, and 16, Van further discloses a map of a location of the personal vehicle (FIG. 8 and ¶[0041] – “…may first prompt the golfer 24 to confirm the specified location and to confirm the autonomous vehicle 10 may proceed through the user interface 64 in step 164. The location may be specified by pointing to a location on a map of the golf course 50…”) but does not disclose, wherein the first user interface is a personal use vehicle interface and the first set of displayed features includes at least one of a battery status of the personal vehicle, a speedometer for the personal vehicle, a list of available tee times at nearby golf courses, or a map of a location of the personal vehicle.
However, Doane teaches, wherein the first user interface is a personal use vehicle interface and the first set of displayed features includes at least one of a battery status of the personal vehicle (¶[0026] – “…one or more displays can have a variety of functions including, but not limited to, displaying information to the user of the robotic golf caddy, providing instructional information to the user of the robotic golf caddy, providing diagnostics/status information (e.g., battery low, battery fully charged,…”), a speedometer for the personal vehicle (¶[0011] – “…he processor unit to enable the processor unit to properly control the robotic golf caddy. Such information can include, but is not limited to, the distance of the robotic golf caddy from the golfer, the speed at which the robotic golf caddy is approaching the golfer,….”), a list of available tee times at nearby golf courses (¶[0026] – “…display can also allow input of information (e.g., golf scores, player names, player handicap, time play started, time play ended, reservation of future tee times, ordering food …”), or a map of a location of the personal vehicle.
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 vehicle system as disclosed by modified Van to include battery status, speedometer, and tee time as taught by Doane. Doing so, enhances the vehicle system by providing additional information to the golfer so as to maximize their golfing experience.
Regarding Claims 3, 11, and 17, modified Van further discloses, a distance to hole indication (Claim 3 – “… a distance from the golf ball to a pin located on a green of a golf hole;…”), a map of at least a portion of the golf course (FIG. 4 illustrates a map of at least a part of the golf course), but does not disclose, wherein the second set of displayed features includes at least one of a pace of play indication, a service request feature, a distance to hole indication, or a map of at least a portion of the golf course.
However, Doane teaches, wherein the second set of displayed features includes at least one of a pace of play indication (¶[0024] – “… the robotic golf caddy can move or enter, provide pace of play…”), a service request feature (¶[0026] – “… communication with the club house or other areas on the golf course, ordering golf supplies at club house, requesting golf supplies to be delivered to golfer on golf course, etc.)…”), a distance to hole indication, or a map of at least a portion of the golf course.
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 vehicle system as disclosed by modified Van to include a golf hole mode interface, pace of play, and service request feature as taught by Doane. Doing so, enhances the vehicle system by providing additional information to the golfer so as to maximize their golfing experience.
Regarding Claim 12, modified Van discloses golf course, second user interfaces, but does not disclose, wherein the golf course is one of a plurality of golf courses and the golf mode user interface is one of a plurality of golf mode interfaces, and wherein each golf mode interface of the plurality of golf mode interfaces is associated with a corresponding golf course of the plurality of golf courses.
However, Doane teaches, wherein the golf course is one of a plurality of golf courses and the golf mode interface is one of a plurality of golf mode user interfaces, and wherein each golf mode interface of the plurality of second user interfaces is associated with a corresponding golf course of the plurality of golf courses (¶[0020] – “…The GPS-based tracking device can also or alternatively provide information, such as, but not limited to, providing a detailed history of where each robotic golf caddy has been, tracking the number and type of golf courses (e.g., number of 9 hole golf courses, number of 18 hole golf courses, etc.) the robotic golf caddy has completed, track the hours of use of the robotic golf caddy,…”).
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 vehicle system as disclosed by modified Van to include a plurality of golf courses and the second users associated corresponding golf course as taught by Doane. Doing so, enhances the vehicle system by providing additional information to the golfer so as to the plurality of golf courses and the corresponding golf course per the second interface.
Regarding Claims 13 and 19, modified Van further discloses, wherein the second set of displayed features are arranged in a same location on each golf mode interface of the plurality of golf mode user interfaces (FIGS. 3-4 illustrate the same location).
Claims 4-5 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over VanLandingham et al., US 20200038724 A1 (herein, Van) in view of Lee, Athey US 20220291398 A1 (herein, Athey), Doane et al., US 20170108860 A1 (herein, Doane), and in further view of Gorjestani et al., US 20150356501 A1 (herein, Gor).
Regarding Claim 4, modified Van discloses the golf course, the second interface, the golf mode user interface, and displayed features but does not disclose,
wherein the golf course is one of a plurality of golf courses and the golf mode user interface is one of a plurality of second user interfaces, wherein each golf mode user interface of the plurality of golf mode user interfaces is associated with a corresponding golf course of the plurality of golf courses, and wherein each golf mode user interface of the plurality of golf mode user interfaces incorporates information associated with its corresponding golf course into at least some of the second set of displayed features.
However, Gor teaches, wherein the golf course is one of a plurality of golf courses and the golf mode user interface is one of a plurality of golf mode interfaces, wherein the golf course is one of a plurality of golf courses and the golf mode user interface is one of a plurality of second user interfaces, wherein each golf mode user interface of the plurality of golf mode user interfaces is associated with a corresponding golf course of the plurality of golf courses, and wherein each golf mode user interface of the plurality of golf mode user interfaces incorporates information associated with its corresponding golf course into at least some of the second set of displayed features. (FIG. 4A and ¶[0081] – “…The interface 400 additionally includes an input field 404 through which the user can enter the name (or portion thereof) of a course to filter the golf courses that are included in the selectable list 406 of golf courses. The interface 400 also includes a selectable element 408 (e.g., button) that the user can use to indicate that a golf course the user will be using is not included in the list 406….”).
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 vehicle system as disclosed by modified Van to include a plurality of golf courses, and a plurality of second user interfaces with a corresponding golf course as taught by Gor. Doing so, enhances the vehicle system by providing a plurality of golf course and the plurality of second user interfaces with a corresponding golf course so as to provide the golfer with additional choices that can enhance the golfer experience.
Regarding Claim 5, modified Van further discloses, wherein the second set of displayed features are arranged in a same location on each golf mode user interface of the plurality of golf mode user interfaces (¶[0030] – “…The location of the pin 52 and the green 54 may be detected by using images from the camera 44, such as the view illustrated in FIG. 4, and the location information may be communicated to the golfer 24…).
Claims 6, 14, and 20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over VanLandingham et al., US 20200038724 A1 (herein, Van) in view of Lee, Athey US 20220291398 A1 (herein, Athey), Doane et al., US 20170108860 A1 (herein, Doane), Gorjestani et al., US 20150356501 A1 (herein, Gor), and in further view of Gujral et al., US 20260097656 A1 (herein, Guj).
Regarding Claim 6, 14, and 20, modified Van discloses the instructions, processor, and golf course, wherein the instructions further cause the at least one processor to gray out at least one displayed feature of the second set of displayed features corresponding to a service that is not provided by the corresponding golf course.
However, Gujral teaches, wherein the instructions further cause the at least one processor to gray out at least one displayed feature of the second set of displayed features corresponding to a service that is not provided by the corresponding golf course. (¶[0110] – “…he action engine 706 can determine to adjust a user interface of the vehicle to restrict functions or applications based on the driver distraction score. For example, the action engine 706 can determine to gray out, disable, or otherwise remove artifacts from the user interface…”).
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 vehicle system as disclosed by modified Van to include a gray out of the display pertaining to a service not provided as taught by Guj. Doing so, enhances the vehicle system by providing the graying out of the display when a service is not available on a golf course and as such the golfer is made aware as to what golf course lacks said service.
Claim 22 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over VanLandingham et al., US 20200038724 A1 (herein, Van) in view of Lee, , and in further view of Turner US 20260082189 A1 (herein, Turner).
Regarding Claim 22, modified Van discloses the processing circuit and personal vehicle but does not disclose, wherein the at least one processing circuit includes at least one of (a) a first processing circuit configured to be located on the personal vehicle or (b) a second processing circuit configured to be located remote from the personal vehicle.
However, Turner teaches, wherein the at least one processing circuit includes at least one of (a) a first processing circuit configured to be located on the personal vehicle or (b) a second processing circuit configured to be located remote from the personal vehicle (FIG. 1 and ¶[0087] – “The remote device 110 is configured to receive the vehicle-agnostic information from the processor assembly 120. The remote device 110 may be configured to receive vehicle-agnostic information from the first processor 122 and second processor 124 individually (i.e., rather than from the processor assembly 120 as a whole)…when the safety driver is monitoring the second vehicle 200b at a second point in time, the remote device 110 may receive vehicle-agnostic information from the second processor 124 at the second point in time.”).
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 vehicle system as disclosed by modified Van to include a first processing circuit on the vehicle and the second circuit located on the vehicle as taught by Turner. Doing so, enhances the vehicle system by providing the capability to remotely control the vehicle via the two processors.
Conclusion
Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP § 706.07(a). Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a).
A shortened statutory period for reply to this final action is set to expire THREE MONTHS from the mailing date of this action. In the event a first reply is filed within TWO MONTHS of the mailing date of this final action and the advisory action is not mailed until after the end of the THREE-MONTH shortened statutory period, then the shortened statutory period will expire on the date the advisory action is mailed, and any nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) pursuant to 37 CFR 1.136(a) will be calculated from the mailing date of the advisory action. In no event, however, will the statutory period for reply expire later than SIX MONTHS from the mailing date of this final action.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to LUIS G DEL VALLE whose telephone number is (303)297-4313. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday, 0730 - 1630 MST.
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, Anne Antonucci can be reached at (313) 446-6519. 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.
/LUIS G DEL VALLE/Examiner, Art Unit 3666
/ANNE MARIE ANTONUCCI/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3666
Prosecution Insights