11548323 (P.T.A.B. Sep. 27, 2016)

Ex Parte Reeves

Patent Trial and Appeal BoardSep 27, 2016

11548323 (P.T.A.B. Sep. 27, 2016)

UNITED STA TES p A TENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE APPLICATION NO. FILING DATE FIRST NAMED INVENTOR 111548,323 10/11/2006 Goodwyn George Reeves 22850 7590 09/29/2016 OBLON, MCCLELLAND, MAIER & NEUSTADT, LLP, 1940 DUKE STREET ALEXANDRIA, VA 22314 UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE United States Patent and Trademark Office Address: COMMISSIONER FOR PATENTS P.O. Box 1450 Alexandria, Virginia 22313-1450 www .uspto.gov ATTORNEY DOCKET NO. CONFIRMATION NO. 328242US56CIP 5213 EXAMINER MYHR, JUSTIN L ART UNIT PAPER NUMBER 3714 NOTIFICATION DATE DELIVERY MODE 09/29/2016 ELECTRONIC Please find below and/or attached an Office communication concerning this application or proceeding. The time period for reply, if any, is set in the attached communication. Notice of the Office communication was sent electronically on above-indicated "Notification Date" to the following e-mail address( es): patentdocket@oblon.com oblonpat@oblon.com ahudgens@oblon.com PTOL-90A (Rev. 04/07) UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE BEFORE THE PATENT TRIAL AND APPEAL BOARD Ex parte GOODWYN GEORGE REEVES Appeal2014-004472 Application 11/548,323 Technology Center 3700 Before JENNIFER D. BAHR, CHARLES N. GREENHUT, and ERIC C. JESCHKE, Administrative Patent Judges. BAHR, Administrative Patent Judge. DECISION ON APPEAL STATEMENT OF THE CASE Goodwyn George Reeves (Appellant) appeals under 35 U.S.C. Â§ 134(a) from the Examiner's decision rejecting claims 40-71. We have jurisdiction under 35 U.S.C. Â§ 6(b ). An oral hearing in accordance with 37 C.F.R. Â§ 41.47 was held on September 22, 2016. We REVERSE. Appeal2014-004472 Application 11/548,323 THE CLAIMED SUBJECT MATTER Claim 40, reproduced below from page 16 of the Appeal Brief (Claims Appendix), with pertinent limitations italicized for emphasis, is illustrative of the claimed subject matter. 40. A portable golf round data system comprising: a radiolocation receiver to receive at least one external locating signal from which a user's current location on a golf course can be determined; data storage in a data collection unit for storing course data relating to locations of one or more golf course features; at least one processor in said data collection unit operatively connected to said radiolocation receiver and to said data storage, said processor programmed to: determine said user's current location on said golf course from said external locating signal; and dynamically generate a graphical view of a selected portion of said golf based on said user's current location, said dynamically generated view including a selected portion of the course and graphic indicia starting at said user's current location and representing at least one point on and along a selected path or direction corresponding to a next stroke, which said at least one point includes at least an end point of said selected path or direction; and a graphic display to display said graphical view of said selected portion of said golf course. REJECTIONS I. Claims 40, 55, 57, 60, and 64---66 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C. Â§ 102(b) as anticipated by Garn (US 5,873,797, iss. Feb. 23, 1999). II. Claims 41, 56, 58, and 59 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C. Â§ 103(a) as unpatentable over Garn. 2 Appeal2014-004472 Application 11/548,323 Ill. Claims 42-54 and 67-70 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C. Â§ 103(a) as unpatentable over Garn in view of Fisher (US 5,507 ,485, iss. Apr. 16, 1996). IV. Claims 61---63 stand rejected under 35 U.S.C. Â§ 103(a) as unpatentable over Garn in view of Foley (US 5,487,542, iss. Jan. 30, 1996). V. Claim 71 stands rejected under 35 U.S.C. Â§ 103(a) as unpatentable over Garn in view of Foley and Reeves (US 5,740,077, iss. Apr. 14, 1998). DISCUSSION Independent claims 40 and 71 each require a processor programmed to determine a user's current location from said external locating signal and dynamically generate a graphical view ... based on said user's current location, said dynamically generated view including ... graphic indicia starting at said user's current location and representing at least one point on and along a selected path or direction corresponding to a next stroke, which said at least one point includes at least an end point of said selected path or direction. Appeal Br. 16 (Claims App.). Thus, the claims require a processor programmed to dynamically generate a graphical view including graphic indicia starting at said user's location determined from said external locating signal and representing at least an end point along a selected path or direction corresponding to the next stroke. All of the Examiner's rejections are premised in pertinent part on the Examiner's finding that Garn discloses a processor programmed to dynamically generate such a view including such graphic indicia. Final Act. 2-3, 14--15. Appellant contests the Examiner's finding that Garn discloses such a processor. Appeal Br. 5-11. In particular, Appellant contends that (1) the 3 Appeal2014-004472 Application 11/548,323 user's current location, determined by a cart-mounted sensor, is represented by cart icon 53; (2) Garn's ball icon 58 does not represent the user's current location; and (3) ball icon line 50 is not dynamically generated, in that it is a fixed line that is generated from mapping data stored in the map database in advance, and, further, does not start at said user's location (i.e., cart icon 53), but, rather, starts at the tee box. Appeal Br. 7, 9, 11; Reply Br. 3. Appellant's contentions are accurate, and Appellant's argument is persuasive of error in the rejections. The only graphic indicia generated and displayed by Garn that can reasonably be considered to represent at least an end point along a selected path or direction corresponding to the next stroke is ball icon line 50. However, as correctly pointed out by Appellant, this line is not dynamically generated starting at the user's current location, but, rather, is a "substantially invariant longitudinal line" stored in the map database, and "runs substantially the entire length of the hole from tee to green." Garn, col. 8, 11. 7-9, 20-25. Ball icon 58 is dynamically generated, in that it "is arranged and adapted to move automatically with the cart icon 53, alongside it, as the latter moves along the cart path 47." Id., col. 8, 11. 49-51 (boldface omitted). However, ball icon 58 does not represent, or start from, said user's current position determined from said external locating signal, as required by the claims. Rather, cart icon 53 represents said user's current position based on external locating signals received at distance measuring and guidance equipment (e.g., a GPS receiver) located on the cart. Id., col. 8, 11. 26-38. Moreover, ball icon 58 does not also include at least an end point along a selected path or direction corresponding to the next stroke. The Examiner finds that ball icon 58 4 Appeal2014-004472 Application 11/548,323 would display a starting position of a user's current location on a current hole of the golf course when a user starts the play of the game since this would be the current position of the golf cart and therefore the estimated position of the golf ball in regards to the first stroke. Ans. 4. Even assuming that the golf cart would be positioned on the tee, such that the location of ball icon 58 would coincide with the location of cart icon 53 when the user starts play of the hole, the Examiner's reliance on ball icon 58 is unavailing for several reasons. First, as already mentioned, ball icon 58 does not include at least an end point along a selected path or direction corresponding to the next stroke. Although ball icon line 50 satisfies this limitation, it is not dynamically generated. Further, Garn discloses that, in the preferred embodiment, "the ball icon display is suppressed ... whenever the 'cart path only' rule is either revoked, or not invoked at the beginning of play." Garn, col. 12, 11. 8-13. Thus, in situations in which the cart icon and the ball icon could overlap, ball icon 58 would not be displayed. However, the salient point is that the graphic indicia of Garn that represents at least an end point along a selected path or direction corresponding to the next stroke (i.e., ball icon line 50) is a fixed line that always starts from the tee, and, thus, is not dynamically generated to start from the user's current location; the starting point of ball icon line 50 is not dynamically updated with the user's current location (cart icon 53) determined from said external locating signal. Thus, Garn does not disclose a processor programmed to dynamically generate a graphical view including graphic indicia starting at said user's location determined from said external locating signal and representing at least an end point along a selected path or direction corresponding to the next stroke, as called for in claims 40 and 71. 5 Appeal2014-004472 Application 11/548,323 The Examiner does not rely on Fisher, Foley, or Reeves for any teaching that would overcome the aforementioned deficiency in the Examiner's findings with regard to Garn. Even if Gam's system were modified in view of Reeves to have the cart-located equipment carried by the user instead of attached to a golf cart, that would not remedy the deficiency that ball icon line 50 (i.e., the graphic indicia that represents at least an end point along a selected path or direction corresponding to the next stroke) is a fixed line that always starts from the tee, and, thus, is not dynamically generated to start from the user's current location, as called for in claims 40 and 71, as well as the claims depending therefrom. For the above reasons, we do not sustain any of the Examiner's rejections. DECISION The Examiner's decision rejecting claims 40-71 is reversed. REVERSED 6