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 filed 01/29/2026 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive
On page 7, applicant argues Braun fails to disclose “retaining a content of the setting request from the other process; and transmitting the second control instruction in response to the retained content of the setting request from the other process when the other process is newly selected as a focus process.” Examiner respectfully disagrees. In further review of the reference it was discover that Braun expressly teaches in col 20- line 29- col 21, line 10.”Alternatively, the commands from an inactive foreground application can be stored and then sent to the device when the application becomes active….” That an application may send a command, the API checks whether the commanding application is active (in focus). If not active the command can be store and then send when application becomes active. Under a broadest reasonable interpretation, storing the command constitutes retaining the content of the setting request and sending the command when the application becomes active corresponds to transmitting the control instruction when the other process becomes the focus process.
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.
Claims 1-3 and 5-10 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Braun (US 6300936 B1) in view of Braun.
Regarding claim 1, Braun teaches:
An information processing apparatus configured to connect to an operation device comprising an operation member, the information processing apparatus comprising one or more processors; and a storage device storing a program which, when executed by the one or more processors, cause the information processing apparatus to perform operations comprising(Claim 52. A force feedback interface device coupled to a host computer displaying a graphical environment and a user-controlled graphical object within said graphical environment on a display device, the interface device comprising. See also col 17, line 4-13)
executing a plurality of processes in parallel, wherein the plurality of processes comprises a first process executing an application program and a second process executing a system (col 16, line 34-43 FIG. 4 is a block diagram of a preferred architecture for the host computer to communicate with and control a force feedback interface device 11 with multiple application programs running on the host computer. Application programs 202 and 204 are concurrently running on the host computer 18. In the most typical implementation, one of the application programs is actively running in an operating system as the "active" application program that displays one or more active windows in the GUI (also known as the application program that is "in focus" or which has "keyboard focus").)
selecting a process among the plurality of processes as a focus process based on a given condition. (col 16, line 34-50. FIG. 4 is a block diagram of a preferred architecture for the host computer to communicate with and control a force feedback interface device 11 with multiple application programs running on the host computer. Application programs 202 and 204 are concurrently running on the host computer 18. In the most typical implementation, one of the application programs is actively running in an operating system as the "active" application program that displays one or more active windows in the GUI (also known as the application program that is "in focus" or which has "keyboard focus"). The active window is typically the topmost displayed window in which input is provided by the user using the mouse-controlled cursor, a keyboard, or other peripheral. The other applications are "inactive" in that they are not receiving input from the user (although they may have a window displayed in the GUI which can be updated on the screen))
generating, by the plurality of processes, a plurality of control instructions, wherein each control instruction of the plurality of control instructions indicates a content of a control process to be executed by a component of the operation device (col 20, line 6-13. The context driver 210 receives individual effects and events as they are created by the application program using API 208 and stores the effects and events in a context list 212, storing each context in a different storage location in the host's memory or on some other type of storage device. An active or inactive application program can create a context and have it stored, but only the active application's context will be sent to the force feedback device.)
transmitting, to the operation device, a first control instruction of the plurality of control instructions in response to a setting request from the focus process. (col 20, line 52-67. A context is therefore only allowed to exert forces with the force feedback device when that context is active, i.e., is associated with an active application program or the background application. In the described embodiment, only one foreground context can be active at any given time. Any number of background contexts may be simultaneously active; however, there may be a device limit on the number of background contexts that may be created. For example, the mouse device 11 may only allow one background context to be created at any one time, which is the preferred embodiment. Thus, if an inactive (not in focus) foreground application program commands a force to be output, the API will ignore the command after determining that the commanding application is not active (or, the command will only be sent to the device when the application becomes active).)
restricting transmission of a second control instruction of the plurality of control instructions in response to a setting request another process of the plurality of processes other than the focus process, and retaining a content of the setting request from the other process; and. (col 20, line 36-52. If the application is active or background, the API sends the start information to the context driver 210 indicating the application program that commanded the force and the particular force effects to be commanded. The context driver 210 then associates the commanding application program with a context 214 in list 212 and sends the effects from the context to the force feedback device (if not previously sent). For example, if a context for a particular application program includes a spring effect, a damper effect, and a vibration effect, and the application program commands the vibration to be output, then the context driver selects the vibration effects to be output to the device. The data describing this effect is then output by the context driver 210. Similarly, the application program can send a command to stop particular force effects, to pause the effects, to get the status information of an effect, or to destroy an effect.)
Braun teachings does not appear to explicitly teach : and retaining a content of the setting request from the other process; and transmitting the second control instruction in response to the retained content of the setting request from the other process when the other process is newly selected as a focus process.
However, Braun does teach :(col 20,line 63 – col 21, line 10. Thus, if an inactive (not in focus) foreground application program commands a force to be output, the API will ignore the command after determining that the commanding application is not active (or, the command will only be sent to the device when the application becomes active).If the active application program becomes inactive (i.e. loses foreground or is removed from the host's memory) and a different application becomes active, then the API indicates this to the context driver 210, which then deactivates the context associated with that application program and loads the effects from the new active context to the force feedback device 11. Likewise, when the original application program again becomes active, the API tells the context driver to activate the associated context and load the appropriate effects to the force feedback device.).
Accordingly, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in art before the effective filing of the invention to ignore (restrict) an inactive application to ensure only the active selected process by the user controls the haptic device. This behavior is a standard feature in multitasking systems.
Regarding claim 2, Braun teaches:
The information processing apparatus according to wherein the operations further comprise: selecting a process that is an object for accepting a user's operation from the plurality of processes as the selected process. (col 16, line 63- col 17, line 16 . When the user moves the cursor over an inactive window and provides a command gesture such as clicking a button on a mouse, the inactive window becomes the active window and the former active window becomes inactive. The active application is also known as the "foreground" application, in the sense that its force sensations are being implemented by the force feedback device, as described below. A master application 206 also is running on host computer 18 and is also known as the "background" force feedback application. This application is preferably a general purpose program that always runs inactively in the operating system and whose set of commanded forces are always available to be output and controlled on the interface device 11 and/or other devices. For example, a preferred embodiment of the master application is a "desktop" control panel for force feedback. An example of such a program is illustrated in FIG. 5. A "mouse properties" dialog box 240 can be displayed which allows the user to specify force sensations 244 that are assigned to specified object types 242 in the displayed graphical environment, e.g. a graphical user interface )
Regarding claim 3, Braun teaches:
The information processing apparatus according to The information processing apparatus according to wherein the operations further comprise: periodically receiving state information indicating an execution state of the control process from the operation device;, (col 20, line 48 – 66. The data describing this effect is then output by the context driver 210. Similarly, the application program can send a command to stop particular force effects, to pause the effects, to get the status information of an effect, or to destroy an effect. A context is therefore only allowed to exert forces with the force feedback device when that context is active, i.e., is associated with an active application program or the background application. In the described embodiment, only one foreground context can be active at any given time. Any number of background contexts may be simultaneously active; however, there may be a device limit on the number of background contexts that may be created. For example, the mouse device 11 may only allow one background context to be created at any one time, which is the preferred embodiment. Thus, if an inactive (not in focus) foreground application program commands a force to be output, the API will ignore the command after determining that the commanding application is not active (or, the command will only be sent to the device when the application becomes active).)
Regarding claim 5, Braun teaches the elements of claim 1 as outline above and thus the claim has similar limitations and is rejected under the same rationale provided above. Braun also teaches:
A method for controlling an information processing apparatus connected to an operation device comprising an operation member,, the method comprising. ( Claim 1. A method for interfacing a multi-tasking graphical environment implemented on a host computer with a force feedback interface device coupled to said host computer, wherein multiple application programs are simultaneously running in said multi-tasking environment, wherein one of said multiple application programs is active and the other application programs are inactive, the method comprising)
Regarding claim 6, Braun teaches the elements of claim 1 as outline above and thus the claim has similar limitations and is herein rejected under the same rationale provided above.. Braun also teaches::
A non-transitory, computer readable storage medium containing a computer program, which when executed by a computer connected to an operation device comprising an operation member,, causes the computer to carry out actions, comprising. (Claim 16 A computer readable medium including program instructions executable by a host computer:)
Regarding claim 7, the claim recites similar limitation as corresponding claim 2 and is rejected for similar reasons as claim 2 using similar teachings and rationale.
Regarding claim 8, the claim recites similar limitation as corresponding claim 3 and is rejected for similar reasons as claim 3 using similar teachings and rationale.
Regarding claim 9, the claim recites similar limitation as corresponding claim 2 and is rejected for similar reasons as claim 2 using similar teachings and rationale.
Regarding claim 10, the claim recites similar limitation as corresponding claim 3 and is rejected for similar reasons as claim 3 using similar teachings and rationale.
Conclusion
THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. 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 CARLOS A ESPANA whose telephone number is (703)756-1069. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday 8 a.m - 5 p.m EST.
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, LEWIS BULLOCK JR can be reached at (571)272-3759. 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.
/C.A.E./Examiner, Art Unit 2199
/LEWIS A BULLOCK JR/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2199