DETAILED ACTION
The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
Responsive to the communication dated 09/28/2022
Claims 1-20 are presented for examination
Information Disclosure Statement
The IDS dated 12/04/2023, 12/08/2023, 01/12/2024, 01/18/2024, 11/12/2024, 03/13/2025, 04/23/2025, 08/14/2025, and 12/08/2025 have been reviewed. See attached.
Drawings
The drawings dated 09/28/2022 have been reviewed. They are accepted.
Abstract
The abstract dated 09/28/2022 has been reviewed. It has 176 words, which is greater than the 150 word maximum. Appropriate correction is required.
Applicant is reminded of the proper content of an abstract of the disclosure.
A patent abstract is a concise statement of the technical disclosure of the patent and should include that which is new in the art to which the invention pertains. The abstract should not refer to purported merits or speculative applications of the invention and should not compare the invention with the prior art.
If the patent is of a basic nature, the entire technical disclosure may be new in the art, and the abstract should be directed to the entire disclosure. If the patent is in the nature of an improvement in an old apparatus, process, product, or composition, the abstract should include the technical disclosure of the improvement. The abstract should also mention by way of example any preferred modifications or alternatives.
Where applicable, the abstract should include the following: (1) if a machine or apparatus, its organization and operation; (2) if an article, its method of making; (3) if a chemical compound, its identity and use; (4) if a mixture, its ingredients; (5) if a process, the steps.
Extensive mechanical and design details of an apparatus should not be included in the abstract. The abstract should be in narrative form and generally limited to a single paragraph within the range of 50 to 150 words in length.
See MPEP § 608.01(b) for guidelines for the preparation of patent abstracts.
Claim Interpretation
Although the term “fit model” is a term of art in the field of clothing design that refers to a 3D model of a particular person’s body for the purpose of fitting clothes models to, it is clear based on passages from the specification ([Par 473] “In step 612, the core service generates, for the custom product, a parametric fit model having a plurality of fit model parameters. Each fit model parameter, of the plurality of fit model parameters, may be computed by interpolating a corresponding parameter of a first particular parametric model of the two particular parametric models and a corresponding parameter of a second particular parametric model of the two particular parametric models. For example, referring to FIG. 4D, if one of the adjustment parameters provided for, for example, a t- shirt pertains to a width of the t-shirt, and the user provided width appears to be between the width of a 3X size of a t-shirt and the width of a 4X size of a t-shirt, then a custom width may be computed by determining an average width between the width of a 3X size of a t-shirt and the width of a 4X size of a t-shirt.”) and figures such as Fig.4I and 4k which describe the generation of the “fit model,” that this phrase does not refer to the term of art, rather it refers to a fit model of the clothing, i.e. a model of the clothing that has been fit to a certain size. The term of art “fit model” does not include any actual clothing, it is merely a 3D representation of the measurements themselves.
Claim Objections
Claims 4, 7, 11, 14 and 18 are objected to because of the following informalities:
Claims 7 and 14 recite “the customized product.” It is clear that this is meant to refer to the “custom product” and should amended to reflect such.
Claims 4, 11, and 18 recite a “fourth graphical representation of the parametric physical product;” no third graphical representation was previously recited. It is recommended to amend the “fourth graphical representation” to instead be a “third graphical representation.”
Appropriate correction is required.
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 1-20 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.
Claims 1, 8, and 15 recite the limitation "... at least one parameter, of the plurality of corresponding parameters.” There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. It is unclear what these parameters are referring to. The claim had previously described “corresponding control points,” and “adjustment parameters,” but no “corresponding parameters” were previously identified
Claims 1, 8, and 15 recite the limitation “the plurality of adjustment parameters of a particular parametric model.” There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. While a plurality of adjustment parameters was previously introduced, it was not previously introduced as being specific to particular parametric models.
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 1-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 101 because they are directed to an abstract idea without significantly more.
Claim 1 (Statutory Category – Process)
Step 2A – Prong 1: Judicial Exception Recited?
Yes, the claim recites a mental process, specifically:
MPEP 2106.04(a)(2)(Ill): “Accordingly, the "mental processes" abstract idea grouping is defined as concepts performed in the human mind, and examples of mental processes include observations, evaluations, Judgments, and opinions.”
Further, the MPEP recites “The courts do not distinguish between mental processes that are performed entirely in the human mind and mental processes that require a human to use a physical aid (e.g., pen and paper or a slide rule) to perform the claim limitation.”
A method for custom fitting and manufacturing parametric products, the method comprising: generating a plurality of parametric models of a custom product based on, at least in part, past learned data pertaining to the custom product, each parametric model identified by a parametric model identifier and having a plurality of corresponding control points;
Generating such parametric models for a product based on past information is a mental process equivalent to coming up with parameters for designs based on previous experience, and drawing designs based on those parameters using a pencil and paper. For example, a person who had previously designed shirts may have learned that adding an extra inch of fabric to the neck of t-shirts increases durability. With this in mind, they could write out a set of parameters for a t-shirt design and increase the {necklength} parameter by 1 inch. The form of the designed t-shirt could also be formed by control points, for example a set of points that’s positions define where the sleeves should start, or points that reflect the {necklength} parameter by denoting the locations of the top and bottom of the neck area of the shirt. The person could then draw a design of the t-shirt that reflects the parameter values and control point positions. This could be repeated with different parameters and control point positions to generate a plurality of such designs. A “model identifier” could be added by titling each design/model.
Performing this modelling within a computer environment amounts to no more than mere instructions to apply.
generating a first user interface comprising at least a first graphical representation of the custom product, and displaying the first user interface on a computer display device;
Generating such a user interface that comprises a graphical representation of the product is a mental process equivalent to drawing such an interface, such as an interface mockup, with a pencil and paper, and including a drawing of the product design within this interface.
Producing an actual user interface on the display of a computer amounts to no more than mere instructions to apply.
based on the plurality of adjustment parameters and the plurality of parametric models, determining two particular parametric models, each having at least one parameter, of the plurality of corresponding parameters, that is within a particular tolerance of at least one parameter of the plurality of adjustment parameters of a particular parametric model of the two particular parametric models;
This is a mental process equivalent to observing the set of generated designs and their associated parameters, and comparing these parameters to a second set of parameters to determine which designs have parameters within a certain numeric distance from the corresponding parameters of the second set. For example, say the adjustment parameter taken into account is shirt width with a value of 30 inches, and an arbitrarily chosen tolerance of 1 inch. A person could compare this to each of the t-shirt designs until they find two that have a width within an inch of 30 inches, i.e. two with a width between 29 and 31 inches.
Performing this modelling within a computer environment amounts to no more than mere instructions to apply.
generating, for the custom product, a parametric fit model having a plurality of fit model parameters; wherein each fit model parameter, of the plurality of fit model parameters, is computed by interpolating, for the at least one parameter of the two particular parametric models, between one or more corresponding control points of a first parametric model of the two particular parametric models and one or more corresponding control points of a second parametric model of the two particular parametric models; wherein a fit model parameter, of the plurality of fit model parameters of the parametric fit model, is represented as a fit key-value pair;
Generating this fit model is a mental process equivalent to fitting a design for a product to a particular size by interpolating between two other sizes of that design. For example, say a design for a shirt had a “large” size with a width of 30 inches and a “small” size with a width of 20 inches, with control points on either edge of the shirt. A person could interpolate a “medium” size by drawing a design for the shirt that is midway between the “large” and “small” sizes, moving the control points accordingly to midway between their positions in the “large” and “small” sizes. For example, if one point was at the position (30,3) (or (30,3,3) for 3D) for the “large” design, and a corresponding point was at the position (20,1) (or (20,1,1) for 3D) for the “small” design, the position of the interpolated point for the ”medium” design could be mentally determined to be midway between the two positions, i.e. at (25,2) (or (25,2,2) for 3D).
Note that the calculation of these interpolated coordinates is also a mathematic concept.
Specifying that the parameters are represented as a key-value pair merely clarifies the format the parameters are written in. For example, given the hypothetical {necklength} parameter discussed earlier, the written parameter listing may include a line such as {necklength:2inches}.
Performing this modelling within a computer environment amounts to no more than mere instructions to apply.
The claims also recite a mathematic concept, specifically:
wherein each fit model parameter, of the plurality of fit model parameters, is computed by interpolating, for the at least one parameter of the two particular parametric models, between one or more corresponding control points of a first parametric model of the two particular parametric models and one or more corresponding control points of a second parametric model of the two particular parametric models;
Interpolating between two sets of values for an unknown between them is a mathematic concept that numerically calculates the unknown data. Further note that the specification provides examples of the interpolation process by explicitly reciting formulae. See ([Par 87- 90] “2.3.3. FITTING USING INTERPOLATION Interpolation is a method of finding new values for any function using a known set of values. To interpolate means to connect discrete data points to obtain, for example, reasonable estimates of data points between the known points. In case of a linear interpolation, the new values for two known (i.e., given) points may be found using a linear interpolation formula. An example formula is y = yl + ((x - xl) / (x2 - xl)) * (y2 - yl), where x is the known value, y is the unknown value, xl and yl are the coordinates that are below the known x value, and x2 and y2 are the coordinates that are above the x value. A linear interpolation formula may include evaluating the following continuous linear function:
V2= ((V1- VO) * t)+VO where t is in the range [0...1], VO is a start vector, V1 is an end vector, and V2 is
the interpolated result.”
Step 2A – Prong 2: Integrated into a Practical Solution?
Insignificant Extra-Solution Activity (MPEP 2106.05(g)) has found mere data gathering and
post solution activity to be insignificant extra-solution activity.
Data gathering:
receiving, via the first user interface, a plurality of adjustment parameters for improving a fit of the custom product in relation to user-specific data;
Receiving this data is merely the act of gathering it, and therefore amounts to no more than mere data gathering.
Post-Solution Activity:
transmitting the parametric fit model to a manufacturer to cause the manufacturer to produce a parametric physical product based on the plurality of fit model parameters of the parametric fit model.
Transmitting and producing the model based on the result of the abstract idea amounts to no more than acting on those results, and therefore is an example of insignificant post-solution activity.
Should it be found that this is not an example of insignificant post-solution activity, it is also an example of mere instructions to apply.
Mere Instructions to Apply (MPEP 2106.05(f)) has found that merely applying a judicial exception such as an abstract idea, as by performing it on a computer, does not integrate the claim into a practical solution.
Mere Instructions to Apply:
generating a first user interface comprising at least a first graphical representation of the custom product, and displaying the first user interface on a computer display device;
Applying a computer to generate a generic user interface at a high level of generality is simply the act of instructing a computer to perform generic functions to generate that interface, which is merely an instruction to apply a computer to the judicial exception. The claim only recites the idea of a solution or outcome, i.e. that the interface is “generated” without reciting how this generation is actually accomplished. Further, the computer elements claimed are cited as merely generic tools to perform the operations;
transmitting the parametric fit model to a manufacturer to cause the manufacturer to produce a parametric physical product based on the plurality of fit model parameters of the parametric fit model.
Transmitting data in a generic manner is explicitly recognized by the courts as an example of mere instructions to apply. See (MPEP 2106.05(f)(2): Whether the claim invokes computers or other machinery merely as a tool to perform an existing process. Use of a computer or other machinery in its ordinary capacity for economic or other tasks (e.g., to receive, store, or transmit data) or simply adding a general purpose computer or computer components after the fact to an abstract idea (e.g., a fundamental economic practice or mathematical equation) does not integrate a judicial exception into a practical application or provide significantly more. See Affinity Labs v. DirecTV, 838 F.3d 1253, 1262, 120 USPQ2d 1201, 1207 (Fed. Cir. 2016) (cellular telephone); TLI Communications LLC v. AV Auto, LLC, 823 F.3d 607, 613, 118 USPQ2d 1744, 1748 (Fed. Cir. 2016) (computer server and telephone unit). Similarly, "claiming the improved speed or efficiency inherent with applying the abstract idea on a computer" does not integrate a judicial exception into a practical application or provide an inventive concept. Intellectual Ventures I LLC v. Capital One Bank (USA), 792 F.3d 1363, 1367, 115 USPQ2d 1636, 1639 (Fed. Cir. 2015).)
generating a plurality of parametric models of a custom product… each parametric model identified by a parametric model identifier and having a plurality of corresponding control points; generating, for the custom product, a parametric fit model having a plurality of fit model parameters;
Applying a computer to generate models at a high level of generality is simply the act of instructing a computer to perform generic functions to generate those models, which is merely an instruction to apply a computer to the judicial exception. The claim only recites the idea of a solution or outcome, i.e. that the models are “generated” without reciting how this generation is actually accomplished. Further, the computer elements claimed are cited as merely generic tools to perform the operations;
Moreover, Mere Instructions To Apply An Exception (MPEP 2106.05(f)) has found that simply adding a general purpose computer or computer components after the fact to an abstract idea (e.g., a fundamental economic practice or mathematical equation) does not integrate a judicial exception into a practical application or provide significantly more. In light of this, the additional generic computer component elements of “a plurality of parametric models; generating a first user interface comprising at least a first graphical representation of the custom product, and displaying the first user interface on a computer display device; a parametric fit model” are not sufficient to integrate a judicial exception into a practical application nor provide evidence of an inventive concept.
Step 2B: Claim provides an Inventive Concept?
No, as discussed with respect to Step 2A, the additional limitations are Insignificant Extra-Solution Activity and mere instructions to apply and do not impose any meaningful limits on practicing the abstract idea and therefore the claim does not provide an inventive concept in Step 2B.
Insignificant Extra-Solution Activity (MPEP 2106.05(g)) has found mere data gathering and
post solution activity to be insignificant extra-solution activity.
Data gathering:
receiving, via the first user interface, a plurality of adjustment parameters for improving a fit of the custom product in relation to user-specific data;
Receiving this data is merely the act of gathering it, and therefore amounts to no more than mere data gathering.
A claim element that amounts to merely gathering data is not indicative of integration into a
practical solution nor evidence that the claim provides an inventive concept or significantly more, as exemplified by ((MPEP 2106.05)(g)(Mere Data Gathering) i. Performing clinical tests on individuals to obtain input for an equation, In re Grams, 888 F.2d 835, 839-40; 12 USPQ2d 1824, 1827-28 (Fed. Cir. 1989); iv. Obtaining information about transactions using the Internet to verify credit card transactions, CyberSource v. Retail Decisions, Inc., 654 F.3d 1366, 1375, 99 USPQ2d 1690, 1694 (Fed. Cir. 2011);
Post-Solution Activity:
transmitting the parametric fit model to a manufacturer to cause the manufacturer to produce a parametric physical product based on the plurality of fit model parameters of the parametric fit model.
Transmitting and producing the model based on the result of the abstract idea amounts to no more than acting on those results, and therefore is an example of insignificant post-solution activity.
This element merely acts on the results of the previous abstract steps. A claim element that merely acts on a series of previous abstract steps is not indicative of integration into a practical solution nor evidence that the claim provides an inventive concept, as exemplified by ((MPEP 2106.05)(g)(Insignificant application) i. Cutting hair after first determining the hair style, In re Brown, 645 Fed. App'x 1014, 1016-1017 (Fed. Cir. 2016) and ii. Printing or downloading generated menus, Ameranth, 842 F.3d at 1241-42, 120 USPQ2d at 1854-55.)
Should it be found that this is not an example of insignificant post-solution activity, it is also an example of mere instructions to apply.
Mere Instructions to Apply (MPEP 2106.05(f)) has found that merely applying a judicial exception such as an abstract idea, as by performing it on a computer, does not integrate the claim into a practical solution.
Mere Instructions to Apply:
generating a first user interface comprising at least a first graphical representation of the custom product, and displaying the first user interface on a computer display device;
Applying a computer to generate a generic user interface at a high level of generality is simply the act of instructing a computer to perform generic functions to generate that interface, which is merely an instruction to apply a computer to the judicial exception. The claim only recites the idea of a solution or outcome, i.e. that the interface is “generated” without reciting how this generation is actually accomplished. Further, the computer elements claimed are cited as merely generic tools to perform the operations;
The courts have found that such mere instructions to apply are not indicative of integration into a practical application nor recitation of significantly more than the judicial exception (MPEP 2106.05(f) “Another consideration when determining whether a claim integrates a judicial exception into a practical application in Step 2A Prong Two or recites significantly more than a judicial exception in Step 2B is whether the additional elements amount to more than a recitation of the words "apply it" (or an equivalent) or are more than mere instructions to implement an abstract idea or other exception on a computer. As explained by the Supreme Court, in order to make a claim directed to a judicial exception patent-eligible, the additional element or combination of elements must do "‘more than simply stat[e] the [judicial exception] while adding the words ‘apply it’". Alice Corp. v. CLS Bank, 573 U.S. 208, 221, 110 USPQ2d 1976, 1982-83 (2014) (quoting Mayo Collaborative Servs. V. Prometheus Labs., Inc., 566 U.S. 66, 72, 101 USPQ2d 1961, 1965). Thus, for example, claims that amount to nothing more than an instruction to apply the abstract idea using a generic computer do not render an abstract idea eligible. Alice Corp., 573 U.S. at 223, 110 USPQ2d at 1983”)
transmitting the parametric fit model to a manufacturer to cause the manufacturer to produce a parametric physical product based on the plurality of fit model parameters of the parametric fit model.
Transmitting data in a generic manner is explicitly recognized by the courts as an example of mere instructions to apply. See (MPEP 2106.05(f)(2): Whether the claim invokes computers or other machinery merely as a tool to perform an existing process. Use of a computer or other machinery in its ordinary capacity for economic or other tasks (e.g., to receive, store, or transmit data) or simply adding a general purpose computer or computer components after the fact to an abstract idea (e.g., a fundamental economic practice or mathematical equation) does not integrate a judicial exception into a practical application or provide significantly more. See Affinity Labs v. DirecTV, 838 F.3d 1253, 1262, 120 USPQ2d 1201, 1207 (Fed. Cir. 2016) (cellular telephone); TLI Communications LLC v. AV Auto, LLC, 823 F.3d 607, 613, 118 USPQ2d 1744, 1748 (Fed. Cir. 2016) (computer server and telephone unit). Similarly, "claiming the improved speed or efficiency inherent with applying the abstract idea on a computer" does not integrate a judicial exception into a practical application or provide an inventive concept. Intellectual Ventures I LLC v. Capital One Bank (USA), 792 F.3d 1363, 1367, 115 USPQ2d 1636, 1639 (Fed. Cir. 2015).)
The courts have found that such mere instructions to apply are not indicative of integration into a practical application nor recitation of significantly more than the judicial exception (MPEP 2106.05(f) “Another consideration when determining whether a claim integrates a judicial exception into a practical application in Step 2A Prong Two or recites significantly more than a judicial exception in Step 2B is whether the additional elements amount to more than a recitation of the words "apply it" (or an equivalent) or are more than mere instructions to implement an abstract idea or other exception on a computer. As explained by the Supreme Court, in order to make a claim directed to a judicial exception patent-eligible, the additional element or combination of elements must do "‘more than simply stat[e] the [judicial exception] while adding the words ‘apply it’". Alice Corp. v. CLS Bank, 573 U.S. 208, 221, 110 USPQ2d 1976, 1982-83 (2014) (quoting Mayo Collaborative Servs. V. Prometheus Labs., Inc., 566 U.S. 66, 72, 101 USPQ2d 1961, 1965). Thus, for example, claims that amount to nothing more than an instruction to apply the abstract idea using a generic computer do not render an abstract idea eligible. Alice Corp., 573 U.S. at 223, 110 USPQ2d at 1983”)
generating a plurality of parametric models of a custom product… each parametric model identified by a parametric model identifier and having a plurality of corresponding control points; generating, for the custom product, a parametric fit model having a plurality of fit model parameters;
Applying a computer to generate models at a high level of generality is simply the act of instructing a computer to perform generic functions to generate those models, which is merely an instruction to apply a computer to the judicial exception. The claim only recites the idea of a solution or outcome, i.e. that the models are “generated” without reciting how this generation is actually accomplished. Further, the computer elements claimed are cited as merely generic tools to perform the operations;
The courts have found that such mere instructions to apply are not indicative of integration into a practical application nor recitation of significantly more than the judicial exception (MPEP 2106.05(f) “Another consideration when determining whether a claim integrates a judicial exception into a practical application in Step 2A Prong Two or recites significantly more than a judicial exception in Step 2B is whether the additional elements amount to more than a recitation of the words "apply it" (or an equivalent) or are more than mere instructions to implement an abstract idea or other exception on a computer. As explained by the Supreme Court, in order to make a claim directed to a judicial exception patent-eligible, the additional element or combination of elements must do "‘more than simply stat[e] the [judicial exception] while adding the words ‘apply it’". Alice Corp. v. CLS Bank, 573 U.S. 208, 221, 110 USPQ2d 1976, 1982-83 (2014) (quoting Mayo Collaborative Servs. V. Prometheus Labs., Inc., 566 U.S. 66, 72, 101 USPQ2d 1961, 1965). Thus, for example, claims that amount to nothing more than an instruction to apply the abstract idea using a generic computer do not render an abstract idea eligible. Alice Corp., 573 U.S. at 223, 110 USPQ2d at 1983”)
Moreover, Mere Instructions To Apply An Exception (MPEP 2106.05(f)) has found that simply adding a general purpose computer or computer components after the fact to an abstract idea (e.g., a fundamental economic practice or mathematical equation) does not integrate a judicial exception into a practical application or provide significantly more. In light of this, the additional generic computer component elements of “a plurality of parametric models; generating a first user interface comprising at least a first graphical representation of the custom product, and displaying the first user interface on a computer display device; a parametric fit model, transmitting the parametric fit model” are not sufficient to integrate a judicial exception into a practical application nor provide evidence of an inventive concept.
The additional elements have been considered both individually and as an ordered combination in the consideration of whether they constitute significantly more, and have been determined not to constitute such.
The claim is ineligible.
Claim 2 recites “further comprising storing the parametric fit model, having the plurality of fit model parameters, in association with a user profile of a user.”
This merely clarifies how the model is stored, and therefore is merely an extension of the mental process and mere instructions to apply.
Further, storing data is explicitly recognized by the courts as an example of mere instructions to apply.
(MPEP 2106.05(f)(2): Whether the claim invokes computers or other machinery merely as a tool to perform an existing process. Use of a computer or other machinery in its ordinary capacity for economic or other tasks (e.g., to receive, store, or transmit data) or simply adding a general purpose computer or computer components after the fact to an abstract idea (e.g., a fundamental economic practice or mathematical equation) does not integrate a judicial exception into a practical application or provide significantly more. See Affinity Labs v. DirecTV, 838 F.3d 1253, 1262, 120 USPQ2d 1201, 1207 (Fed. Cir. 2016) (cellular telephone); TLI Communications LLC v. AV Auto, LLC, 823 F.3d 607, 613, 118 USPQ2d 1744, 1748 (Fed. Cir. 2016) (computer server and telephone unit). Similarly, "claiming the improved speed or efficiency inherent with applying the abstract idea on a computer" does not integrate a judicial exception into a practical application or provide an inventive concept. Intellectual Ventures I LLC v. Capital One Bank (USA), 792 F.3d 1363, 1367, 115 USPQ2d 1636, 1639 (Fed. Cir. 2015).)
Claim 3 recites “receiving a request to invite an agent to collaborate on adjusting the parametric fit model;
Receiving such a request amounts to no more than gathering data representative of that request, and therefore amounts to no more than mere data gathering.
based on, at least in part, a plurality of fit parameters of the parametric fit model, generating a second graphical representation of the parametric physical product; generating a second user interface and displaying, on a user computer display device, the second user interface comprising at least the second graphical representation of the parametric physical product; generating a third user interface and displaying, on an agent computer display device, the third user interface comprising at least the second graphical representation of the parametric physical product;
Generating a new representation of the design based on the fit model is a mental process equivalent to observing the fit model parameters and drawing an article of clothing that fits those parameters. For example, if the fit model specifies that the inseam of a pair of pants should be 30 inches, a person could draw a design for a pair of pants with a 30 inch inseam.
This new drawn design could be included in various drawn interface mockups, also created through the use of paper and pencil.
Displaying these interfaces and the representation on a generic computer display amounts to no more than mere instructions to apply.
receiving, via the second user interface, a plurality of user adjustment parameters for improving a fit of the parametric physical product; receiving, via the third user interface, a plurality of agent adjustment parameters for improving a fit of the parametric physical product;
Receiving such parameter data amounts to no more than gathering data representative of that parameter data, and therefore amounts to no more than mere data gathering.
based on the plurality of user adjustment parameters, the plurality of agent adjustment parameters and the plurality of fit parameters of the parametric physical product, generating, for the custom product, an adjusted parametric fit model having a plurality of new fit model parameters;
Generating this new fit model is a mental process equivalent to writing out a parameter set for and drawing a representation of this new fit model with a pencil and paper. For example, if the new values indicate that a design for pants should have a 32 inch inseam instead of a 30 inch inseam, this could be reflected in the written parameter table/list and a new drawing representative of pants with a 32 inch inseam can be created.
wherein a new fit model parameter, of the plurality of new fit model parameters of the adjusted parametric fit model, is represented as an adjusted fit key-value pair;
Specifying that the parameters are represented as a key-value pair merely clarifies the format the parameters are written in.
sending the adjusted parametric fit model to the manufacturer to cause the manufacturer to produce the parametric physical product based on a plurality of adjusted fit model parameters of the adjusted parametric fit model.”
Transmitting and producing the model based on the result of the abstract idea amounts to no more than acting on those results, and therefore is an example of insignificant post-solution activity.
Should it be found that this is not an example of insignificant post-solution activity, it is also an example of mere instructions to apply.
Transmitting data in a generic manner is explicitly recognized by the courts as an example of mere instructions to apply. See (MPEP 2106.05(f)(2): Whether the claim invokes computers or other machinery merely as a tool to perform an existing process. Use of a computer or other machinery in its ordinary capacity for economic or other tasks (e.g., to receive, store, or transmit data) or simply adding a general purpose computer or computer components after the fact to an abstract idea (e.g., a fundamental economic practice or mathematical equation) does not integrate a judicial exception into a practical application or provide significantly more. See Affinity Labs v. DirecTV, 838 F.3d 1253, 1262, 120 USPQ2d 1201, 1207 (Fed. Cir. 2016) (cellular telephone); TLI Communications LLC v. AV Auto, LLC, 823 F.3d 607, 613, 118 USPQ2d 1744, 1748 (Fed. Cir. 2016) (computer server and telephone unit). Similarly, "claiming the improved speed or efficiency inherent with applying the abstract idea on a computer" does not integrate a judicial exception into a practical application or provide an inventive concept. Intellectual Ventures I LLC v. Capital One Bank (USA), 792 F.3d 1363, 1367, 115 USPQ2d 1636, 1639 (Fed. Cir. 2015).)
Claim 4 recites “receiving a request to adjust the parametric fit model;
Receiving such a request amounts to no more than gathering data representative of that request, and therefore amounts to no more than mere data gathering.
based on, at least in part, a plurality of fit parameters of the parametric fit model, generating a fourth graphical representation of the parametric physical product; generating a fourth user interface and displaying, on a user computer display device, the fourth user interface comprising at least the fourth graphical representation of the parametric physical product;
Generating a new representation of the design based on the fit model is a mental process equivalent to observing the fit model parameters and drawing an article of clothing that fits those parameters. For example, if the fit model specifies that the inseam of a pair of pants should be 30 inches, a person could draw a design for a pair of pants with a 30 inch inseam.
This new drawn design could be included in various drawn interface mockups, also created through the use of paper and pencil.
Displaying these interfaces and the representation on a generic computer display amounts to no more than mere instructions to apply.
receiving, via the fourth user interface, a plurality of user adjustment parameters for improving a fit of the parametric physical product;
Receiving such parameter data amounts to no more than gathering data representative of that parameter data, and therefore amounts to no more than mere data gathering.
based on the plurality of user adjustment parameters and the plurality of fit parameters of the parametric physical product, generating, for the custom product, an adjusted parametric fit model having a plurality of new fit model parameters;
Generating this new fit model is a mental process equivalent to writing out a parameter set for and drawing a representation of this new fit model with a pencil and paper. For example, if the new values indicate that a design for pants should have a 32 inch inseam instead of a 30 inch inseam, this could be reflected in the written parameter table/list and a new drawing representative of pants with a 32 inch inseam can be created.
wherein a new fit model parameter, of the plurality of new fit model parameters of the adjusted parametric fit model, is represented as an adjusted fit key-value pair;
Specifying that the parameters are represented as a key-value pair merely clarifies the format the parameters are written in.
sending the adjusted parametric fit model to the manufacturer to cause the manufacturer to produce the parametric physical product based on a plurality of adjusted fit model parameters of the parametric fit model.”
Transmitting and producing the model based on the result of the abstract idea amounts to no more than acting on those results, and therefore is an example of insignificant post-solution activity.
Should it be found that this is not an example of insignificant post-solution activity, it is also an example of mere instructions to apply.
Transmitting data in a generic manner is explicitly recognized by the courts as an example of mere instructions to apply. See (MPEP 2106.05(f)(2): Whether the claim invokes computers or other machinery merely as a tool to perform an existing process. Use of a computer or other machinery in its ordinary capacity for economic or other tasks (e.g., to receive, store, or transmit data) or simply adding a general purpose computer or computer components after the fact to an abstract idea (e.g., a fundamental economic practice or mathematical equation) does not integrate a judicial exception into a practical application or provide significantly more. See Affinity Labs v. DirecTV, 838 F.3d 1253, 1262, 120 USPQ2d 1201, 1207 (Fed. Cir. 2016) (cellular telephone); TLI Communications LLC v. AV Auto, LLC, 823 F.3d 607, 613, 118 USPQ2d 1744, 1748 (Fed. Cir. 2016) (computer server and telephone unit). Similarly, "claiming the improved speed or efficiency inherent with applying the abstract idea on a computer" does not integrate a judicial exception into a practical application or provide an inventive concept. Intellectual Ventures I LLC v. Capital One Bank (USA), 792 F.3d 1363, 1367, 115 USPQ2d 1636, 1639 (Fed. Cir. 2015).)
Claim 5 recites “wherein the first user interface displays, on the computer display device, the first graphical representation of the custom product as a visualization of the parametric model of the custom product showing how the parametric physical product, manufactured based on the plurality of fit model parameters using a plurality of fit key-values of the parametric fit model, fits the user having the user-specific data; wherein the key-value pair is a data structure that includes an attribute key and a corresponding attribute value.”
A person could mentally create such a visualization of how a product might fit a person by observing the set of user data, for example height, and the measurements of the fit model of the clothing, and drawing, with a pencil a paper, a representation of how that might look on someone with the given user data. For example, given a 5’ tall, 95lb user and a model/design for a size 5XL shirt that is 50 inches wide, a person could reasonably draw a representation of that user in a shirt that is significantly too large.
Displaying these interfaces and the representation on a generic computer display amounts to no more than mere instructions to apply.
Clarifying that the key-value pair includes a key and a value merely clarifies the form of such data, and is therefore merely an extension of the mental process, mere data gathering, and mere instructions to apply.
Claim 6 recites “wherein the first user interface further displays one or more regions of the visualization of the parametric model of the custom product;
This merely clarifies how the visualization is depicted, and therefore amounts to no more than an extension of the mental process and mere instructions to apply.
It is clear from the specification and figures that such a “region” refers to a region of the product design itself, for example the tongue of a shoe. See ([Par 159] “Furthermore, the first user interface may also display one or more regions of the visualization of the parametric model of the custom product. Referring again to FIG. 1B3, the exemplary first user interface may display the different regions of the lace up shoe. A region of the one or more regions of the visualization may be adjustable using one or more functionalities of the first user interface. The one or more functionalities of the first user interface may allow adjusting a fit of the parametric physical product to the user having the user-specific data.”)
Displaying these interfaces and the representation on a generic computer display amounts to no more than mere instructions to apply.
wherein a region of the one or more regions of the visualization is adjustable using one or more functionalities of the first user interface; wherein the one or more functionalities of the first user interface allow adjusting a fit of the parametric physical product to the user having the user-specific data.”
Making these adjustments is a mental process equivalent to modifying the parameters of the model based on user measurements and subsequently modifying the representation based on these parameter changes. For example, if a user has abnormally long toes, making such a modification could involve modifying the parameters that govern the shape of the toe region of a shoe design and drawing a new representation of that design with a pencil and paper based on the modified parameters.
Creating a representation of an interface that allows this might consist of, for example, adding representations of sliders and input fields in the drawn interface.
Note that receiving input from the interface as to these adjustments amounts to no more than gathering data representative of that input, and therefore amounts to no more than mere data gathering.
Displaying these interfaces and the representation on a generic computer display amounts to no more than mere instructions to apply.
Claim 7 recites “further comprising: receiving, from the first user interface, a selection of a region, from the one or more regions, and an indication that the customized product should have either a looser fit or a tighter fit.”
Receiving this selection and indication from the interface is merely the act of gathering data representative of this selection and indication, and therefore amounts to no more than mere data gathering.
Claims 8-14 The elements of claims 8-14 are substantially the same as those of claims 1-7. Therefore, the elements of claims 8-14 are rejected due to the same reasons as outlined above for claims 1-7.
Mere Instructions To Apply An Exception (MPEP 2106.05(f)) has found that simply adding a general purpose computer or computer components after the fact to an abstract idea (e.g., a fundamental economic practice or mathematical equation) does not integrate a judicial exception into a practical application or provide significantly more. In light of this, the additional generic computer component elements of claim 8, particularly: “A non-transitory computer-readable medium storing one or more instructions, which, when executed by one or more processors, cause the one or more processors to perform: generating a plurality of parametric models; generating a first user interface comprising at least a first graphical representation of the custom product, and displaying the first user interface on a computer display device; a parametric fit model, transmitting the parametric fit model” are not sufficient to integrate a judicial exception into a practical application nor provide evidence of an inventive concept.
Claim 15-20 The elements of claims 15-20 are substantially the same as those of claims 1-6. Therefore, the elements of claims 15-20 are rejected due to the same reasons as outlined above for claims 1-6.
Mere Instructions To Apply An Exception (MPEP 2106.05(f)) has found that simply adding a general purpose computer or computer components after the fact to an abstract idea (e.g., a fundamental economic practice or mathematical equation) does not integrate a judicial exception into a practical application or provide significantly more. In light of this, the additional generic computer component elements of claim 15, particularly: “A custom product computer system generator comprising: a memory unit; one or more processors; and a custom product computer storing one or more instructions, which, when executed by one or more processors, cause the one or more processors to perform: generating a plurality of parametric models; generating a first user interface comprising at least a first graphical representation of the custom product, and displaying the first user interface on a computer display device; a parametric fit model, the parametric fit model” are not sufficient to integrate a judicial exception into a practical application nor provide evidence of an inventive concept.
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.
(1) Claims 1-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Beaver (US 20210266352 A1) in view of Terai (JP 2021123826 A) in further view of Donelly (US 20220253923 A1)
Claim 1. Beaver teaches A method for custom fitting and manufacturing parametric products, the method comprising: generating a plurality of parametric models of a custom product based on, at least in part, past learned data pertaining to the custom product, each parametric model identified by a parametric model identifier and ([Abstract] “In some embodiments, a method for generating customized products in collaboration with live designers is disclosed. [Par 342] “In some embodiments, computer collaboration system 100 stores, for a designer, the designer's designs, samples stock pictures, and the like. That may be stored either in designer database 562 and/or designs database 564.” [Par 348] “For each interactive design available for customization using platform 100, default values of the attributes associated with the product may be modified by users according to the roles assigned to the users and according to the manufacturing constraints provided by a manufacturer. For example, if a customized product is a t-shirt, its default color may be red, but a user may modify the color by selecting any of three colors (e.g., red, green, or blue) to the tee-shirt. The modification may be stored in, for example, product data definitions 104.” [Par 110] “The models may be parametric, i.e., they may have parameters that, through coded relationships, adjust the form of the model for a specific need. For instance, a set of 3D models may represent a bike helmet. Each model may fit a statistically normed human head of a specific age.” [Par 107-108] “Referring again to FIG. 1. a customization process performed by a user, of users 10, and intended to generate a digital design of a customized product is captured in so-called product description data, which then may be translated into a manufacturing description comprising product and manufacturing instructions. The product and manufacturing instructions may include digital design specifications, data, and code needed to manufacture a custom product. That may include instructions for generating, for example, a 3D geometry for digital final products. This may also include generating instructions for generating 2D and/or 3D patterns that may be used to cut, cast, or form physical components of physical final products. The patterns may be parametric, i.e., they may have parameters that, through encoded relationships, adjust the form of the pattern for a specific need.” [Par 352] “In some embodiments, a product description may include, or be associated with, a journaled list of modifications that have been submitted by users for an interactive design. The list may also include other information such as identifiers of the users who provided the modifications, global-key-values generated as the collaborators collaborated on the customized product, a history log of the modifications that have been accepted, reverted or deleted, comments that have been provided by the user, and the like. For example, one or more modifications stored in the list may be undone or redone by using a couple of clicks, not by performing countless clicks to undo or redo the customization as in conventional customization platforms.” [Par 93] “ product description data that captures key-value pairs describing the parameters and characteristics of the interactive digital designs as the customer and the designers collaborate on the designs.” [Par 96] “generate tokens that allow recipients of the final products to request services and access to core services 16, and attach the tokens to, or depict the token on, the final products.”[Par 347] “Descriptions of the attributes for each interactive design, or groups of designs, may be stored as part of collaboration components 106 or in a separate data structure that may be organized as a data table or storage space that is accessible to collaboration components 106.”) ([Par 145-147] “ In some embodiments, a product option framework is configured to generate a product option framework user interface. Accordingly, each product options set is associated with logic and code to build a user interface element for each parametric product option. Furthermore, each product options set contains style hints so that each user interface element may be artfully placed to produce a high quality user experience…. The user interface elements may include a design view, a color editor, a font editor, a size selector, a texture selector, a text editor, a fabric swatch selector, a product real view, and the like. In some embodiments, a product options framework cooperates with a user product renderer that may be implemented in, for example, a RealView server 16A. The user product renderer may be configured to render views of a custom product as though it is already manufactured. Typically, it uses a product option set of key-values as input. It creates one or more run-time assets using computational photography of the manufactured product.”) receiving, via the first user interface, a plurality of adjustment parameters for improving a fit of the custom product in relation to user-specific data; ([Par 145-147] “ In some embodiments, a product option framework is configured to generate a product option framework user interface. Accordingly, each product options set is associated with logic and code to build a user interface element for each parametric product option. Furthermore, each product options set contains style hints so that each user interface element may be artfully placed to produce a high quality user experience…. The user interface elements may include… a size selector” [Par 128-129] “In some embodiments, the product option set contains the logic to enumerate each customizable option in a manner that presents a complete user interface to change the parametric product instructions… The instructions for manufacturing a customized product are usually parametric. The parameters include the size of the customized product (this can be multi-dimensional, and include width, height, depth). The parameters may also relate to human sizes or ages. The parameters may also be custom and based on biometric information.”) based on the plurality of adjustment parameters and the plurality of parametric models, ([Par 110] “The models may be parametric, i.e., they may have parameters that, through coded relationships, adjust the form of the model for a specific need. For instance, a set of 3D models may represent a bike helmet. Each model may fit a statistically normed human head of a specific age.” [Par 145-147] “ In some embodiments, a product option framework is configured to generate a product option framework user interface. Accordingly, each product options set is associated with logic and code to build a user interface element for each parametric product option. Furthermore, each product options set contains style hints so that each user interface element may be artfully placed to produce a high quality user experience…. The user interface elements may include… a size selector” [Par 128-129] “In some embodiments, the product option set contains the logic to enumerate each customizable option in a manner that presents a complete user interface to change the parametric product instructions… The instructions for manufacturing a customized product are usually parametric. The parameters include the size of the customized product (this can be multi-dimensional, and include width, height, depth). The parameters may also relate to human sizes or ages. The parameters may also be custom and based on biometric information.”) ([Par 110] “The models may be parametric, i.e., they may have parameters that, through coded relationships, adjust the form of the model for a specific need. For instance, a set of 3D models may represent a bike helmet. Each model may fit a statistically normed human head of a specific age.”) ([Par 145-147] “ In some embodiments, a product option framework is configured to generate a product option framework user interface. Accordingly, each product options set is associated with logic and code to build a user interface element for each parametric product option. Furthermore, each product options set contains style hints so that each user interface element may be artfully placed to produce a high quality user experience…. The user interface elements may include… a size selector” [Par 128-129] “In some embodiments, the product option set contains the logic to enumerate each customizable option in a manner that presents a complete user interface to change the parametric product instructions… The instructions for manufacturing a customized product are usually parametric. The parameters include the size of the customized product (this can be multi-dimensional, and include width, height, depth). The parameters may also relate to human sizes or ages. The parameters may also be custom and based on biometric information.”) a parametric fit model having a plurality of fit model parameters; wherein each fit model parameter, of the plurality of fit model parameters, is computed by ([Par 201-202] “In some embodiments, the computer collaboration system may cause displaying, in a user interface executing in a user device of the customer, an interactive design along with annotations representing attributes, attribute groups and the locations within the design to which the attributes apply. The attributes, default values for the attributes and default ranges for the values for the attributes may be provided by an attribute engine which may be part of the computer collaboration system. The attribute engine may define and/or filter the attributes according to constraints provided by manufacturers, designers, or system administrators. In response to receiving, in the user interface, a rendering of the interactive design with the annotations, a user may select, using the functionalities of the user interface, a specific attribute or a specific attribute group at a specific location within the depiction of the interactive design and select or adjust a value associated with the attribute. For example, the user may select a width-attribute and use a slider object, provided by the user interface, to set a new value for the width parameter” [Par 145-147] “ In some embodiments, a product option framework is configured to generate a product option framework user interface. Accordingly, each product options set is associated with logic and code to build a user interface element for each parametric product option. Furthermore, each product options set contains style hints so that each user interface element may be artfully placed to produce a high quality user experience…. The user interface elements may include… a size selector” [Par 128-129] “In some embodiments, the product option set contains the logic to enumerate each customizable option in a manner that presents a complete user interface to change the parametric product instructions… The instructions for manufacturing a customized product are usually parametric. The parameters include the size of the customized product (this can be multi-dimensional, and include width, height, depth). The parameters may also relate to human sizes or ages. The parameters may also be custom and based on biometric information.” [Par 110] “The product instructions may also include models, including 2D and 3D models that are used to form, through additive manufacturing, or subtractive manufacturing, portions of a product. The models may be parametric, i.e., they may have parameters that, through coded relationships, adjust the form of the model for a specific need. For instance, a set of 3D models may represent a bike helmet.” [Examiner’s note: the “adjustment parameters” refer to the input custom sizing parameters while the “fit model” and its associated parameters refer to the model of the customized product itself after adjustment]) wherein a fit model parameter, of the plurality of fit model parameters of the parametric fit model, is represented as a fit key-value pair; ([Par 93] “The approach also includes managing access to product description data that captures key-value pairs describing the parameters and characteristics of the interactive digital designs as the customer and the designers collaborate on the designs” [Par 132] “In some embodiments, a product option may be represented as a key-value pair. The key-value pair is a label that may span individual products and represent a class of products. The keys of pairs may include a material type, a color, a size, and the like.” [Par 335] “Each modification may be automatically saved as a serialized key-value pair, and this solves the technical problem of navigating through countless sets of attributes and dealing with, for example, countless clicks to complete the customization as required in conventional customization platforms. The pairs may be transmitted to a product options framework, which would update the product description for the interactive digital design.” [Par 107] “Referring again to FIG. 1. a customization process performed by a user, of users 10, and intended to generate a digital design of a customized product is captured in so-called product description data, which then may be translated into a manufacturing description comprising product and manufacturing instructions.”) transmitting the parametric fit model to a manufacturer to cause the manufacturer to produce a parametric physical product based on the plurality of fit model parameters of the parametric fit model.([Par 80] “Digital designs may be transmitted from a product collaboration platform to manufacturing servers, or manufacturing entities, that may use the received digital designs to manufacture products either digitally or physically. The manufactured product may, in turn, be delivered to recipients.” [Par 186] “Based on, at least in part, the plurality of global-key-values pairs, an ownership-attribution tree is constructed. Based on, at least in part, the ownership-attribution tree, manufacturing instructions for customizing the physical product and according to the plurality of variable product attributes are generated. The manufacturing instructions may be transmitted to a product customization server to cause a manufacturing entity to proceed with generating a customized product based on the manufacturing instructions.” [Par 128-129] “In some embodiments, the product option set contains the logic to enumerate each customizable option in a manner that presents a complete user interface to change the parametric product instructions… The instructions for manufacturing a customized product are usually parametric. The parameters include the size of the customized product (this can be multi-dimensional, and include width, height, depth). The parameters may also relate to human sizes or ages. The parameters may also be custom and based on biometric information.”)
Beaver does not explicitly teach models having a plurality of corresponding control points; determining two particular parametric models, each having at least one parameter that is within a particular tolerance of at least one parameter of a particular parametric model of the two particular parametric models; interpolating, for data of the two particular parametric models, between one or more corresponding control points of a first parametric model of the two particular parametric models and one or more corresponding control points of a second parametric model of the two particular parametric models;
Terai makes obvious models having a plurality of corresponding control points; determining two particular parametric models, each having at least one parameter corresponding control points of a first parametric model of the two particular parametric models and one or more corresponding control points of a second parametric model of the two particular parametric models; ([Abstract] “For a knit product to be graded, 2 sizes of pattern data are converted into knit data. Feature points that specify the shape of the knit product are generated for the converted 2 sizes of pattern data and an intermediate shape that specifies the shape of the knit product among the feature points are generated. The feature points and the intermediate shape for a target size are generated by interpolating or extrapolating among the feature points and the intermediate shapes according to the target size of the knit product. A closed loop is generated by connecting the feature points and the intermediate shapes and knit data for the target size is created by arranging a knit in a pattern specified by the loop.” [Page 2 Par 9-11] “The interpolation extrapolation unit 6 interpolates or extrapolates between the corresponding feature points and interpolates or extrapolates between the corresponding intermediate points with respect to the knit data for, for example, the maximum and the minimum two sizes. When using knit data for two sizes, interpolation or extrapolation may be performed linearly, and when three sizes or more exist, interpolation or extrapolation may be performed in a curved line with a quadratic curve or the like. When knit data for two sizes, maximum and minimum, is used, interpolation is performed. In other cases, for example, interpolation and extrapolation are performed…” [Page 4 Par 5-7] “We will consider the case where an apparel product tailored to each user is realized by knitting. When considering only the two components of width and length, the same processing as in FIG. 8 may be performed. When considering other components, FIG. 8 may be expanded to perform interpolation or extrapolation in a space of three or more dimensions. Although the intermediate points are used in the embodiment, the shape of the knit product between the feature points may be approximated by a curve or a straight line, and the feature points may be treated as the end points of the curve or the straight line. Using the parameter t, which is, for example, 0 for the feature point that is one end of the curve and 1 for the feature point that is the other end, approximates the shape of the knit product between the feature points as an algebraic curve of degree 2 or higher. be able to. If the shape of the knit product between the feature points is straight, it may be straight. Such a curve or a straight line and an intermediate point in the embodiment are called an intermediate shape between feature points, and the intermediate point generation unit 4 generates an intermediate shape automatically or by dialogue with a user. These curves or straight lines can be interpolated or extrapolated between sizes as well as intermediate points by interpolating or extrapolating between points with the same value of parameter t. Interpolation or extrapolation produces feature points at the target size and curves or straight lines that are intermediate shapes. Then, when the feature points and the intermediate shapes are connected in order, a closed loop is generated. Since feature points are the endpoints of curves or straight lines, interpolating or extrapolating between feature points means interpolating or extrapolating the endpoints of curves or straight lines. Further, connecting the feature points and the intermediate shapes means connecting the curves or straight lines having the intermediate shapes so that the end points are connected to each other.” [Page 3 Par 3] “FIG. 4 shows an intermediate generated by interpolation of the minimum size pattern data 10 and the maximum size pattern data 20, the minimum size knit data 15 and the maximum size knit data 25, and the knit data 15 and 25. The size knit data 35 is shown.” [Examiner’s note: the system of Terai takes 2 parametric models of clothing at different sizes then uses interpolation to generate models between those sizes based on the interpolation of feature points (i.e. control points)])
Terai is analogous art because it is within the field of automatic clothes model generation. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to combine Terai with Beaver before the effective filing date. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to make this combination in order to make the customization and production of certain types of products easier. As noted by Terai, the customization and production, particularly the generation of new sizes from a base design, is notoriously difficult with knit products and frequently requires manual trial and error ([Page 1 Par 3] “Shoe uppers come in multiple sizes for the same design. Therefore, pattern data is prepared for the shoe upper of each size and converted into knit data for each size. The knit data is data for driving the knitting machine. By the way, even if the shoe upper is knitted according to the knit data converted from the pattern data, the shape of the shoe upper often does not match the pattern data. Therefore, it is necessary to correct the knit data by trial and error so that the shoe upper can be knitted according to the pattern data. However, for many sizes, it is difficult to correct the knit data by trial and error.”) To this end, Terai presents a method for the automatic grading (i.e. generation of new sizes from a base design) of knit products without unnecessary steps or the need to manually create intermediate sizes ([Abstract] “For a knit product to be graded, 2 sizes of pattern data are converted into knit data. Feature points that specify the shape of the knit product are generated for the converted 2 sizes of pattern data and an intermediate shape that specifies the shape of the knit product among the feature points are generated. The feature points and the intermediate shape for a target size are generated by interpolating or extrapolating among the feature points and the intermediate shapes according to the target size of the knit product. A closed loop is generated by connecting the feature points and the intermediate shapes and knit data for the target size is created by arranging a knit in a pattern specified by the loop. EFFECT: Since knit data such as an intermediate size can be generated from 2 sizes of knit data without passing through pattern data such as an intermediate size, conversion from the pattern data to the knit data is unnecessary for the intermediate size and the like.”) Overall, one of ordinary skill in the art would have recognized that combining Terai with Beaver would result in a system that makes customization and production of products with particular manufacturing methods, such as knit products, significantly easier.
The combination of Beaver and Terai does not explicitly teach at least one parameter that is within a particular tolerance of at least one parameter of a model
Donnelly makes obvious at least one parameter that is within a particular tolerance of at least one parameter of a model ([Par 69] “Size prediction is implemented by first determining a number of fit factors for a given garment model. Fit factors for a jacket may include such measurements as overarm circumference, biceps circumference, sleeve length and major circumference. Then, for each fit factor, a method of measuring the key dimensions on both the garment model and the body scan fit model are determined. Also for each fit factor, threshold values of the key dimension are determined to place the user into an appropriate size category.”)
Donelly is analogous art because it is within the field of clothing modelling. It would have been obvious to combine it with Beaver and Terai before the effective filing date. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to make this combination in order to better ensure fit and thus product satisfaction. As noted by Donelly, a significant reason of product dissatisfaction and subsequent return is poor sizing. ([Par 2-4] “Recent years have seen an overwhelming growth of electronic commerce in the apparel industry. One of the greatest problems plaguing both electronic apparel merchants and customers is the difficulty in determining how a garment will fit the customer. Customers are nervous about purchasing garments electronically, because they are unsure of what size to order, and how that garment will look on them. Merchants are nervous about the high volume of apparel returns. For a merchant, the handling of an apparel return can cost up to four times what it cost to process the initial sale of the apparel. Industry analysts have estimated that apparel returns for electronic merchants range from about 10% for very basic items to between 35%-40% for high end clothing. The single biggest reason for returns of apparel purchased electronically is poor fit.”) To this end, Donelly presents a method for fit preview and analysis using actual body scans of a customer, ensuring proper sizing can be selected ([Par 18-19] “A system and method for implementing a “virtual fitting room” is disclosed. The virtual fitting room of the present invention, hereinafter referred to as the software, is a software program that will, among other features, provide an actual analysis of how a garment will fit a customer, and which will provide a realistic visual representation of the garment's fit on the customer. … The software uses a full-body scanner (using any scanning technique, such as white light, laser, or infrared, radar, lidar, ultraviolet, and other methods) to generate a cloud of data points to collectively describe the surface geometry of a body. The cloud of data is defined as a plurality of points defined as XYZ coordinates. By working with a cloud of data points, the system can remain scanner-independent; that is, it can use data generated by any scanner capable of generating a cloud of data points). The system then processes this data to achieve an accurate body scan fit model of the user.”) Overall, one of ordinary skill in the art would have recognized that combining Donelly with Beaver and Terai would result in a system that not only allowed for the rich customization and size adjustment of production, but also allowed for those customizations and adjustments to be made based on actual morphological data of the customer, ultimately leading to better fit and higher satisfaction.
Claim 2. Beaver teaches further comprising storing the parametric fit model, having the plurality of fit model parameters, in association with a user profile of a user. ([Par 352] “ In some embodiments, a product description may include, or be associated with, a journaled list of modifications that have been submitted by users for an interactive design. The list may also include other information such as identifiers of the users who provided the modifications, global-key-values generated as the collaborators collaborated on the customized product, a history log of the modifications that have been accepted, reverted or deleted, comments that have been provided by the user, and the like” [Par 369] “User interface elements may be specific not only to a role assigned to a user, but also to an interactive design itself. For example, if platform 10 offers customizable ties and customizable scarfs, and a user profile for a user includes information indicating that the user is a male, then it is assumed that the user might want to customize a tie, not a scarf. Furthermore, it may be assumed that the user would like to customize a color, a material, and a shape of the tie. Based on that information, collaboration components 106 may select the user interface elements that are specific to the tie and to the selection of the tie attributes.”)
Claim 3. Beaver teaches receiving a request to invite an agent to collaborate on adjusting the parametric fit model; ([Par 175] “Furthermore, collaboration server 155 may cooperate with request analyzer 159 and transmit (20E2) a request made by customer 202 for, for example, assistance from designer 212 (or agent 216), to request analyzer 159.” [Par 193] “ A customer may collaborate with a designer, also referred to as a live designer or an agent. For example, a customer may ask for assistance from a designer to help the customer to customize an interactive design and show the customer how the designer would modify the interactive design to achieve the design that the customer would like to see.”) based on, at least in part, a plurality of fit parameters of the parametric fit model, generating a second graphical representation of the parametric physical product; generating a second user interface and displaying, on a user computer display device, the second user interface comprising at least the second graphical representation of the parametric physical product; generating a third user interface and displaying, on an agent computer display device, the third user interface comprising at least the second graphical representation of the parametric physical product; ([Par 201-202] “In some embodiments, the computer collaboration system may cause displaying, in a user interface executing in a user device of the customer, an interactive design along with annotations representing attributes, attribute groups and the locations within the design to which the attributes apply. The attributes, default values for the attributes and default ranges for the values for the attributes may be provided by an attribute engine which may be part of the computer collaboration system. The attribute engine may define and/or filter the attributes according to constraints provided by manufacturers, designers, or system administrators. In response to receiving, in the user interface, a rendering of the interactive design with the annotations, a user may select, using the functionalities of the user interface, a specific attribute or a specific attribute group at a specific location within the depiction of the interactive design and select or adjust a value associated with the attribute. For example, the user may select a width-attribute and use a slider object, provided by the user interface, to set a new value for the width parameter. The new value of the parameter may be transmitted as a serialized key-value pair to a product options framework.” [Par 303-305] “Also in step 716, the collaboration computer transmits to the particular user device associated with the particular designer, the product description data for rendering the interactive digital design. At this point, the particular designer may access the interactive digital design, modify it, and otherwise update it to help the customer with the interactive design. In step 718, in response to receiving modifications to the interactive digital design from the particular designer, the collaboration computer automatically generates updated product description data by updating the product description data based on the modifications received from the particular designer. Furthermore, the collaboration computer propagates the updated product description data to the user interface of the customer and to the particular user interface of the particular designer to cause the interfaces to update their displays of the interactive digital design based on the updated product description data.” [Par 196] “Customization of an interactive design in collaboration between a customer and a live designer may include creating the design and modifying the design by both the customer and the designer. To be able to customize the design, the customer and the designer may share access to product description data associated with the design.”) receiving, via the second user interface, a plurality of user adjustment parameters for improving a fit of the parametric physical product; receiving, via the third user interface, a plurality of agent adjustment parameters for improving a fit of the parametric physical product; based on the plurality of user adjustment parameters, the plurality of agent adjustment parameters and the plurality of fit parameters of the parametric physical product, generating, for the custom product, an adjusted parametric fit model having a plurality of new fit model parameters; wherein a new fit model parameter, of the plurality of new fit model parameters of the adjusted parametric fit model, is represented as an adjusted fit key-value pair; sending the adjusted parametric fit model to the manufacturer to cause the manufacturer to produce the parametric physical product based on a plurality of adjusted fit model parameters of the adjusted parametric fit model. ([Par 302] “In step 716, in response to receiving an acceptance of the electronic digital collaboration invitation from the particular designer, the collaboration computer grants the particular designer access to product description data as an editor. The product description data includes data that are associated with an interactive design which the customer tries to create, and that comprise key-value pairs, described above.” [Par 305-306] “Furthermore, the collaboration computer propagates the updated product description data to the user interface of the customer and to the particular user interface of the particular designer to cause the interfaces to update their displays of the interactive digital design based on the updated product description data. The process of modifying the product description data during a collaboration session between the customer and the designer may be repeated several times. In some embodiments, the collaboration server may handle editing of the same user interface modifying the same key-value pair within interaction time in several ways depending on agreement between the customer and the designer. In one method, the designer's modification is always selected. In another method, the customer's edit is shown to the designer to accept or reject. In another method, the designer's edit is shown to the customer to accept or reject. In yet another method, the customer's edit is applied, and then the designer's edit. In other embodiments there are methods to apply all edits in the order in which they reach the collaboration server” [Par 201-202] “In some embodiments, the computer collaboration system may cause displaying, in a user interface executing in a user device of the customer, an interactive design along with annotations representing attributes, attribute groups and the locations within the design to which the attributes apply. The attributes, default values for the attributes and default ranges for the values for the attributes may be provided by an attribute engine which may be part of the computer collaboration system. The attribute engine may define and/or filter the attributes according to constraints provided by manufacturers, designers, or system administrators. In response to receiving, in the user interface, a rendering of the interactive design with the annotations, a user may select, using the functionalities of the user interface, a specific attribute or a specific attribute group at a specific location within the depiction of the interactive design and select or adjust a value associated with the attribute. For example, the user may select a width-attribute and use a slider object, provided by the user interface, to set a new value for the width parameter. The new value of the parameter may be transmitted as a serialized key-value pair to a product options framework.” [Par 80] “Digital designs may be transmitted from a product collaboration platform to manufacturing servers, or manufacturing entities, that may use the received digital designs to manufacture products either digitally or physically. The manufactured product may, in turn, be delivered to recipients.” [Par 186] “Based on, at least in part, the plurality of global-key-values pairs, an ownership-attribution tree is constructed. Based on, at least in part, the ownership-attribution tree, manufacturing instructions for customizing the physical product and according to the plurality of variable product attributes are generated. The manufacturing instructions may be transmitted to a product customization server to cause a manufacturing entity to proceed with generating a customized product based on the manufacturing instructions.” [Par 128-129] “In some embodiments, the product option set contains the logic to enumerate each customizable option in a manner that presents a complete user interface to change the parametric product instructions… The instructions for manufacturing a customized product are usually parametric. The parameters include the size of the customized product (this can be multi-dimensional, and include width, height, depth). The parameters may also relate to human sizes or ages. The parameters may also be custom and based on biometric information.”)
Claim 4. Beaver teaches receiving a request to adjust the parametric fit model; ([Par 197] “In some embodiments, to be able to collaborate on an interactive design with a graphics designer, a customer may request a collaboration session between the customer and the designer and supported by a collaboration platform. Once the session is established, the customer and the designer may share access to product description data that are associated with the interactive design and that include corresponding key-value pairs.”) based on, at least in part, a plurality of fit parameters of the parametric fit model, generating a fourth graphical representation of the parametric physical product; generating a fourth user interface and displaying, on a user computer display device, the fourth user interface comprising at least the fourth graphical representation of the parametric physical product; receiving, via the fourth user interface, a plurality of user adjustment parameters for improving a fit of the parametric physical product; based on the plurality of user adjustment parameters and the plurality of fit parameters of the parametric physical product, generating, for the custom product, an adjusted parametric fit model having a plurality of new fit model parameters; wherein a new fit model parameter, of the plurality of new fit model parameters of the adjusted parametric fit model, is represented as an adjusted fit key-value pair; sending the adjusted parametric fit model to the manufacturer to cause the manufacturer to produce the parametric physical product based on a plurality of adjusted fit model parameters of the parametric fit model.([Par 309-313] “In the description below, it is assumed that the steps described in FIG. 7B have been already performed, and updated product description data have been generated by updating the product description data using the modifications received from the particular designer. It is possible, however, that the customer modifies the product description data before the particular designer does. Nevertheless, for the simplicity of the explanation, it is assumed that the particular designer has already provided his modifications to the product description data and that the modifications have been used to generate the updated product description data. In some embodiments, in response to receiving an editing request from a customer interface generated on a customer device, to edit the interactive digital design, a collaboration computer grants the customer access to the updated product description data as an editor. Furthermore, the collaboration computer transmits to the customer device associated with the customer, the updated product description data for rendering the interactive digital design in the user interface executing on the user device of the customer. As the customer modifies the interactive design, new modifications are generated and the key-value pairs corresponding to the updated product description data are modified, edited, and then saved. Upon receiving new modifications to the updated product description data from the user interface of the customer, the collaboration computer automatically generates a second updated product description data by updating the updated product description data based on the new modifications and propagates the second updated product description data to the user interface of the customer and to a particular user interface of the particular designer to cause the interfaces to update their displays of the interactive digital design based on the second updated product description data.” [Par 80] “Digital designs may be transmitted from a product collaboration platform to manufacturing servers, or manufacturing entities, that may use the received digital designs to manufacture products either digitally or physically. The manufactured product may, in turn, be delivered to recipients.” [Par 186] “Based on, at least in part, the plurality of global-key-values pairs, an ownership-attribution tree is constructed. Based on, at least in part, the ownership-attribution tree, manufacturing instructions for customizing the physical product and according to the plurality of variable product attributes are generated. The manufacturing instructions may be transmitted to a product customization server to cause a manufacturing entity to proceed with generating a customized product based on the manufacturing instructions.” [Par 128-129] “In some embodiments, the product option set contains the logic to enumerate each customizable option in a manner that presents a complete user interface to change the parametric product instructions… The instructions for manufacturing a customized product are usually parametric. The parameters include the size of the customized product (this can be multi-dimensional, and include width, height, depth). The parameters may also relate to human sizes or ages. The parameters may also be custom and based on biometric information.”)
Claim 5. Beaver teaches wherein the first user interface displays, on the computer display device, the first graphical representation of the custom product as a visualization of the parametric model of the custom product showing how the parametric physical product, manufactured based on the plurality of fit model parameters using a plurality of fit key-values of the parametric fit model, ([Par 145-147] “ In some embodiments, a product option framework is configured to generate a product option framework user interface. Accordingly, each product options set is associated with logic and code to build a user interface element for each parametric product option. Furthermore, each product options set contains style hints so that each user interface element may be artfully placed to produce a high quality user experience…. The user interface elements may include a design view, a color editor, a font editor, a size selector, a texture selector, a text editor, a fabric swatch selector, a product real view, and the like. In some embodiments, a product options framework cooperates with a user product renderer that may be implemented in, for example, a RealView server 16A. The user product renderer may be configured to render views of a custom product as though it is already manufactured. Typically, it uses a product option set of key-values as input. It creates one or more run-time assets using computational photography of the manufactured product.”)
wherein the key-value pair is a data structure that includes an attribute key and a corresponding attribute value. ([Par 132-133] “In some embodiments, a product option may be represented as a key-value pair. The key-value pair is a label that may span individual products and represent a class of products. The keys of pairs may include a material type, a color, a size, and the like. The value in a key-value pair is a specific discrete or continuous value that sets a manufacturing instruction. Examples of discrete (enumerated) values may include a discrete type of fabric such as cotton, cotton-polyester blend, silk, and the like. The discrete values may also include specific colors, such as white, navy, black, and the like.”)
Donelly makes obvious wherein the system shows how the product fits the user having the user-specific data; ([Par 18] “A system and method for implementing a “virtual fitting room” is disclosed. The virtual fitting room of the present invention, hereinafter referred to as the software, is a software program that will, among other features, provide an actual analysis of how a garment will fit a customer, and which will provide a realistic visual representation of the garment's fit on the customer.”)
Claim 6. Beaver teaches wherein the first user interface further displays one or more regions of the visualization of the parametric model of the custom product; wherein a region of the one or more regions of the visualization is adjustable using one or more functionalities of the first user interface; wherein the one or more functionalities of the first user interface allow adjusting a fit of the parametric physical product to the user having the user-specific data. ([Par 145-147] “ In some embodiments, a product option framework is configured to generate a product option framework user interface. Accordingly, each product options set is associated with logic and code to build a user interface element for each parametric product option. Furthermore, each product options set contains style hints so that each user interface element may be artfully placed to produce a high quality user experience…. The user interface elements may include a design view, a color editor, a font editor, a size selector, a texture selector, a text editor, a fabric swatch selector, a product real view, and the like. In some embodiments, a product options framework cooperates with a user product renderer that may be implemented in, for example, a RealView server 16A. The user product renderer may be configured to render views of a custom product as though it is already manufactured. Typically, it uses a product option set of key-values as input. It creates one or more run-time assets using computational photography of the manufactured product.” [Par 349] “An interactive design can be defined as the subset of the custom product attributes that may be altered, added, manufactured, or embellished for the purpose of custom product manufacturing. While the product attributes are product specific, they may include the substrate color or material choice for an area of the product, the trim material or color of a product, printed, engraved, or embroidered embellishments, and/or color palettes applied to the design.” [Par 371] “Collaboration components 106 may include a component that is used to store a representation of graphical user interface elements (not shown) associated with design areas of a customizable product. Design areas may include one or more areas defined within the customized product that a user may customize and/or modify. For example, if platform 100 offers customizable mugs, then design areas may include an area for showing an outside surface of the mug, an area for showing an inside surface of the mug, and an area for showing a surface of the mug handle. A product description for the design may specify that a user may modify the appearance of each of the surfaces separately, or that the user may group the surfaces and modify the group.”)
Claim 7. Beaver teaches receiving, from the first user interface, a selection of a region, from the one or more regions, and an indication that the customized product should have either a looser fit or a tighter fit. (Par 145-147] “ In some embodiments, a product option framework is configured to generate a product option framework user interface. Accordingly, each product options set is associated with logic and code to build a user interface element for each parametric product option. Furthermore, each product options set contains style hints so that each user interface element may be artfully placed to produce a high quality user experience…. The user interface elements may include a design view, … a size selector, ... product real view, and the like. In some embodiments, a product options framework cooperates with a user product renderer that may be implemented in, for example, a RealView server 16A. The user product renderer may be configured to render views of a custom product as though it is already manufactured. Typically, it uses a product option set of key-values as input. It creates one or more run-time assets using computational photography of the manufactured product.” [Par 371] “Collaboration components 106 may include a component that is used to store a representation of graphical user interface elements (not shown) associated with design areas of a customizable product. Design areas may include one or more areas defined within the customized product that a user may customize and/or modify. For example, if platform 100 offers customizable mugs, then design areas may include an area for showing an outside surface of the mug, an area for showing an inside surface of the mug, and an area for showing a surface of the mug handle. A product description for the design may specify that a user may modify the appearance of each of the surfaces separately, or that the user may group the surfaces and modify the group.”[Examiner’s note: a “size selector” menu option that allows for the selection of clothing sizes allows for the selection of clothes that are looser or tighter, i.e. going down a size for tighter and up a size for looser])
Claims 8-14. The elements of claims 8-14 are substantially the same as those of claims 1-7. Therefore, the elements of claims 8-14 are rejected due to the same reasons as outlined above for claims 1-7. Further, Beaver makes obvious the additional elements of “A non-transitory computer-readable medium storing one or more instructions, which, when executed by one or more processors, cause the one or more processors to perform:…” ([Par 167] “FIG. 2 is a block diagram showing an example of a role-based collaboration platform 1. In the example depicted in FIG. 2, a computer collaboration system 100 includes a user profiles database 102, a global-key-values database 103, a product data definitions database 104, an attribution trees database 105, collaboration components 106, a product options framework 110, an attribute engine 108, one or more processors 120, one or more memory units 122, and one or more frameworks 129-136.”).
Claim 15-20. The elements of claims 15-20 are substantially the same as those of claims 1-6. Therefore, the elements of claims 15-20 are rejected due to the same reasons as outlined above for claims 1-6. Further, Beaver makes obvious the additional elements of “A custom product computer system generator comprising: a memory unit; one or more processors; and a custom product computer storing one or more instructions, which, when executed by one or more processors, cause the one or more processors to perform:” ([Par 167] “FIG. 2 is a block diagram showing an example of a role-based collaboration platform 1. In the example depicted in FIG. 2, a computer collaboration system 100 includes a user profiles database 102, a global-key-values database 103, a product data definitions database 104, an attribution trees database 105, collaboration components 106, a product options framework 110, an attribute engine 108, one or more processors 120, one or more memory units 122, and one or more frameworks 129-136.”).
Double Patenting - nonstatutory
The nonstatutory double patenting rejection is based on a judicially created doctrine grounded in public policy (a policy reflected in the statute) so as to prevent the unjustified or improper timewise extension of the “right to exclude” granted by a patent and to prevent possible harassment by multiple assignees. A nonstatutory double patenting rejection is appropriate where the conflicting claims are not identical, but at least one examined application claim is not patentably distinct from the reference claim(s) because the examined application claim is either anticipated by, or would have been obvious over, the reference claim(s). See, e.g., In re Berg, 140 F.3d 1428, 46 USPQ2d 1226 (Fed. Cir. 1998); In re Goodman, 11 F.3d 1046, 29 USPQ2d 2010 (Fed. Cir. 1993); In re Longi, 759 F.2d 887, 225 USPQ 645 (Fed. Cir. 1985); In re Van Ornum, 686 F.2d 937, 214 USPQ 761 (CCPA 1982); In re Vogel, 422 F.2d 438, 164 USPQ 619 (CCPA 1970); In re Thorington, 418 F.2d 528, 163 USPQ 644 (CCPA 1969).
A timely filed terminal disclaimer in compliance with 37 CFR 1.321(c) or 1.321(d) may be used to overcome an actual or provisional rejection based on nonstatutory double patenting provided the reference application or patent either is shown to be commonly owned with the examined application, or claims an invention made as a result of activities undertaken within the scope of a joint research agreement. See MPEP § 717.02 for applications subject to examination under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA as explained in MPEP § 2159. See MPEP § 2146 et seq. for applications not subject to examination under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA . A terminal disclaimer must be signed in compliance with 37 CFR 1.321(b).
The filing of a terminal disclaimer by itself is not a complete reply to a nonstatutory double patenting (NSDP) rejection. A complete reply requires that the terminal disclaimer be accompanied by a reply requesting reconsideration of the prior Office action. Even where the NSDP rejection is provisional the reply must be complete. See MPEP § 804, subsection I.B.1. For a reply to a non-final Office action, see 37 CFR 1.111(a). For a reply to final Office action, see 37 CFR 1.113(c). A request for reconsideration while not provided for in 37 CFR 1.113(c) may be filed after final for consideration. See MPEP §§ 706.07(e) and 714.13.
The USPTO Internet website contains terminal disclaimer forms which may be used. Please visit www.uspto.gov/patent/patents-forms. The actual filing date of the application in which the form is filed determines what form (e.g., PTO/SB/25, PTO/SB/26, PTO/AIA /25, or PTO/AIA /26) should be used. A web-based eTerminal Disclaimer may be filled out completely online using web-screens. An eTerminal Disclaimer that meets all requirements is auto-processed and approved immediately upon submission. For more information about eTerminal Disclaimers, refer to www.uspto.gov/patents/apply/applying-online/eterminal-disclaimer.
Claims 1-15 rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claims 1-15 of U.S. Patent No. 12147659 (hereinafter ‘659) in view of Terai (JP 2021123826 A). Although the claims at issue are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other because the claims of ‘659 anticipate (or make obvious in view of Terai (JP 2021123826 A)) the claims of the instant application and differ only in slight, obvious variation as shown below:
Terai is analogous art because it is within the field of automatic clothes model generation. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to combine Terai with ‘659 before the effective filing date. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to make this combination in order to make the customization and production of certain types of products easier. As noted by Terai, the customization and production, particularly the generation of new sizes from a base design, is notoriously difficult with knit products and frequently requires manual trial and error ([Page 1 Par 3] “Shoe uppers come in multiple sizes for the same design. Therefore, pattern data is prepared for the shoe upper of each size and converted into knit data for each size. The knit data is data for driving the knitting machine. By the way, even if the shoe upper is knitted according to the knit data converted from the pattern data, the shape of the shoe upper often does not match the pattern data. Therefore, it is necessary to correct the knit data by trial and error so that the shoe upper can be knitted according to the pattern data. However, for many sizes, it is difficult to correct the knit data by trial and error.”) To this end, Terai presents a method for the automatic grading (i.e. generation of new sizes from a base design) of knit products without unnecessary steps or the need to manually create intermediate sizes ([Abstract] “For a knit product to be graded, 2 sizes of pattern data are converted into knit data. Feature points that specify the shape of the knit product are generated for the converted 2 sizes of pattern data and an intermediate shape that specifies the shape of the knit product among the feature points are generated. The feature points and the intermediate shape for a target size are generated by interpolating or extrapolating among the feature points and the intermediate shapes according to the target size of the knit product. A closed loop is generated by connecting the feature points and the intermediate shapes and knit data for the target size is created by arranging a knit in a pattern specified by the loop. EFFECT: Since knit data such as an intermediate size can be generated from 2 sizes of knit data without passing through pattern data such as an intermediate size, conversion from the pattern data to the knit data is unnecessary for the intermediate size and the like.”) Overall, one of ordinary skill in the art would have recognized that combining Terai with ‘659 would result in a system that makes customization and production of products with particular manufacturing methods, such as knit products, significantly easier.
Instant app claim number
Instant claim element
‘659 claim number
‘659 claim element
Notes
1
A method for custom fitting and manufacturing parametric products, the method comprising:
generating a plurality of parametric models of a custom product based on, at least in part, past learned data pertaining to the custom product, each parametric model identified by a parametric model identifier and having a plurality of corresponding control points;
1
A method for custom fitting and manufacturing parametric products, the method comprising:
generating a plurality of parametric models of a custom product based on, at least in part, past learned data pertaining to the custom product, each parametric model identified by a parametric model identifier and having a plurality of corresponding numerical distance parameters;
Terai makes obvious the use of control points rather than numerical distance parameters
Terai
([Abstract] “For a knit product to be graded, 2 sizes of pattern data are converted into knit data. Feature points that specify the shape of the knit product are generated for the converted 2 sizes of pattern data and an intermediate shape that specifies the shape of the knit product among the feature points are generated. The feature points and the intermediate shape for a target size are generated by interpolating or extrapolating among the feature points and the intermediate shapes according to the target size of the knit product. A closed loop is generated by connecting the feature points and the intermediate shapes and knit data for the target size is created by arranging a knit in a pattern specified by the loop.” [Page 2 Par 9-11] “The interpolation extrapolation unit 6 interpolates or extrapolates between the corresponding feature points and interpolates or extrapolates between the corresponding intermediate points with respect to the knit data for, for example, the maximum and the minimum two sizes. When using knit data for two sizes, interpolation or extrapolation may be performed linearly, and when three sizes or more exist, interpolation or extrapolation may be performed in a curved line with a quadratic curve or the like. When knit data for two sizes, maximum and minimum, is used, interpolation is performed. In other cases, for example, interpolation and extrapolation are performed…”)
1
generating a first user interface comprising at least a first graphical representation of the custom product, and displaying the first user interface on a computer display device;
receiving, via the first user interface, a plurality of adjustment parameters for improving a fit of the custom product in relation to user-specific data;
1
generating a first user interface comprising at least a first graphical representation of the custom product, and displaying the first user interface on a computer display device;
receiving, via the first user interface, a plurality of adjustment parameters for improving a fit of the custom product in relation to user-specific data;
1
based on the plurality of adjustment parameters and the plurality of parametric models, determining two particular parametric models, each having at least one parameter, of the plurality of corresponding parameters, that is within a particular tolerance of at least one parameter of the plurality of adjustment parameters of a particular parametric model of the two particular parametric models;
1
based on the plurality of adjustment parameters and the plurality of parametric models, determining two particular parametric models, each particular parametric model having at least one numerical distance parameter, of the corresponding numerical distance parameters, that is within a particular tolerance of at least one parameter of the plurality of adjustment parameters;
Since the numeric distance parameter is one of a plurality of numeric distance parameters of the particular parametric models, it reads on the at least one parameter of the plurality of parameters in the instant app.
Terai makes obvious parameters of a particular parametric model of the two particular parametric models;
Terai
([Abstract] “For a knit product to be graded, 2 sizes of pattern data are converted into knit data. Feature points that specify the shape of the knit product are generated for the converted 2 sizes of pattern data and an intermediate shape that specifies the shape of the knit product among the feature points are generated. The feature points and the intermediate shape for a target size are generated by interpolating or extrapolating among the feature points and the intermediate shapes according to the target size of the knit product. A closed loop is generated by connecting the feature points and the intermediate shapes and knit data for the target size is created by arranging a knit in a pattern specified by the loop.” [Page 2 Par 9-11] “The interpolation extrapolation unit 6 interpolates or extrapolates between the corresponding feature points and interpolates or extrapolates between the corresponding intermediate points with respect to the knit data for, for example, the maximum and the minimum two sizes. When using knit data for two sizes, interpolation or extrapolation may be performed linearly, and when three sizes or more exist, interpolation or extrapolation may be performed in a curved line with a quadratic curve or the like. When knit data for two sizes, maximum and minimum, is used, interpolation is performed. In other cases, for example, interpolation and extrapolation are performed…” [Page 4 Par 5-7] “We will consider the case where an apparel product tailored to each user is realized by knitting. When considering only the two components of width and length, the same processing as in FIG. 8 may be performed. When considering other components, FIG. 8 may be expanded to perform interpolation or extrapolation in a space of three or more dimensions. Although the intermediate points are used in the embodiment, the shape of the knit product between the feature points may be approximated by a curve or a straight line, and the feature points may be treated as the end points of the curve or the straight line. Using the parameter t, which is, for example, 0 for the feature point that is one end of the curve and 1 for the feature point that is the other end, approximates the shape of the knit product between the feature points as an algebraic curve of degree 2 or higher. be able to. If the shape of the knit product between the feature points is straight, it may be straight. Such a curve or a straight line and an intermediate point in the embodiment are called an intermediate shape between feature points, and the intermediate point generation unit 4 generates an intermediate shape automatically or by dialogue with a user. These curves or straight lines can be interpolated or extrapolated between sizes as well as intermediate points by interpolating or extrapolating between points with the same value of parameter t. Interpolation or extrapolation produces feature points at the target size and curves or straight lines that are intermediate shapes. …”)
1
generating, for the custom product, a parametric fit model having a plurality of fit model parameters;
wherein each fit model parameter, of the plurality of fit model parameters, is computed by interpolating, for the at least one parameter of the two particular parametric models, between one or more corresponding control points of a first parametric model of the two particular parametric models and one or more corresponding control points of a second parametric model of the two particular parametric models;
1
generating, for the custom product, a parametric fit model having a plurality of fit model parameters;
wherein each fit model parameter, of the plurality of fit model parameters, is computed by interpolating a corresponding numerical distance parameter of a first particular parametric model of the two particular parametric models and a corresponding numerical distance parameter of a second particular parametric model of the two particular parametric models;
Terai makes obvious interpolating between control points rather than numerical distance parameters
Terai
([Abstract] “For a knit product to be graded, 2 sizes of pattern data are converted into knit data. Feature points that specify the shape of the knit product are generated for the converted 2 sizes of pattern data and an intermediate shape that specifies the shape of the knit product among the feature points are generated. The feature points and the intermediate shape for a target size are generated by interpolating or extrapolating among the feature points and the intermediate shapes according to the target size of the knit product. A closed loop is generated by connecting the feature points and the intermediate shapes and knit data for the target size is created by arranging a knit in a pattern specified by the loop.” [Page 2 Par 9-11] “The interpolation extrapolation unit 6 interpolates or extrapolates between the corresponding feature points and interpolates or extrapolates between the corresponding intermediate points with respect to the knit data for, for example, the maximum and the minimum two sizes. When using knit data for two sizes, interpolation or extrapolation may be performed linearly, and when three sizes or more exist, interpolation or extrapolation may be performed in a curved line with a quadratic curve or the like. When knit data for two sizes, maximum and minimum, is used, interpolation is performed. In other cases, for example, interpolation and extrapolation are performed…”)
1
wherein a fit model parameter, of the plurality of fit model parameters of the parametric fit model, is represented as a fit key-value pair;
transmitting the parametric fit model to a manufacturer to cause the manufacturer to produce a parametric physical product based on the plurality of fit model parameters of the parametric fit model.
1
wherein a fit model parameter, of the plurality of fit model parameters of the parametric fit model, is represented as a fit key-value pair;
transmitting the parametric fit model to a manufacturer to cause the manufacturer to produce a parametric physical product based on the plurality of fit model parameters of the parametric fit model.
2
further comprising storing the parametric fit model, having the plurality of fit model parameters, in association with a user profile of a user.
2
further comprising storing the parametric fit model, having the plurality of fit model parameters, in association with a user profile of a user.
3
The method of Claim 2, further comprising:
receiving a request to invite an agent to collaborate on adjusting the parametric fit model;
based on, at least in part, a plurality of fit parameters of the parametric fit model, generating a second graphical representation of the parametric physical product;
generating a second user interface and displaying, on a user computer display device, the second user interface comprising at least the second graphical representation of the parametric physical product;
generating a third user interface and displaying, on an agent computer display device, the third user interface comprising at least the second graphical representation of the parametric physical product;
receiving, via the second user interface, a plurality of user adjustment parameters for improving a fit of the parametric physical product;
receiving, via the third user interface, a plurality of agent adjustment parameters for improving a fit of the parametric physical product;
based on the plurality of user adjustment parameters, the
plurality of agent adjustment parameters and the plurality of fit parameters of the parametric physical product, generating, for the custom product, an adjusted parametric fit model having a plurality of new fit model parameters;
wherein a new fit model parameter, of the plurality of new fit model parameters of the adjusted parametric fit model, is represented as an adjusted fit key-value pair;
sending the adjusted parametric fit model to the manufacturer to cause the manufacturer to produce the parametric physical product based on a plurality of adjusted fit model parameters of the adjusted parametric fit model.
3
The method of Claim 2, further comprising:
receiving a request to invite an agent to collaborate on adjusting the parametric fit model;
based on, at least in part, a plurality of fit parameters of the parametric fit model, generating a second graphical representation of the parametric physical product;
generating a second user interface and displaying, on a user computer display device, the second user interface comprising at least the second graphical representation of the parametric physical product;
generating a third user interface and displaying, on an agent computer display device, the third user interface comprising at least the second graphical representation of the parametric physical product;
receiving, via the second user interface, a plurality of user adjustment parameters for improving a fit of the parametric physical product;
receiving, via the third user interface, a plurality of agent adjustment parameters for improving a fit of the parametric physical product;
based on the plurality of user adjustment parameters, the plurality of agent adjustment parameters and the plurality of fit parameters of the parametric physical product, generating, for the custom product, an adjusted parametric fit model having a plurality of new fit model parameters;
wherein a new fit model parameter, of the plurality of new fit model parameters of the adjusted parametric fit model, is represented as an adjusted fit key-value pair;
sending the adjusted parametric fit model to the manufacturer to cause the manufacturer to produce the parametric physical product based on a plurality of adjusted fit model parameters of the adjusted parametric fit model.
4
The method of Claim 2, further comprising:
receiving a request to adjust the parametric fit model;
based on, at least in part, a plurality of fit parameters of the parametric fit model, generating a fourth graphical representation of the parametric physical product;
generating a fourth user interface and displaying, on a user computer display device, the fourth user interface comprising at least the fourth graphical representation of the parametric physical product;
receiving, via the fourth user interface, a plurality of user adjustment parameters for improving a fit of the parametric physical product;
based on the plurality of user adjustment parameters and the plurality of fit parameters of the parametric physical product, generating, for the custom product, an adjusted parametric fit model having a plurality of new fit model parameters;
wherein a new fit model parameter, of the plurality of new fit model parameters of the adjusted parametric fit model, is represented as an adjusted fit key-value pair;
sending the adjusted parametric fit model to the manufacturer to cause the manufacturer to produce the parametric physical product based on a plurality of adjusted fit model parameters of the parametric fit model.
4
The method of Claim 2, further comprising:
receiving a request to adjust the parametric fit model;
based on, at least in part, a plurality of fit parameters of the parametric fit model, generating a fourth graphical representation of the parametric physical product;
generating a fourth user interface and displaying, on a user computer display device, the fourth user interface comprising at least the fourth graphical representation of the parametric physical product;
receiving, via the fourth user interface, a plurality of user adjustment parameters for improving a fit of the parametric physical product;
based on the plurality of user adjustment parameters and the plurality of fit parameters of the parametric physical product, generating, for the custom product, an adjusted parametric fit model having a plurality of new fit model parameters;
wherein a new fit model parameter, of the plurality of new fit model parameters of the adjusted parametric fit model, is represented as an adjusted fit key-value pair;
sending the adjusted parametric fit model to the manufacturer to cause the manufacturer to produce the parametric physical product based on a plurality of adjusted fit model parameters of the parametric fit model.
5
The method of Claim 1, wherein the first user interface displays, on the computer display device, the first graphical representation of the custom product as a visualization of the parametric model of the custom product showing how the
parametric physical product, manufactured based on the plurality of fit model parameters using a plurality of fit key-values of the parametric fit model, fits the user having the user-specific data;
wherein the key-value pair is a data structure that includes an attribute key and a corresponding attribute value.
5
The method of Claim 1, wherein the first user interface displays, on the computer display device, the first graphical representation of the custom product as a visualization of the parametric model of the custom product showing how the parametric physical product, manufactured based on the plurality of fit model parameters using a plurality of fit key-values of the parametric fit model, fits the user having the user-specific data;
wherein the key-value pair is a data structure that includes an attribute key and a corresponding attribute value.
6
The method of Claim 5, wherein the first user interface further displays one or more regions of the visualization of the parametric model of the custom product; wherein a region of the one or more regions of the visualization is adjustable using one or more functionalities of the first user interface;
wherein the one or more functionalities of the first user interface allow adjusting a fit of the parametric physical product to the user having the user-specific data.
6
The method of Claim 5, wherein the first user interface further displays one or more regions of the visualization of the parametric model of the custom product;
wherein a region of the one or more regions of the visualization is adjustable using one or more functionalities of the first user interface;
wherein the one or more functionalities of the first user interface allow adjusting a fit of the parametric physical product to the user having the user-specific data.
7
The method of Claim 6, further comprising: receiving, from the first user interface, a selection of a region, from the one or more regions, and an indication that the customized product should have either a looser fit or a tighter fit.
7
The method of Claim 6, further comprising: receiving, from the first user interface, a selection of a region, from the one or more regions, and an indication that the customized product should have either a looser fit or a tighter fit.
8
A non-transitory computer-readable medium
storing one or more instructions, which, when executed by one or more processors, cause the one or more processors to perform:
generating a plurality of parametric models of a custom product based on, at least in part, past learned data pertaining to the custom product, each parametric model identified by a parametric model identifier and having a plurality of corresponding control points;
8
One or more non-transitory computer-readable media
storing one or more instructions, which, when executed by one or more processors, cause the one or more processors to perform:
generating a plurality of parametric models of a custom product based on, at least in part, past learned data pertaining to the custom product, each parametric model identified by a parametric model identifier and having a plurality of corresponding numerical distance parameters;
Terai makes obvious the use of control points rather than numerical distance parameters
Terai
([Abstract] “For a knit product to be graded, 2 sizes of pattern data are converted into knit data. Feature points that specify the shape of the knit product are generated for the converted 2 sizes of pattern data and an intermediate shape that specifies the shape of the knit product among the feature points are generated. The feature points and the intermediate shape for a target size are generated by interpolating or extrapolating among the feature points and the intermediate shapes according to the target size of the knit product. A closed loop is generated by connecting the feature points and the intermediate shapes and knit data for the target size is created by arranging a knit in a pattern specified by the loop.” [Page 2 Par 9-11] “The interpolation extrapolation unit 6 interpolates or extrapolates between the corresponding feature points and interpolates or extrapolates between the corresponding intermediate points with respect to the knit data for, for example, the maximum and the minimum two sizes. When using knit data for two sizes, interpolation or extrapolation may be performed linearly, and when three sizes or more exist, interpolation or extrapolation may be performed in a curved line with a quadratic curve or the like. When knit data for two sizes, maximum and minimum, is used, interpolation is performed. In other cases, for example, interpolation and extrapolation are performed…”)
8
generating a first user interface comprising at least a first graphical representation of the custom product, and displaying the first user interface on a computer display device;
receiving, via the first user interface, a plurality of adjustment parameters for improving a fit of the custom product in relation to user-specific data;
8
generating a first user interface comprising at least a first graphical representation of the custom product, and displaying the first user interface on a computer display device;
receiving, via the first user interface, a plurality of adjustment parameters for improving a fit of the custom product in relation to user-specific data;
8
based on the plurality of adjustment parameters and the plurality of parametric models, determining two particular parametric models, each having at least one parameter, of the plurality of corresponding parameters, that is within a particular tolerance of at least one parameter of the plurality of adjustment parameters of a particular parametric model of the two particular parametric models;
8
based on the plurality of adjustment parameters and the plurality of parametric models, determining two particular parametric models, each particular parametric model having at least one numerical distance parameter, of the corresponding numerical distance parameters, that is within a particular tolerance of at least one parameter of the plurality of adjustment parameters;
Since the numeric distance parameter is one of a plurality of numeric distance parameters of the particular parametric models, it reads on the at least one parameter of the plurality of parameters in the instant app.
Terai makes obvious parameters of a particular parametric model of the two particular parametric models;
Terai
([Abstract] “For a knit product to be graded, 2 sizes of pattern data are converted into knit data. Feature points that specify the shape of the knit product are generated for the converted 2 sizes of pattern data and an intermediate shape that specifies the shape of the knit product among the feature points are generated. The feature points and the intermediate shape for a target size are generated by interpolating or extrapolating among the feature points and the intermediate shapes according to the target size of the knit product. A closed loop is generated by connecting the feature points and the intermediate shapes and knit data for the target size is created by arranging a knit in a pattern specified by the loop.” [Page 2 Par 9-11] “The interpolation extrapolation unit 6 interpolates or extrapolates between the corresponding feature points and interpolates or extrapolates between the corresponding intermediate points with respect to the knit data for, for example, the maximum and the minimum two sizes. When using knit data for two sizes, interpolation or extrapolation may be performed linearly, and when three sizes or more exist, interpolation or extrapolation may be performed in a curved line with a quadratic curve or the like. When knit data for two sizes, maximum and minimum, is used, interpolation is performed. In other cases, for example, interpolation and extrapolation are performed…” [Page 4 Par 5-7] “We will consider the case where an apparel product tailored to each user is realized by knitting. When considering only the two components of width and length, the same processing as in FIG. 8 may be performed. When considering other components, FIG. 8 may be expanded to perform interpolation or extrapolation in a space of three or more dimensions. Although the intermediate points are used in the embodiment, the shape of the knit product between the feature points may be approximated by a curve or a straight line, and the feature points may be treated as the end points of the curve or the straight line. Using the parameter t, which is, for example, 0 for the feature point that is one end of the curve and 1 for the feature point that is the other end, approximates the shape of the knit product between the feature points as an algebraic curve of degree 2 or higher. be able to. If the shape of the knit product between the feature points is straight, it may be straight. Such a curve or a straight line and an intermediate point in the embodiment are called an intermediate shape between feature points, and the intermediate point generation unit 4 generates an intermediate shape automatically or by dialogue with a user. These curves or straight lines can be interpolated or extrapolated between sizes as well as intermediate points by interpolating or extrapolating between points with the same value of parameter t. Interpolation or extrapolation produces feature points at the target size and curves or straight lines that are intermediate shapes. …”)
8
generating, for the custom product, a parametric fit model having a plurality of fit model parameters;
wherein each fit model parameter, of the plurality of fit model parameters, is computed by interpolating, for the at least one parameter of the two particular parametric models, between one or more corresponding control points of a first parametric model of the two particular parametric models and one or more corresponding control points of a second parametric model of the two particular parametric models;
8
generating, for the custom product, a parametric fit model having a plurality of fit model parameters;
wherein each fit model parameter, of the plurality of fit model parameters, is computed by interpolating a corresponding numerical distance parameter of a first particular parametric model of the two particular parametric models and a corresponding numerical distance parameter of a second particular parametric model of the two particular parametric models;
Terai makes obvious interpolating between control points rather than numerical distance parameters
Terai
([Abstract] “For a knit product to be graded, 2 sizes of pattern data are converted into knit data. Feature points that specify the shape of the knit product are generated for the converted 2 sizes of pattern data and an intermediate shape that specifies the shape of the knit product among the feature points are generated. The feature points and the intermediate shape for a target size are generated by interpolating or extrapolating among the feature points and the intermediate shapes according to the target size of the knit product. A closed loop is generated by connecting the feature points and the intermediate shapes and knit data for the target size is created by arranging a knit in a pattern specified by the loop.” [Page 2 Par 9-11] “The interpolation extrapolation unit 6 interpolates or extrapolates between the corresponding feature points and interpolates or extrapolates between the corresponding intermediate points with respect to the knit data for, for example, the maximum and the minimum two sizes. When using knit data for two sizes, interpolation or extrapolation may be performed linearly, and when three sizes or more exist, interpolation or extrapolation may be performed in a curved line with a quadratic curve or the like. When knit data for two sizes, maximum and minimum, is used, interpolation is performed. In other cases, for example, interpolation and extrapolation are performed…”)
8
wherein a fit model parameter, of the plurality of fit model parameters of the parametric fit model, is represented as a fit key-value pair;
transmitting the parametric fit model to a manufacturer to cause the manufacturer to produce a parametric physical product based on the plurality of fit model parameters of the parametric fit model.
8
wherein a fit model parameter, of the plurality of fit model parameters of the parametric fit model, is represented as a fit key-value pair;
transmitting the parametric fit model to a manufacturer to cause the manufacturer to produce a parametric physical product based on the plurality of fit model parameters of the parametric fit model.
9
The non-transitory computer-readable medium of Claim
8, storing additional instructions for: storing the parametric fit model, having the plurality of fit model parameters, in association with a user profile of a user.
9
The one or more non-transitory computer-readable media of Claim 8, storing additional instructions for: storing the parametric fit model, having the plurality of fit model parameters, in association with a user profile of the user.
10
The non-transitory computer-readable medium of Claim
9, storing additional instructions for:
receiving a request to invite an
agent to collaborate on adjusting
the parametric fit model;
based on, at least in part, a plurality of fit parameters of the parametric fit model, generating a second graphical representation of the parametric physical product;
generating a second user interface and displaying, on a user computer display device, the second user interface comprising at least the second graphical representation of the parametric physical product;
generating a third user interface and displaying, on an agent computer display device, the third user interface comprising at least the second graphical representation of the parametric physical product;
receiving, via the second user interface, a plurality of user adjustment parameters for improving a fit of the parametric physical product;
receiving, via the third user interface, a plurality of agent adjustment parameters for improving a fit of the parametric physical product;
based on the plurality of user adjustment parameters, the
plurality of agent adjustment parameters and the plurality of fit parameters of the parametric physical product, generating, for the custom product, an adjusted parametric fit model having a plurality of new fit model parameters;
wherein a new fit model parameter, of the plurality of new fit model parameters of the adjusted parametric fit model, is represented as an adjusted fit key-value pair;
sending the adjusted parametric fit model to the manufacturer to cause the manufacturer to produce the parametric physical product based on a plurality of adjusted fit model parameters of the adjusted parametric fit model.
10
The one or more non-transitory computer-readable media of Claim 9, storing additional instructions for:
receiving a request to invite an agent to collaborate on adjusting the parametric fit model;
based on, at least in part, a plurality of fit parameters of the parametric fit model, generating a second graphical representation of the parametric physical product;
generating a second user interface and displaying, on a user computer display device, the second user interface comprising at least the second graphical representation of the parametric physical product;
generating a third user interface and displaying, on an agent computer display device, the third user interface comprising at least the second graphical representation of the parametric physical product;
receiving, via the second user interface, a plurality of user adjustment parameters for improving a fit of the parametric physical product;
receiving, via the third user interface, a plurality of agent adjustment parameters for improving a fit of the parametric physical product;
based on the plurality of user adjustment parameters, the plurality of agent adjustment parameters and the plurality of fit parameters of the parametric physical product, generating, for the custom product, an adjusted parametric fit model having a plurality of new fit model parameters;
wherein a new fit model parameter, of the plurality of new fit model parameters of the adjusted parametric fit model, is represented as an adjusted fit key-value pair;
sending the adjusted parametric fit model to the manufacturer to cause the manufacturer to produce the parametric physical product based on a plurality of adjusted fit model parameters of the adjusted parametric fit model.
11
The non-transitory computer-readable medium of Claim 9, storing additional instructions for:
receiving a request to adjust the parametric fit model;
based on, at least in part, a plurality of fit parameters of the parametric fit model, generating a fourth graphical representation of the parametric physical product;
generating a fourth user interface and displaying, on a user computer display device, the fourth user interface comprising at least the fourth graphical representation of the parametric physical product;
receiving, via the fourth user interface, a plurality of user adjustment parameters for improving a fit of the parametric physical product;
based on the plurality of user adjustment parameters and the plurality of fit parameters of the parametric physical product, generating, for the custom product, an adjusted parametric fit model having a plurality of new fit model parameters;
wherein a new fit model parameter, of the plurality of new fit model parameters of the adjusted parametric fit model, is represented as an adjusted fit key-value pair;
sending the adjusted parametric fit model to the manufacturer to cause the manufacturer to produce the parametric physical product based on a plurality of adjusted fit model parameters of the parametric fit model.
11
The one or more non-transitory computer-readable media of Claim 9, storing additional instructions for:
receiving a request to adjust the parametric fit model;
based on, at least in part, a plurality of fit parameters of the parametric fit model, generating a fourth graphical representation of the parametric physical product;
generating a fourth user interface and displaying, on a user computer display device, the fourth user interface comprising at least the fourth graphical representation of the parametric physical product;
receiving, via the fourth user interface, a plurality of user adjustment parameters for improving a fit of the parametric physical product;
based on the plurality of user adjustment parameters and the plurality of fit parameters of the parametric physical product, generating, for the custom product, an adjusted parametric fit model having a plurality of new fit model parameters;
wherein a new fit model parameter, of the plurality of new fit model parameters of the adjusted parametric fit model, is represented as an adjusted fit key-value pair;
sending the adjusted parametric fit model to the manufacturer to cause the manufacturer to produce the parametric physical product based on a plurality of adjusted fit model parameters of the parametric fit model.
12
The non-transitory computer-readable medium of Claim
8, wherein the first user interface displays, on the computer display device, the first graphical representation of the custom product as a visualization of the parametric model of the custom product showing how the
parametric physical product, manufactured based on the plurality of fit model parameters using a plurality of fit key-values of the parametric fit model, fits the user having the user- specific data; wherein the key-value pair is a data structure that includes an attribute key and a corresponding attribute value.
12
The one or more non-transitory computer-readable media of Claim 8, wherein the first user interface displays, on the computer display device, the first graphical representation of the custom product as a visualization of the parametric model of the custom product showing how the parametric physical product, manufactured based on the plurality of fit model parameters using a plurality of fit key-values of the parametric fit model, fits the user having the user-specific data;
wherein the key-value pair is a data structure that includes an attribute key and a corresponding attribute value.
13
The non-transitory computer-readable medium of Claim
12, wherein the first user interface further displays one or more regions of the visualization of the
parametric model of the custom product;
wherein a region of the one or more regions of the visualization is adjustable using one or more functionalities of the first user interface; wherein the one or more functionalities of the first user interface allow adjusting a fit of the parametric physical product to the user having the user-specific data.
13
The one or more non-transitory computer-readable media of Claim 12, wherein the first user interface further displays one or more regions of the visualization of the parametric model of the custom product;
wherein a region of the one or more regions of the visualization is adjustable using one or more functionalities of the first user interface; wherein the one or more functionalities of the first user interface allow adjusting a fit of the parametric physical product to the user having the user-specific data.
14
The non-transitory computer-readable medium of Claim 13, storing additional instructions for: receiving, from the first user interface, a selection of a region, from the one or more regions, and an indication that the customized product should have either a looser fit or a tighter fit.
14
The one or more non-transitory computer-readable media of Claim 13, storing additional instructions for: receiving, from the first user interface, a selection of a region, from the one or more regions, and an indication that the customized product should have either a looser fit or a tighter fit.
15
A custom product computer system generator comprising: a memory unit; one or more processors; and a custom product computer storing one or more instructions, which, when executed by one or more processors, cause the one or more processors to perform: generating a plurality of parametric models of a custom product based on, at least in part, past learned data pertaining to the custom product, each
parametric model identified by a parametric model identifier and having a plurality of corresponding control points;
15
A custom product computer system generator comprising: a memory unit; one or more processors; and a custom product computer storing one or more instructions, which, when executed by one or more processors, cause the one or more processors to perform: generating a plurality of parametric models of a custom product based on, at least in part, past learned data pertaining to the custom product, each parametric model identified by a parametric model identifier and having a plurality of corresponding numerical distance parameters;
Terai makes obvious the use of control points rather than numerical distance parameters
Terai
([Abstract] “For a knit product to be graded, 2 sizes of pattern data are converted into knit data. Feature points that specify the shape of the knit product are generated for the converted 2 sizes of pattern data and an intermediate shape that specifies the shape of the knit product among the feature points are generated. The feature points and the intermediate shape for a target size are generated by interpolating or extrapolating among the feature points and the intermediate shapes according to the target size of the knit product. A closed loop is generated by connecting the feature points and the intermediate shapes and knit data for the target size is created by arranging a knit in a pattern specified by the loop.” [Page 2 Par 9-11] “The interpolation extrapolation unit 6 interpolates or extrapolates between the corresponding feature points and interpolates or extrapolates between the corresponding intermediate points with respect to the knit data for, for example, the maximum and the minimum two sizes. When using knit data for two sizes, interpolation or extrapolation may be performed linearly, and when three sizes or more exist, interpolation or extrapolation may be performed in a curved line with a quadratic curve or the like. When knit data for two sizes, maximum and minimum, is used, interpolation is performed. In other cases, for example, interpolation and extrapolation are performed…”)
15
generating a first user interface comprising at least a first graphical representation of the custom product, and displaying the first user interface on a computer display device; receiving, via the first user interface, a plurality of adjustment parameters for improving a fit of the custom product in relation to user-specific data;
15
generating a first user interface comprising at least a first graphical representation of the custom product, and displaying the first user interface on a computer display device; receiving, via the first user interface, a plurality of adjustment parameters for improving a fit of the custom product in relation to user-specific data;
15
based on the plurality of adjustment parameters and the plurality of parametric models,
determining two particular parametric models, each having at least one parameter, of the plurality of corresponding parameters, that is within a particular tolerance of at least one parameter of the plurality of adjustment parameters of a particular parametric model of the two particular parametric models;
15
based on the plurality of adjustment parameters and the plurality of parametric models,
determining two particular parametric models, each particular parametric model having at least one numerical distance parameter, of the corresponding numerical distance parameters, that is within a particular tolerance of at least one parameter of the plurality of adjustment parameters
Since the numeric distance parameter is one of a plurality of numeric distance parameters of the particular parametric models, it reads on the at least one parameter of the plurality of parameters in the instant app.
Terai makes obvious parameters of a particular parametric model of the two particular parametric models;
Terai
([Abstract] “For a knit product to be graded, 2 sizes of pattern data are converted into knit data. Feature points that specify the shape of the knit product are generated for the converted 2 sizes of pattern data and an intermediate shape that specifies the shape of the knit product among the feature points are generated. The feature points and the intermediate shape for a target size are generated by interpolating or extrapolating among the feature points and the intermediate shapes according to the target size of the knit product. A closed loop is generated by connecting the feature points and the intermediate shapes and knit data for the target size is created by arranging a knit in a pattern specified by the loop.” [Page 2 Par 9-11] “The interpolation extrapolation unit 6 interpolates or extrapolates between the corresponding feature points and interpolates or extrapolates between the corresponding intermediate points with respect to the knit data for, for example, the maximum and the minimum two sizes. When using knit data for two sizes, interpolation or extrapolation may be performed linearly, and when three sizes or more exist, interpolation or extrapolation may be performed in a curved line with a quadratic curve or the like. When knit data for two sizes, maximum and minimum, is used, interpolation is performed. In other cases, for example, interpolation and extrapolation are performed…” [Page 4 Par 5-7] “We will consider the case where an apparel product tailored to each user is realized by knitting. When considering only the two components of width and length, the same processing as in FIG. 8 may be performed. When considering other components, FIG. 8 may be expanded to perform interpolation or extrapolation in a space of three or more dimensions. Although the intermediate points are used in the embodiment, the shape of the knit product between the feature points may be approximated by a curve or a straight line, and the feature points may be treated as the end points of the curve or the straight line. Using the parameter t, which is, for example, 0 for the feature point that is one end of the curve and 1 for the feature point that is the other end, approximates the shape of the knit product between the feature points as an algebraic curve of degree 2 or higher. be able to. If the shape of the knit product between the feature points is straight, it may be straight. Such a curve or a straight line and an intermediate point in the embodiment are called an intermediate shape between feature points, and the intermediate point generation unit 4 generates an intermediate shape automatically or by dialogue with a user. These curves or straight lines can be interpolated or extrapolated between sizes as well as intermediate points by interpolating or extrapolating between points with the same value of parameter t. Interpolation or extrapolation produces feature points at the target size and curves or straight lines that are intermediate shapes. …”)
15
generating, for the custom product, a parametric fit model having a plurality of fit model parameters; wherein each fit model parameter, of the plurality of fit model parameters, is computed by interpolating, for the at least one parameter of the two particular parametric models, between one or more corresponding control points of a first parametric model of the two particular parametric models and one or more corresponding control points of a second parametric model of the two particular parametric models;
15
generating, for the custom product, a parametric fit model having a plurality of fit model parameters;
wherein each fit model parameter, of the plurality of fit model parameters, is computed by interpolating a corresponding numerical distance parameter of a first particular parametric model of the two particular parametric models and a corresponding numerical distance parameter of a second particular parametric model of the two particular parametric models;
Terai makes obvious interpolating between control points rather than numerical distance parameters
Terai
([Abstract] “For a knit product to be graded, 2 sizes of pattern data are converted into knit data. Feature points that specify the shape of the knit product are generated for the converted 2 sizes of pattern data and an intermediate shape that specifies the shape of the knit product among the feature points are generated. The feature points and the intermediate shape for a target size are generated by interpolating or extrapolating among the feature points and the intermediate shapes according to the target size of the knit product. A closed loop is generated by connecting the feature points and the intermediate shapes and knit data for the target size is created by arranging a knit in a pattern specified by the loop.” [Page 2 Par 9-11] “The interpolation extrapolation unit 6 interpolates or extrapolates between the corresponding feature points and interpolates or extrapolates between the corresponding intermediate points with respect to the knit data for, for example, the maximum and the minimum two sizes. When using knit data for two sizes, interpolation or extrapolation may be performed linearly, and when three sizes or more exist, interpolation or extrapolation may be performed in a curved line with a quadratic curve or the like. When knit data for two sizes, maximum and minimum, is used, interpolation is performed. In other cases, for example, interpolation and extrapolation are performed…”)
15
wherein a fit model parameter, of the plurality of fit model parameters of the parametric fit model, is represented as a fit key-value pair;
transmitting the parametric fit model to a manufacturer to cause the manufacturer to produce a parametric physical product based on the plurality of fit model parameters of the parametric fit model.
15
wherein a fit model parameter, of the plurality of fit model parameters of the parametric fit model, is represented as a fit key-value pair; transmitting the parametric fit model to a manufacturer to cause the manufacturer to produce a parametric physical product based on the plurality of fit model parameters of the parametric fit model.
Claims 17-20 rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claims 17-20 of U.S. Patent No. 12147659 (hereinafter ‘659) in view of Terai (JP 2021123826 A) in further view of Beaver (US 20210266352 A1). Although the claims at issue are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other because the claims of ‘659 anticipate (or make obvious in view of Terai (JP 2021123826 A) and in further view of Beaver (US 20210266352 A1)) the claims of the instant application and differ only in slight, obvious variation as shown below:
Terai is analogous art because it is within the field of automatic clothes model generation. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to combine Terai with ‘659 before the effective filing date. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to make this combination in order to make the customization and production of certain types of products easier. As noted by Terai, the customization and production, particularly the generation of new sizes from a base design, is notoriously difficult with knit products and frequently requires manual trial and error ([Page 1 Par 3] “Shoe uppers come in multiple sizes for the same design. Therefore, pattern data is prepared for the shoe upper of each size and converted into knit data for each size. The knit data is data for driving the knitting machine. By the way, even if the shoe upper is knitted according to the knit data converted from the pattern data, the shape of the shoe upper often does not match the pattern data. Therefore, it is necessary to correct the knit data by trial and error so that the shoe upper can be knitted according to the pattern data. However, for many sizes, it is difficult to correct the knit data by trial and error.”) To this end, Terai presents a method for the automatic grading (i.e. generation of new sizes from a base design) of knit products without unnecessary steps or the need to manually create intermediate sizes ([Abstract] “For a knit product to be graded, 2 sizes of pattern data are converted into knit data. Feature points that specify the shape of the knit product are generated for the converted 2 sizes of pattern data and an intermediate shape that specifies the shape of the knit product among the feature points are generated. The feature points and the intermediate shape for a target size are generated by interpolating or extrapolating among the feature points and the intermediate shapes according to the target size of the knit product. A closed loop is generated by connecting the feature points and the intermediate shapes and knit data for the target size is created by arranging a knit in a pattern specified by the loop. EFFECT: Since knit data such as an intermediate size can be generated from 2 sizes of knit data without passing through pattern data such as an intermediate size, conversion from the pattern data to the knit data is unnecessary for the intermediate size and the like.”) Overall, one of ordinary skill in the art would have recognized that combining Terai with ‘659 would result in a system that makes customization and production of products with particular manufacturing methods, such as knit products, significantly easier.
Beaver is analogous art because it is within the field of parametric product customization with a particular application in clothing customization. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to combine Beaver with Terai and ‘659 before the effective filing date. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to make this combination in order to make collaboration easier and make design decisions involving multiple collaborators easier to reach. As noted by Beaver, many collaborative design systems suffer from a lack of distinct user roles, which makes reaching design decisions and agreements difficult ([Par 4-6] “The recent innovations in information technologies have inspired the development of multi-user collaboration tools. Due to recent technological advances, many tools have been developed to facilitate, for example, an online-product-customization and interactivity capabilities to users. Collaborative customization of a product may include allowing multiple users to collaborate on a digital design, exchange ideas related to the design, and provide support and assistance in customizing the appearance of the product. However, as the collaboration applications grow and include vendors and third-party service providers, it becomes more and more difficult to ensure that the collaboration sessions meet the requirements set forth in, for example, collaboration agreements between the users. Therefore, there is a need to provide mechanisms for managing communications channels established between users of role-based collaborative systems, especially for managing collaborations during the process of generating customized products using the role-based collaborative systems.”) To this end, Beaver presents a system for rich, role-based collaboration in the design process of custom products such as clothes ([Abstract] “In some embodiments, a method for generating customized products in collaboration with live designers is disclosed. The method comprises: receiving, at a computer collaboration computer, a request, from a first user interface that executes on a first user device associated with a first user, for assistance in collaborating on an interactive design; wherein the request comprises collaboration parameters; in response to receiving the request, automatically determining one or more designer profiles, each designer profile satisfying one or more of the collaboration parameters; in response to selecting a particular designer profile from the one or more designer profiles: automatically enabling a collaboration on the interactive design between the first user and a second user who has the particular designer profile; wherein the collaboration between the first user and the second user comprises automatically generating and updating product description data having a plurality of key-values pairs associated with the interactive design.” [Par 94] “In some embodiments, an approach for generating customized products in collaboration with live designers and agents is implemented in a product collaboration platform. The platform allows users, designers, agents, customers, and support engineers, to, for example, collaborate in designing and creating digital designs of customized products. A customized product may be a digital product, such as a digital gift card, or may be a physical product, such as a physical t-shirt. An example computer environment is described in FIG. 1.” [Par 327] “Various roles may be assigned to users who interact with computer collaboration system 100 via user devices 140A-140G. Examples of roles may include a customer role, a customer support agent role, a graphics designer role, a customer peer role, and a customer product artist role. Based on the assigned roles, the users may be granted access to a product description of an interactive design as editors, viewers, managers, and the like.”) Overall, one of ordinary skill in the art would have recognized that combining Beaver with Terai and ‘659 would allow for deeper, more complex collaboration features than those already present in the combination of Terai and ‘659, making such collaboration easier and more productive.
Instant app claim number
Instant claim element
‘659 claim number
‘659 claim element
Notes
16
The custom product computer system generator of Claim 15, storing additional instructions for: storing the parametric fit model, having the plurality of fit model parameters, in association with a user profile of a user.
-
-
Note that since the contents of instant claim 16 are absent from the dependency tree of claim 15 of ‘659, it is not rejected under these grounds.
It is, however, made obvious by the reference Beaver, as shown below.
17
The custom product computer system generator of Claim 16, storing additional instructions for:
16
The custom product computer system generator of Claim 15, storing additional instructions for:
Beaver makes obvious the features of instant claim 16 on which instant claim 17 depends.
Beaver
Instant Claim 16:
The custom product computer system generator of Claim 15, storing additional instructions for: storing the parametric fit model, having the plurality of fit model parameters, in association with a user profile of a user. ([Par 352] “ In some embodiments, a product description may include, or be associated with, a journaled list of modifications that have been submitted by users for an interactive design. The list may also include other information such as identifiers of the users who provided the modifications, global-key-values generated as the collaborators collaborated on the customized product, a history log of the modifications that have been accepted, reverted or deleted, comments that have been provided by the user, and the like” [Par 369] “User interface elements may be specific not only to a role assigned to a user, but also to an interactive design itself. For example, if platform 10 offers customizable ties and customizable scarfs, and a user profile for a user includes information indicating that the user is a male, then it is assumed that the user might want to customize a tie, not a scarf. Furthermore, it may be assumed that the user would like to customize a color, a material, and a shape of the tie. Based on that information, collaboration components 106 may select the user interface elements that are specific to the tie and to the selection of the tie attributes.”)
17
receiving a request to invite an agent to collaborate on adjusting the parametric fit model;
based on, at least in part, a plurality of fit parameters of the parametric fit model, generating a second graphical representation of the parametric physical product;
generating a second user interface and displaying, on a user computer display device, the second user interface comprising at least the second graphical representation of the parametric physical product;
generating a third user interface and displaying, on an agent computer display device, the third user interface comprising at least the second graphical representation of the parametric physical product;
receiving, via the second user interface, a plurality of user adjustment parameters for improving a fit of the parametric physical product;
receiving, via the third user interface, a plurality of agent adjustment parameters for improving a fit of the parametric physical product;
based on the plurality of user adjustment parameters, the
plurality of agent adjustment parameters and the plurality of fit parameters of the parametric physical product, generating, for the custom product, an adjusted parametric fit model having a plurality of new fit model parameters;
wherein a new fit model parameter, of the plurality of new fit model parameters of the adjusted parametric fit model, is represented as an adjusted fit key-value pair;
sending the adjusted parametric fit model to the manufacturer to cause the manufacturer to produce the parametric physical product based on a plurality of adjusted fit model parameters of the adjusted parametric fit model.
16
receiving a request to invite an agent to collaborate on adjusting the parametric fit model;
based on, at least in part, a plurality of fit parameters of the parametric fit model, generating a second graphical representation of the parametric physical product;
generating a second user interface and displaying, on a user computer display device, the second user interface comprising at least the second graphical representation of the parametric physical product;
generating a third user interface and displaying, on an agent computer display device, the third user interface comprising at least the second graphical representation of the parametric physical product;
receiving, via the second user interface, a plurality of user adjustment parameters for improving a fit of the parametric physical product;
receiving, via the third user interface, a plurality of agent adjustment parameters for
improving a fit of the parametric physical product;
based on the plurality of user adjustment parameters, the plurality of agent adjustment parameters and the plurality of fit parameters of the parametric physical product, generating, for the custom product, an adjusted parametric fit model having a plurality of new fit model parameters;
wherein a new fit model parameter, of the plurality of new fit model parameters of the adjusted parametric fit model, is represented as an adjusted fit key-value pair;
sending the adjusted parametric fit model to the manufacturer to cause the manufacturer to produce the parametric physical product based on a plurality of adjusted fit model parameters of the adjusted parametric fit model.
18
The custom product computer system generator of Claim 16, storing additional instructions for:
17
The custom product computer system generator of Claim 16, storing additional instructions for:
Beaver makes obvious the features of instant claim 16 on which instant claim 18 depends.
Beaver
Instant Claim 16:
The custom product computer system generator of Claim 15, storing additional instructions for: storing the parametric fit model, having the plurality of fit model parameters, in association with a user profile of a user. ([Par 352] “ In some embodiments, a product description may include, or be associated with, a journaled list of modifications that have been submitted by users for an interactive design. The list may also include other information such as identifiers of the users who provided the modifications, global-key-values generated as the collaborators collaborated on the customized product, a history log of the modifications that have been accepted, reverted or deleted, comments that have been provided by the user, and the like” [Par 369] “User interface elements may be specific not only to a role assigned to a user, but also to an interactive design itself. For example, if platform 10 offers customizable ties and customizable scarfs, and a user profile for a user includes information indicating that the user is a male, then it is assumed that the user might want to customize a tie, not a scarf. Furthermore, it may be assumed that the user would like to customize a color, a material, and a shape of the tie. Based on that information, collaboration components 106 may select the user interface elements that are specific to the tie and to the selection of the tie attributes.”)
18
receiving a request to adjust the parametric fit model;
based on, at least in part, a plurality of fit parameters of the parametric fit model, generating a fourth graphical representation of the parametric physical product;
generating a fourth user interface and displaying, on a user computer display device, the fourth user interface comprising at least the fourth graphical representation of the parametric physical product;
receiving, via the fourth user interface, a plurality of user adjustment parameters for improving a fit of the parametric physical product;
based on the plurality of user adjustment parameters and the plurality of fit parameters of the parametric physical product, generating, for the custom product, an adjusted parametric fit model having a plurality of new fit model parameters;
wherein a new fit model parameter, of the plurality of new fit model parameters of the adjusted parametric fit model, is represented as an adjusted fit key-value pair;
sending the adjusted parametric fit model to the manufacturer to cause the manufacturer to produce the parametric physical product based on a plurality of adjusted fit model parameters of the parametric fit model.
17
receiving a request to adjust the parametric fit model;
based on, at least in part, a plurality of fit parameters of the parametric fit model, generating a fourth graphical representation of the parametric physical product;
generating a fourth user interface and displaying, on a user computer display device, the fourth user interface comprising at least the fourth graphical representation of the parametric physical product;
receiving, via the fourth user interface, a plurality of user adjustment parameters for improving a fit of the parametric physical product;
based on the plurality of user adjustment parameters and the plurality of fit parameters of the parametric physical product, generating, for the custom product, an adjusted parametric fit model having a plurality of new fit model parameters;
wherein a new fit model parameter, of the plurality of new fit model parameters of the adjusted parametric fit model, is represented as an adjusted fit key-value pair;
sending the adjusted parametric fit model to the manufacturer to cause the manufacturer to produce the parametric physical product based on a plurality of adjusted fit model parameters of the parametric fit model.
19
The custom product computer system generator of Claim 15, wherein the first user interface displays, on the computer display device, the first graphical representation of the custom product as a visualization of the parametric model of the custom product showing how the
parametric physical product, manufactured based on the plurality of fit model parameters using a plurality of fit key-values of the parametric fit model, fits the user having the user- specific data;
wherein the key-value pair is a data structure that includes an attribute key and a corresponding attribute value.
18
The custom product computer system generator of Claim 16, wherein the first user interface displays, on the computer display device, the first graphical representation of the custom product as a visualization of the parametric model of the custom product showing how the parametric physical product, manufactured based on the plurality of fit model parameters using a plurality of fit key-values of the parametric fit model, fits the user having the user-specific data;
wherein the key-value pair is a data structure that includes an attribute key and a corresponding attribute value.
20
The custom product computer system generator of Claim 19, wherein the first user interface further displays one or more regions of the visualization of the
parametric model of the custom product;
wherein a region of the one or more regions of the visualization is adjustable using one or more functionalities of the first user interface;
wherein the one or more functionalities of the first user interface allow adjusting a fit of the parametric physical product to the user having the user-specific data.
19
The custom product computer system generator of Claim 18, wherein the first user interface further displays one or more regions of the visualization of the parametric model of the custom product;
wherein a region of the one or more regions of the visualization is adjustable using one or more functionalities of the first user interface;
wherein the one or more functionalities of the first user interface allow adjusting a fit of the parametric physical product to the user having the user-specific data.
Claims 1-7 rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claims 1-7 of U.S. Patent No. 11733853 (hereinafter ‘853) in view of Beaver (US 20210266352 A1). Although the claims at issue are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other because the claims of ‘853 anticipate (or make obvious in view of Beaver (US 20210266352 A1)) the claims of the instant application and differ only in slight, obvious variation as shown below:
Beaver is analogous art because it is within the field of parametric product customization with a particular application in clothing customization. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to combine Beaver with ‘853 before the effective filing date. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to make this combination in order to make collaboration easier and make design decisions involving multiple collaborators easier to reach. As noted by Beaver, many collaborative design systems suffer from a lack of distinct user roles, which makes reaching design decisions and agreements difficult ([Par 4-6] “The recent innovations in information technologies have inspired the development of multi-user collaboration tools. Due to recent technological advances, many tools have been developed to facilitate, for example, an online-product-customization and interactivity capabilities to users. Collaborative customization of a product may include allowing multiple users to collaborate on a digital design, exchange ideas related to the design, and provide support and assistance in customizing the appearance of the product. However, as the collaboration applications grow and include vendors and third-party service providers, it becomes more and more difficult to ensure that the collaboration sessions meet the requirements set forth in, for example, collaboration agreements between the users. Therefore, there is a need to provide mechanisms for managing communications channels established between users of role-based collaborative systems, especially for managing collaborations during the process of generating customized products using the role-based collaborative systems.”) To this end, Beaver presents a system for rich, role-based collaboration in the design process of custom products such as clothes ([Abstract] “In some embodiments, a method for generating customized products in collaboration with live designers is disclosed. The method comprises: receiving, at a computer collaboration computer, a request, from a first user interface that executes on a first user device associated with a first user, for assistance in collaborating on an interactive design; wherein the request comprises collaboration parameters; in response to receiving the request, automatically determining one or more designer profiles, each designer profile satisfying one or more of the collaboration parameters; in response to selecting a particular designer profile from the one or more designer profiles: automatically enabling a collaboration on the interactive design between the first user and a second user who has the particular designer profile; wherein the collaboration between the first user and the second user comprises automatically generating and updating product description data having a plurality of key-values pairs associated with the interactive design.” [Par 94] “In some embodiments, an approach for generating customized products in collaboration with live designers and agents is implemented in a product collaboration platform. The platform allows users, designers, agents, customers, and support engineers, to, for example, collaborate in designing and creating digital designs of customized products. A customized product may be a digital product, such as a digital gift card, or may be a physical product, such as a physical t-shirt. An example computer environment is described in FIG. 1.” [Par 327] “Various roles may be assigned to users who interact with computer collaboration system 100 via user devices 140A-140G. Examples of roles may include a customer role, a customer support agent role, a graphics designer role, a customer peer role, and a customer product artist role. Based on the assigned roles, the users may be granted access to a product description of an interactive design as editors, viewers, managers, and the like.”) Overall, one of ordinary skill in the art would have recognized that combining Beaver with ‘853 would allow for deeper, more complex collaboration features than those already present in ‘853, making such collaboration easier and more productive.
Instant app claim number
Instant claim element
‘853 claim number
‘853 claim element
Notes
1
A method for custom fitting and manufacturing parametric products, the method comprising:
generating a plurality of parametric models of a custom product
based on, at least in part, past learned data pertaining to the custom product, each parametric model identified by a parametric model identifier and having a plurality of corresponding control points;
1
A method for custom fitting and manufacturing parametric products, the method comprising:
generating a plurality of parametric 3D models of a custom product based on, at least in part, past learned data pertaining to the custom product, each parametric 3D model having a plurality of corresponding 3D control points;
Beaver makes obvious parametric identifiers for models
Note that the use of “3D” in ‘853 reads on the generic version of that feature in the instant application (for example, “3D model” reads on “model,” “3D parameters” read on “parameters,” “3D control points” read on “control points,” etc.)
Beaver
([Par 93] “ product description data that captures key-value pairs describing the parameters and characteristics of the interactive digital designs as the customer and the designers collaborate on the designs.” [Par 96] “generate tokens that allow recipients of the final products to request services and access to core services 16, and attach the tokens to, or depict the token on, the final products.”[Par 347] “Descriptions of the attributes for each interactive design, or groups of designs, may be stored as part of collaboration components 106 or in a separate data structure that may be organized as a data table or storage space that is accessible to collaboration components 106.”)
1
generating a first user interface comprising at least a first graphical representation of the custom product, and displaying the first user interface on a computer display device;
receiving, via the first user interface, a plurality of adjustment
parameters for improving a fit of the custom product in relation to user-specific data;
1
generating a first user interface comprising at least a first graphical representation of the custom product, and displaying the first user interface on a computer display device;
receiving, via the first user interface, a plurality of adjustment 3D parameters for improving a fit of the custom product in relation to user-specific data;
1
based on the plurality of adjustment parameters and the plurality of parametric models, determining
two particular parametric models,
1
based on the plurality of adjustment 3D parameters and the plurality of parametric 3D models, determining two particular parametric 3D models of the plurality of parametric 3D models,
Determining “two particular parametric 3D models of the plurality of parametric 3D models,” reads on the more generic “determining
two particular parametric models,” of the instant application.
1
each having at least one
parameter, of the plurality of corresponding parameters, that
is within a particular tolerance of at least one parameter of the
plurality of adjustment
parameters of a particular parametric model of the two particular parametric models;
1
each having at least one 3D parameter, of the plurality of corresponding 3D parameters, that is within a particular tolerance of at least one 3D parameter of the plurality of adjustment 3D parameters;
Beaver makes obvious a plurality of adjustment parameters specifically for particular parametric models. Note that since these adjustment parameters are for each model, they apply to any of the two determined models as well.
Beaver
([Par 145-147] “ In some embodiments, a product option framework is configured to generate a product option framework user interface. Accordingly, each product options set is associated with logic and code to build a user interface element for each parametric product option. Furthermore, each product options set contains style hints so that each user interface element may be artfully placed to produce a high quality user experience…. The user interface elements may include… a size selector” [Par 128-129] “In some embodiments, the product option set contains the logic to enumerate each customizable option in a manner that presents a complete user interface to change the parametric product instructions… The instructions for manufacturing a customized product are usually parametric. The parameters include the size of the customized product (this can be multi-dimensional, and include width, height, depth). The parameters may also relate to human sizes or ages. The parameters may also be custom and based on biometric information.”)
1
generating, for the custom product, a parametric fit model having a plurality of fit model parameters;
wherein each fit model
parameter, of the plurality of fit model parameters, is computed by interpolating, for the at least one parameter of the two particular parametric models, between one or more corresponding control points of a first parametric model of the two particular parametric models and one or more corresponding control points of a second parametric model of the two particular parametric models;
wherein a fit model parameter,
of the plurality of fit model parameters of the parametric fit model, is represented as a fit key-value pair;
1
generating, for the custom product, a parametric 3D fit model having a plurality of 3D fit model parameters;
wherein each 3D fit model parameter, of the plurality of 3D fit model parameters, is computed by interpolating, for the at least one parameter of the two particular parametric 3D models, between a plurality of corresponding 3D control points of a first parametric 3D model of the two particular 3D parametric models and a plurality of corresponding 3D control points of a second parametric 3D model of the two particular parametric 3D models;
wherein a 3D fit model parameter, of the plurality of 3D fit model parameters of the parametric 3D fit model, is represented as a fit key-value pair;
Note that “a plurality of …” reads on “one or more …”
1
transmitting the parametric fit model to a manufacturer to cause the manufacturer to produce a parametric physical product based on the plurality of fit model parameters of the parametric fit model.
1
sending the parametric 3D fit model to a manufacturer to cause the manufacturer to produce a parametric physical product based on the plurality of 3D fit model parameters of the parametric 3D fit model.
Note that sending data reads on transmitting that data
2
The method of Claim 1, further comprising storing the parametric
fit model, having the plurality of
fit model parameters, in
association with a user profile of a user.
2
The method of Claim 1, further comprising storing the parametric 3D fit model, having the plurality of 3D fit model parameters, in association with a user profile of a user.
3
The method of Claim 2, further comprising:
receiving a request to invite an
agent to collaborate on adjusting the parametric fit model;
based on, at least in part, a plurality of fit parameters of the parametric fit model, generating a second graphical representation of the parametric physical product;
generating a second user interface and displaying, on a user computer display device, the second user interface comprising at least the second graphical representation of the parametric physical product;
generating a third user interface and displaying, on an agent computer display device, the third user interface comprising at least the second graphical representation of the parametric physical product;
receiving, via the second user interface, a plurality of user adjustment parameters for improving a fit of the parametric physical product;
receiving, via the third user interface, a plurality of agent adjustment parameters for improving a fit of the parametric physical product;
based on the plurality of user adjustment parameters, the
plurality of agent adjustment parameters and the plurality of fit parameters of the parametric physical product, generating, for the custom product, an adjusted parametric fit model having a plurality of new fit model parameters;
wherein a new fit model
parameter, of the plurality of new
fit model parameters of the
adjusted parametric fit model, is represented as an adjusted fit key-value pair;
sending the adjusted parametric
fit model to the manufacturer to cause the manufacturer to produce the parametric physical product based on a plurality of adjusted
fit model parameters of the adjusted parametric fit model.
3
The method of Claim 2, further comprising:
receiving a request to invite an agent to collaborate on adjusting the parametric 3D fit model;
based on, at least in part, a plurality of fit parameters of the parametric 3D fit model, generating a second graphical representation of the parametric physical product;
generating a second user interface and displaying, on a user computer display device, the second user interface comprising at least the second graphical representation of the parametric physical product;
generating a third user interface and displaying, on an agent computer display device, the third user interface comprising at least the second graphical representation of the parametric physical product;
receiving, via the second user interface, a plurality of user adjustment parameters for improving a fit of the parametric physical product;
receiving, via the third user interface, a plurality of agent adjustment parameters for improving a fit of the parametric physical product;
based on the plurality of user adjustment parameters, the plurality of agent adjustment parameters and the plurality of fit parameters of the parametric physical product, generating, for the custom product, an adjusted parametric 3D fit model having a plurality of new 3D fit model parameters;
wherein a new 3D fit model parameter, of the plurality of new 3D fit model parameters of the adjusted parametric 3D fit model, is represented as an adjusted fit key-value pair;
sending the adjusted parametric 3D fit model to the manufacturer to cause the manufacturer to produce the parametric physical product based on a plurality of adjusted 3D fit model parameters of the adjusted parametric 3D fit model.
4
The method of Claim 2, further comprising:
receiving a request to adjust the parametric fit model;
based on, at least in part, a plurality of fit parameters of the parametric fit model,
generating a fourth graphical representation of the parametric physical product;
generating a fourth user interface and displaying, on a user computer display device, the fourth user interface comprising at least the fourth graphical representation of the parametric physical product;
receiving, via the fourth user interface, a plurality of user adjustment parameters for improving a fit of the parametric physical product;
based on the plurality of user adjustment parameters and the plurality of fit parameters of the parametric physical product, generating, for the custom product, an adjusted parametric fit model having a plurality of new fit
model parameters;
wherein a new fit model parameter, of the plurality of new fit model parameters of the
adjusted parametric fit model, is represented as an adjusted fit key-value pair;
sending the adjusted parametric
fit model to the manufacturer to cause the manufacturer to produce the parametric physical product based on a plurality of adjusted
fit model parameters of the
parametric fit model.
4
The method of Claim 2, further comprising:
receiving a request to adjust the parametric 3D fit model;
based on, at least in part, a plurality of fit parameters of the parametric 3D fit model,
generating a fourth graphical representation of the parametric physical product;
generating a fourth user interface and displaying, on a user computer display device, the fourth user interface comprising at least the fourth graphical representation of the parametric physical product;
receiving, via the fourth user interface, a plurality of user adjustment parameters for improving a fit of the parametric physical product;
based on the plurality of user adjustment parameters and the plurality of fit parameters of the parametric physical product, generating, for the custom product, an adjusted parametric 3D fit model having a plurality of new 3D fit model parameters;
wherein a new 3D fit model parameter, of the plurality of new 3D fit model parameters of the adjusted parametric 3D fit model, is represented as an adjusted fit key-value pair;
sending the adjusted parametric 3D fit model to the manufacturer to cause the manufacturer to produce the parametric physical product based on a plurality of adjusted 3D fit model parameters of the parametric 3D fit model.
5
The method of Claim 1, wherein the first user interface displays, on the computer display device, the first graphical representation of the custom product as a visualization of the parametric model of the custom product showing how the
parametric physical product, manufactured based on the plurality of fit model parameters using a plurality of fit key-values of the parametric fit model, fits the user having the user-specific data;
wherein the key-value pair is a data structure that includes an attribute key and a corresponding attribute value.
5
The method of Claim 1, wherein the first user interface displays, on the computer display device, the first graphical representation of the custom product as a visualization of the parametric model of the custom product showing how the parametric physical product, manufactured based on the plurality of 3D fit model parameters using a plurality of fit key-values of the parametric 3D fit model, fits the user having the user-specific data;
wherein the key-value pair is a data structure that includes an attribute key and a corresponding attribute value.
6
The method of Claim 5, wherein the first user interface further displays one or more regions of the visualization of the parametric model of the custom product;
wherein a region of the one or more regions of the visualization is adjustable using one or more functionalities of the first user interface;
wherein the one or more functionalities of the first user interface allow adjusting a fit of the parametric physical product to the user having the user-specific data.
6
The method of Claim 5, wherein the first user interface further displays one or more regions of the visualization of the parametric model of the custom product; wherein a region of the one or more regions of the visualization is adjustable using one or more functionalities of the first user interface;
wherein the one or more functionalities of the first user interface allow adjusting a fit of the parametric physical product to the user having the user-specific data.
7
The method of Claim 6, further comprising: receiving, from the first user interface, a selection of a region, from the one or more regions, and an indication that the customized product should have either a looser fit or a tighter fit.
7
The method of Claim 6, further comprising: receiving, from the first user interface, a selection of a region, from the one or more regions, and an indication that the customized product should have either a looser fit or a tighter fit.
Claims 8-20 rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claims 8-20 of U.S. Patent No. No. 11733853 (hereinafter ‘853) . Although the claims at issue are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other because the instant claims are merely a broader version of the claims of ‘853, namely the claims of ‘853 read on the instant claims
Instant app claim number
Instant claim element
‘853 claim number
‘853 claim element
Notes
8
A non-transitory computer-readable medium storing one or more instructions, which, when executed by one or more processors, cause the one or more processors to perform:
generating a plurality of parametric models of a custom product based on, at least in part, past learned data pertaining to the custom product, each parametric model identified by a parametric model identifier and having a plurality of corresponding control points;
generating a first user interface comprising at least a first graphical representation of the custom product, and displaying the first user interface on a computer display device;
receiving, via the first user interface, a plurality of adjustment parameters for improving a fit of the custom product in relation to user-specific data;
based on the plurality of adjustment parameters and the plurality of parametric models, determining two particular parametric models, each having at least one parameter, of the plurality of corresponding parameters, that is within a particular tolerance of at least one parameter of the plurality of adjustment parameters of a particular parametric model of the two particular parametric models;
8
A non-transitory computer-readable medium storing one or more instructions, which, when executed by one or more processors, cause the one or more processors to perform:
generating a plurality of parametric models of a custom product based on, at least in part, past learned data pertaining to the custom product, each parametric model identified by a parametric model identifier and having a plurality of corresponding control points;
generating a first user interface comprising at least a first graphical representation of the custom product, and displaying the first user interface on a computer display device;
receiving, via the first user interface, a plurality of adjustment parameters for improving a fit of the custom product in relation to user-specific data;
based on the plurality of adjustment parameters and the plurality of parametric models, determining two particular parametric models, each having at least one parameter, of the plurality of corresponding parameters, that is within a particular tolerance of at least one parameter of the plurality of adjustment parameters of a particular parametric model of the two particular parametric models;
8
generating, for the custom product, a parametric fit model having a plurality of fit model parameters;
wherein each fit model
parameter, of the plurality of fit model parameters, is computed by interpolating, for the at least one parameter of the two particular parametric models, between one or more corresponding control points of a first parametric model of the two particular parametric models and one or more corresponding control points of a second parametric model of the two particular parametric models;
wherein a fit model parameter,
of the plurality of fit model parameters of the parametric fit model, is represented as a fit key-value pair;
transmitting the parametric
fit model to a manufacturer to cause the manufacturer to produce a parametric physical product based on the plurality of fit model parameters of the parametric fit model.
8
generating, for the custom product, a parametric 3D fit model having a plurality of 3D fit model parameters;
wherein each 3D fit model parameter, of the plurality of 3D fit model parameters, is computed by interpolating, for the at least one parameter of the two particular parametric models, between one or more corresponding control points of a first parametric model of the two particular parametric models and one or more corresponding control points of a second parametric model of the two particular parametric models;
wherein a 3D fit model parameter, of the plurality of 3D fit model parameters of the parametric 3D fit model, is represented as a fit key-value pair;
transmitting the parametric 3D
fit model to a manufacturer to cause the manufacturer to produce a parametric physical product based on the plurality of 3D fit model parameters of the parametric 3D fit model.
Note that the use of “3D” in ‘853 reads on the generic version of that feature in the instant application (for example, “3D model” reads on “model,” “3D parameters” read on “parameters,” “3D control points” read on “control points,” etc.)
9
The non-transitory computer-readable medium of Claim 8, storing additional instructions for: storing the parametric fit model, having
the plurality of fit model parameters, in association with a user profile of a user.
9
The non-transitory computer-readable medium of Claim 8, storing additional instructions for: storing the parametric 3D fit model, having the plurality of 3D fit model parameters, in association with a user profile of a user.
10
The non-transitory computer-readable medium of Claim 9, storing additional instructions for:
receiving a request to invite an agent to collaborate on adjusting the parametric fit model;
based on, at least in part, a plurality of fit parameters of the parametric fit model, generating a second graphical representation of the parametric physical product;
generating a second user interface and displaying, on a user computer display device, the second user interface comprising at least the second graphical representation of the parametric physical product;
generating a third user interface and displaying, on an agent computer display device, the third user interface comprising at least the second graphical representation of the parametric physical product;
receiving, via the second user interface, a plurality of user adjustment parameters for improving a fit of the parametric physical product;
receiving, via the third user interface, a plurality of agent adjustment parameters for improving a fit of the parametric physical product;
based on the plurality of user adjustment parameters, the
plurality of agent adjustment parameters and the plurality of fit parameters of the parametric physical product, generating, for the custom product, an adjusted parametric fit model having a plurality of new fit model parameters;
wherein a new fit model
parameter, of the plurality of new
fit model parameters of the
adjusted parametric fit model, is represented as an adjusted fit key-value pair;
sending the adjusted parametric
fit model to the manufacturer to cause the manufacturer to produce the parametric physical product based on a plurality of adjusted
fit model parameters of the adjusted parametric fit model.
10
The non-transitory computer-readable medium of Claim 9, storing additional instructions for: receiving a request to invite an agent to collaborate on adjusting the parametric 3D fit model;
based on, at least in part, a plurality of fit parameters of the parametric 3D fit model, generating a second graphical representation of the parametric physical product;
generating a second user interface and displaying, on a user computer display device, the second user interface comprising at least the second graphical representation of the parametric physical product;
generating a third user interface and displaying, on an agent computer display device, the third user interface comprising at least the second graphical representation of the parametric physical product;
receiving, via the second user interface, a plurality of user adjustment parameters for improving a fit of the parametric physical product;
receiving, via the third user interface, a plurality of agent adjustment parameters for
improving a fit of the parametric physical product;
based on the plurality of user adjustment parameters, the plurality of agent adjustment parameters and the plurality of fit parameters of the parametric physical product, generating, for the custom product, an adjusted parametric 3D fit model having a plurality of new 3D fit model parameters;
wherein a new 3D fit model parameter, of the plurality of new 3D fit model parameters of the adjusted parametric 3D fit model, is represented as an adjusted fit key-value pair;
sending the adjusted parametric 3D fit model to the manufacturer to cause the manufacturer to produce the parametric physical product based on a plurality of adjusted 3D fit model parameters of the adjusted parametric 3D fit model.
11
The non-transitory computer-readable medium of Claim 9, storing additional instructions for:
receiving a request to adjust the parametric fit model;
based on, at least in part, a plurality of fit parameters of the parametric fit model, generating a fourth graphical representation of the parametric physical product;
generating a fourth user interface and displaying, on a user computer display device, the fourth user interface comprising at least the fourth graphical representation of the parametric physical product;
receiving, via the fourth user interface, a plurality of user adjustment parameters for improving a fit of the parametric physical product;
based on the plurality of user adjustment parameters and the plurality of fit parameters of the parametric physical product, generating, for the custom product, an adjusted parametric fit model having a plurality of new fit
model parameters;
wherein a new fit model parameter, of the plurality of new
fit model parameters of the
adjusted parametric fit model, is represented as an adjusted fit key-value pair;
sending the adjusted parametric
fit model to the manufacturer to cause the manufacturer to produce the parametric physical product based on a plurality of adjusted
fit model parameters of the parametric fit model.
11
The non-transitory computer-readable medium of Claim 9, storing additional instructions for:
receiving a request to adjust the parametric 3D fit model;
based on, at least in part, a plurality of fit parameters of the parametric 3D fit model, generating a fourth graphical representation of the parametric physical product;
generating a fourth user interface and displaying, on a user computer display device, the fourth user interface comprising at least the fourth graphical representation of the parametric physical product;
receiving, via the fourth user interface, a plurality of user adjustment parameters for improving a fit of the parametric physical product;
based on the plurality of user adjustment parameters and the plurality of fit parameters of the parametric physical product, generating, for the custom product, an adjusted parametric 3D fit model having a plurality of new 3D fit model parameters;
wherein a new 3D fit model parameter, of the plurality of new 3D fit model parameters of the adjusted parametric 3D fit model, is represented as an adjusted fit key-value pair;
sending the adjusted parametric 3D fit model to the manufacturer to cause the manufacturer to produce the parametric physical product based on a plurality of adjusted 3D fit model parameters of the parametric 3D fit model.
12
The non-transitory computer-readable medium of Claim 8, wherein the first user interface displays, on the computer display device, the first graphical representation of the custom product as a visualization of the parametric model of the custom product showing how the
parametric physical product, manufactured based on the plurality of fit model parameters using a plurality of fit key-values of the parametric fit model, fits the user having the user- specific data; wherein the key-value pair is a data structure that includes an attribute key and a corresponding attribute value.
12
The non-transitory computer-readable medium of Claim 8, wherein the first user interface displays, on the computer display device, the first graphical representation of the custom product as a visualization of the parametric model of the custom product showing how the parametric physical product, manufactured based on the plurality of 3D fit model parameters using a plurality of fit key-values of the parametric 3D fit model, fits the user having the user- specific data; wherein the key-value pair is a data structure that includes an attribute key and a corresponding attribute value.
13
The non-transitory computer-readable medium of Claim 12, wherein the first user interface further displays one or more regions of the visualization of the
parametric model of the custom product;
wherein a region of the one or more regions of the visualization is adjustable using one or
more functionalities of the first user interface;
wherein the one or more functionalities of the first user interface allow adjusting a fit of
the parametric physical product to the user having the user-specific data.
13
The non-transitory computer-readable medium of Claim 12, wherein the first user interface further displays one or more regions of the visualization of the parametric model of the custom product;
wherein a region of the one or more regions of the visualization is adjustable using one or
more functionalities of the first user interface;
wherein the one or more functionalities of the first user interface allow adjusting a fit of
the parametric physical product to the user having the user-specific data.
14
The non-transitory computer-readable medium of Claim 13, storing additional instructions for: receiving, from the first user interface, a selection of a region, from the one or more regions, and an indication that the customized product should have either a looser fit or a tighter fit.
14
The non-transitory computer-readable medium of Claim 13, storing additional instructions for: receiving, from the first user interface, a selection of a region, from the one or more regions, and an indication that the customized product should have either a looser fit or a tighter fit.
15
A custom product computer system generator comprising:
a memory unit;
one or more processors; and
a custom product computer storing one or more instructions, which, when executed by one or more processors, cause the one or more processors to perform:
generating a plurality of parametric models of a custom product based on, at least in part, past learned data pertaining to the custom product, each parametric model identified by a parametric model identifier and having a plurality of corresponding control points;
generating a first user interface comprising at least a first graphical representation of the custom product, and displaying the first user interface on a computer display device;
receiving, via the first user interface, a plurality of adjustment parameters for improving a fit of the custom product in relation to user-specific data;
based on the plurality of adjustment parameters and the plurality of parametric models, determining two particular parametric models, each having at least one parameter, of
the plurality of corresponding parameters, that is within a particular tolerance of at least one parameter of the plurality of adjustment parameters of a particular parametric model of the two particular parametric models;
generating, for the custom product, a parametric fit model having a plurality of fit model parameters;
wherein each fit model
parameter, of the plurality of fit model parameters, is computed by interpolating, for the at least one parameter of the two particular parametric models, between one or more corresponding control points of a first parametric model of the two particular parametric models and one or more corresponding control points of a second parametric model of the two particular parametric models;
wherein a fit model parameter,
of the plurality of fit model parameters of the parametric fit model, is represented as a fit key-value pair;
transmitting the parametric fit model to a manufacturer to cause the manufacturer to produce a parametric physical product based on the plurality of fit model parameters of the parametric fit model.
15
A custom product computer system generator comprising:
a memory unit;
one or more processors; and
a custom product computer storing one or more instructions, which, when executed by one or more processors, cause the one or more processors to perform:
generating a plurality of parametric models of a custom product based on, at least in part, past learned data pertaining to the custom product, each parametric model identified by a parametric model identifier and having a plurality of corresponding control points;
generating a first user interface comprising at least a first graphical representation of the custom product, and displaying the first user interface on a computer display device;
receiving, via the first user interface, a plurality of adjustment parameters for improving a fit of the custom product in relation to user-specific data;
based on the plurality of adjustment parameters and the plurality of parametric models, determining two particular parametric models, each having at least one parameter, of the plurality of corresponding parameters, that is within a particular tolerance of at least one parameter of the plurality of adjustment parameters of a particular parametric model of the two particular parametric models;
generating, for the custom product, a parametric 3D fit model having a plurality of 3D fit model parameters;
wherein each 3D fit model parameter, of the plurality of 3D fit model parameters, is computed by interpolating, for the at least one parameter of the two particular parametric models, between one or more corresponding control points of a first parametric model of the two particular parametric models and one or more corresponding control points of a second parametric model of the two particular parametric models;
wherein a 3D fit model parameter, of the plurality of 3D fit model parameters of the parametric 3D fit model, is represented as a fit key-value pair;
transmitting the parametric 3D fit model to a manufacturer to cause the manufacturer to produce a parametric physical product based on the plurality of 3D fit model parameters of the parametric 3D fit model.
Note that the use of “3D” in ‘853 reads on the generic version of that feature in the instant application (for example, “3D model” reads on “model,” “3D parameters” read on “parameters,” “3D control points” read on “control points,” etc.)
16
The custom product computer system generator of Claim 15, storing additional instructions for: storing the parametric fit model, having the plurality of fit model parameters, in association with a user profile of a user.
16
The custom product computer system generator of Claim 15, storing additional instructions for: storing the parametric 3D fit model, having the plurality of 3D fit model parameters, in association with a user profile of a user.
17
The custom product computer system generator of Claim 16, storing additional instructions for:
receiving a request to invite an
agent to collaborate on adjusting the parametric fit model;
based on, at least in part, a plurality of fit parameters of the parametric fit model, generating a second graphical representation of the parametric physical product;
generating a second user interface and displaying, on a user computer display device, the second user interface comprising at least the second graphical representation of the parametric physical product;
generating a third user interface and displaying, on an agent computer display device, the third user interface comprising at least the second graphical representation of the parametric physical product;
receiving, via the second user interface, a plurality of user adjustment parameters for improving a fit of the parametric physical product;
receiving, via the third user interface, a plurality of agent adjustment parameters for improving a fit of the parametric physical product;
based on the plurality of user adjustment parameters, the
plurality of agent adjustment parameters and the plurality of fit parameters of the parametric physical product, generating, for the custom product, an adjusted parametric fit model having a plurality of new fit model parameters;
wherein a new fit model
parameter, of the plurality of new
fit model parameters of the
adjusted parametric fit model, is represented as an adjusted fit key-value pair;
sending the adjusted parametric fit model to the manufacturer to
cause the manufacturer to produce the parametric physical product based on a plurality of adjusted
fit model parameters of the adjusted parametric fit model.
17
The custom product computer system generator of Claim 16, storing additional instructions for: receiving a request to invite an agent to collaborate on adjusting the parametric 3D fit model;
based on, at least in part, a plurality of fit parameters of the parametric 3D fit model, generating a second graphical representation of the parametric physical product;
generating a second user interface and displaying, on a user computer display device, the second user interface comprising at least the second graphical representation of the parametric physical product;
generating a third user interface and displaying, on an agent computer display device, the third user interface comprising at least the second graphical representation of the parametric physical product;
receiving, via the second user interface, a plurality of user adjustment parameters for improving a fit of the parametric physical product;
receiving, via the third user interface, a plurality of agent adjustment parameters for improving a fit of the parametric physical product;
based on the plurality of user adjustment parameters, the plurality of agent adjustment parameters and the plurality of fit parameters of the parametric physical product, generating, for the custom product, an adjusted parametric 3D fit model having a
plurality of new 3D fit model parameters;
wherein a new 3D fit model parameter, of the plurality of new 3D fit model parameters of the adjusted parametric 3D fit model, is represented as an adjusted fit key-value pair;
sending the adjusted parametric 3D fit model to the manufacturer to cause the manufacturer to produce the parametric physical product based on a plurality of adjusted 3D fit model parameters of the adjusted parametric 3D fit model.
18
The custom product computer system generator of Claim 16, storing additional instructions for:
receiving a request to adjust the parametric fit model;
based on, at least in part, a plurality of fit parameters of the parametric fit model, generating a fourth graphical representation of the parametric physical product;
generating a fourth user interface and displaying, on a user computer display device, the fourth user interface comprising at least the fourth graphical representation of the parametric physical product;
receiving, via the fourth user interface, a plurality of user adjustment parameters for improving a fit of the parametric physical product;
based on the plurality of user adjustment parameters and the plurality of fit parameters of the parametric physical product, generating, for the custom product, an adjusted parametric fit model having a plurality of new fit
model parameters;
wherein a new fit model
parameter, of the plurality of new
fit model parameters of the
adjusted parametric fit model, is represented as an adjusted fit key-value pair;
sending the adjusted parametric
fit model to the manufacturer to cause the manufacturer to produce the parametric physical product based on a plurality of adjusted
fit model parameters of the parametric fit model.
18
The custom product computer system generator of Claim 16, storing additional instructions for:
receiving a request to adjust the parametric 3D fit model;
based on, at least in part, a plurality of fit parameters of the parametric 3D fit model, generating a fourth graphical representation of the parametric physical product;
generating a fourth user interface and displaying, on a user computer display device, the fourth user interface comprising at least the fourth graphical representation of the parametric physical product;
receiving, via the fourth user interface, a plurality of user adjustment parameters for improving a fit of the parametric physical product;
based on the plurality of user adjustment parameters and the plurality of fit parameters of the parametric physical product, generating, for the custom product, an adjusted parametric 3D fit model having a plurality of new 3D fit model parameters;
wherein a new 3D fit model parameter, of the plurality of new 3D fit model parameters of the adjusted parametric 3D fit model, is represented as an adjusted fit key-value pair;
sending the adjusted parametric 3D fit model to the manufacturer to cause the manufacturer to produce the parametric physical product based on a plurality of adjusted 3D fit model parameters of the parametric 3D fit model.
19
The custom product computer system generator of Claim 15, wherein the first user interface displays, on the computer display device, the first graphical representation of the custom product as a visualization of the parametric model of the custom product showing how the
parametric physical product, manufactured based on the plurality of fit model parameters using a plurality of fit key-values of the parametric fit model, fits the user having the user- specific data;
wherein the key-value pair is a data structure that includes an attribute key and a corresponding attribute value.
19
The custom product computer system generator of Claim 15, wherein the first user interface displays, on the computer display device, the first graphical representation of the custom product as a visualization of the parametric model of the custom product showing how the parametric physical product, manufactured based on the plurality of 3D fit model parameters using a plurality of fit key-values of the parametric 3D fit model, fits the user having the user- specific data;
wherein the key-value pair is a data structure that includes an attribute key and a corresponding attribute value.
20
The custom product computer system generator of Claim 19, wherein the first user interface further displays one or more regions of the visualization of the
parametric model of the custom product;
wherein a region of the one or more regions of the visualization is adjustable using one or more functionalities of the first user interface;
wherein the one or more functionalities of the first user interface allow adjusting a fit of the parametric physical product to the user having the user-specific data.
20
The custom product computer system generator of Claim 19, wherein the first user interface further displays one or more regions of the visualization of the parametric model of the custom product;
wherein a region of the one or more regions of the visualization is adjustable using one or more functionalities of the first user interface;
wherein the one or more functionalities of the first user interface allow adjusting a fit of the parametric physical product to the user having the user-specific data.
Claims 1-15 and 17-20 provisionally rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claims 1-15 and 17-20 of copending Application No. 17955387 (Hereinafter ‘387) in view of Beaver (US 20210266352 A1) in further view of Terai (JP 2021123826 A) as well as Donelly (US 20220253923 A1)
This is a provisional nonstatutory double patenting rejection.
Beaver is analogous art because it is within the field of parametric product customization with a particular application in clothing customization. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to combine Beaver with ‘387 before the effective filing date. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to make this combination in order to make collaboration easier and make design decisions involving multiple collaborators easier to reach. As noted by Beaver, many collaborative design systems suffer from a lack of distinct user roles, which makes reaching design decisions and agreements difficult ([Par 4-6] “The recent innovations in information technologies have inspired the development of multi-user collaboration tools. Due to recent technological advances, many tools have been developed to facilitate, for example, an online-product-customization and interactivity capabilities to users. Collaborative customization of a product may include allowing multiple users to collaborate on a digital design, exchange ideas related to the design, and provide support and assistance in customizing the appearance of the product. However, as the collaboration applications grow and include vendors and third-party service providers, it becomes more and more difficult to ensure that the collaboration sessions meet the requirements set forth in, for example, collaboration agreements between the users. Therefore, there is a need to provide mechanisms for managing communications channels established between users of role-based collaborative systems, especially for managing collaborations during the process of generating customized products using the role-based collaborative systems.”) To this end, Beaver presents a system for rich, role-based collaboration in the design process of custom products such as clothes ([Abstract] “In some embodiments, a method for generating customized products in collaboration with live designers is disclosed. The method comprises: receiving, at a computer collaboration computer, a request, from a first user interface that executes on a first user device associated with a first user, for assistance in collaborating on an interactive design; wherein the request comprises collaboration parameters; in response to receiving the request, automatically determining one or more designer profiles, each designer profile satisfying one or more of the collaboration parameters; in response to selecting a particular designer profile from the one or more designer profiles: automatically enabling a collaboration on the interactive design between the first user and a second user who has the particular designer profile; wherein the collaboration between the first user and the second user comprises automatically generating and updating product description data having a plurality of key-values pairs associated with the interactive design.” [Par 94] “In some embodiments, an approach for generating customized products in collaboration with live designers and agents is implemented in a product collaboration platform. The platform allows users, designers, agents, customers, and support engineers, to, for example, collaborate in designing and creating digital designs of customized products. A customized product may be a digital product, such as a digital gift card, or may be a physical product, such as a physical t-shirt. An example computer environment is described in FIG. 1.” [Par 327] “Various roles may be assigned to users who interact with computer collaboration system 100 via user devices 140A-140G. Examples of roles may include a customer role, a customer support agent role, a graphics designer role, a customer peer role, and a customer product artist role. Based on the assigned roles, the users may be granted access to a product description of an interactive design as editors, viewers, managers, and the like.”) Overall, one of ordinary skill in the art would have recognized that combining Beaver with ‘387 would allow for deeper, more complex collaboration features than those already present in ‘387, making such collaboration easier and more productive.
Terai is analogous art because it is within the field of automatic clothes model generation. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to combine Terai with ‘387 and Beaver before the effective filing date. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to make this combination in order to make the customization and production of certain types of products easier. As noted by Terai, the customization and production, particularly the generation of new sizes from a base design, is notoriously difficult with knit products and frequently requires manual trial and error ([Page 1 Par 3] “Shoe uppers come in multiple sizes for the same design. Therefore, pattern data is prepared for the shoe upper of each size and converted into knit data for each size. The knit data is data for driving the knitting machine. By the way, even if the shoe upper is knitted according to the knit data converted from the pattern data, the shape of the shoe upper often does not match the pattern data. Therefore, it is necessary to correct the knit data by trial and error so that the shoe upper can be knitted according to the pattern data. However, for many sizes, it is difficult to correct the knit data by trial and error.”) To this end, Terai presents a method for the automatic grading (i.e. generation of new sizes from a base design) of knit products without unnecessary steps or the need to manually create intermediate sizes ([Abstract] “For a knit product to be graded, 2 sizes of pattern data are converted into knit data. Feature points that specify the shape of the knit product are generated for the converted 2 sizes of pattern data and an intermediate shape that specifies the shape of the knit product among the feature points are generated. The feature points and the intermediate shape for a target size are generated by interpolating or extrapolating among the feature points and the intermediate shapes according to the target size of the knit product. A closed loop is generated by connecting the feature points and the intermediate shapes and knit data for the target size is created by arranging a knit in a pattern specified by the loop. EFFECT: Since knit data such as an intermediate size can be generated from 2 sizes of knit data without passing through pattern data such as an intermediate size, conversion from the pattern data to the knit data is unnecessary for the intermediate size and the like.”) Overall, one of ordinary skill in the art would have recognized that combining Terai with ‘387 and Beaver would result in a system that makes customization and production of products with particular manufacturing methods, such as knit products, significantly easier.
Donelly is analogous art because it is within the field of clothing modelling. It would have been obvious to combine it with ‘387, Beaver, and Terai before the effective filing date. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to make this combination in order to better ensure fit and thus product satisfaction. As noted by Donelly, a significant reason of product dissatisfaction and subsequent return is poor sizing. ([Par 2-4] “Recent years have seen an overwhelming growth of electronic commerce in the apparel industry. One of the greatest problems plaguing both electronic apparel merchants and customers is the difficulty in determining how a garment will fit the customer. Customers are nervous about purchasing garments electronically, because they are unsure of what size to order, and how that garment will look on them. Merchants are nervous about the high volume of apparel returns. For a merchant, the handling of an apparel return can cost up to four times what it cost to process the initial sale of the apparel. Industry analysts have estimated that apparel returns for electronic merchants range from about 10% for very basic items to between 35%-40% for high end clothing. The single biggest reason for returns of apparel purchased electronically is poor fit.”) To this end, Donelly presents a method for fit preview and analysis using actual body scans of a customer, ensuring proper sizing can be selected ([Par 18-19] “A system and method for implementing a “virtual fitting room” is disclosed. The virtual fitting room of the present invention, hereinafter referred to as the software, is a software program that will, among other features, provide an actual analysis of how a garment will fit a customer, and which will provide a realistic visual representation of the garment's fit on the customer. … The software uses a full-body scanner (using any scanning technique, such as white light, laser, or infrared, radar, lidar, ultraviolet, and other methods) to generate a cloud of data points to collectively describe the surface geometry of a body. The cloud of data is defined as a plurality of points defined as XYZ coordinates. By working with a cloud of data points, the system can remain scanner-independent; that is, it can use data generated by any scanner capable of generating a cloud of data points). The system then processes this data to achieve an accurate body scan fit model of the user.”) Overall, one of ordinary skill in the art would have recognized that combining Donelly with ‘387, Beaver, and Terai would result in a system that not only allowed for the rich customization and size adjustment of production, but also allowed for those customizations and adjustments to be made based on actual morphological data of the customer, ultimately leading to better fit and higher satisfaction.
Instant app claim number
Instant claim element
‘387 claim number
‘387 claim element
Notes
1
A method for custom fitting and manufacturing parametric products, the method comprising:
generating a plurality of parametric models of a custom product
based on, at least in part, past learned data pertaining to the custom product, each parametric model identified by a parametric model identifier and having a plurality of corresponding control points;
1
A method for custom fitting and manufacturing parametric products, the method comprising:
generating a parametric
model of a custom product
based on, at least in part, past learned data pertaining to the custom product and user-specific data of a user;
…
Beaver makes obvious a plurality of parametric models having parametric model identifiers.
Terai makes obvious parametric models having a plurality of corresponding control points;
Beaver
([Par 107-110] “Referring again to FIG. 1. a customization process performed by a user, of users 10, and intended to generate a digital design of a customized product is captured in so-called product description data, which then may be translated into a manufacturing description comprising product and manufacturing instructions. The product and manufacturing instructions may include digital design specifications, data, and code needed to manufacture a custom product. That may include instructions for generating, for example, a 3D geometry for digital final products. This may also include generating instructions for generating 2D and/or 3D patterns that may be used to cut, cast, or form physical components of physical final products. The patterns may be parametric, i.e., they may have parameters that, through encoded relationships, adjust the form of the pattern for a specific need… The models may be parametric, i.e., they may have parameters that, through coded relationships, adjust the form of the model for a specific need. For instance, a set of 3D models may represent a bike helmet. Each model may fit a statistically normed human head of a specific age.” [Par 93] “ product description data that captures key-value pairs describing the parameters and characteristics of the interactive digital designs as the customer and the designers collaborate on the designs.” [Par 96] “generate tokens that allow recipients of the final products to request services and access to core services 16, and attach the tokens to, or depict the token on, the final products.”[Par 347] “Descriptions of the attributes for each interactive design, or groups of designs, may be stored as part of collaboration components 106 or in a separate data structure that may be organized as a data table or storage space that is accessible to collaboration components 106.”)
Terai
([Abstract] “For a knit product to be graded, 2 sizes of pattern data are converted into knit data. Feature points that specify the shape of the knit product are generated for the converted 2 sizes of pattern data and an intermediate shape that specifies the shape of the knit product among the feature points are generated. The feature points and the intermediate shape for a target size are generated by interpolating or extrapolating among the feature points and the intermediate shapes according to the target size of the knit product. A closed loop is generated by connecting the feature points and the intermediate shapes and knit data for the target size is created by arranging a knit in a pattern specified by the loop.” [Page 2 Par 9-11] “The interpolation extrapolation unit 6 interpolates or extrapolates between the corresponding feature points and interpolates or extrapolates between the corresponding intermediate points with respect to the knit data for, for example, the maximum and the minimum two sizes. When using knit data for two sizes, interpolation or extrapolation may be performed linearly, and when three sizes or more exist, interpolation or extrapolation may be performed in a curved line with a quadratic curve or the like. When knit data for two sizes, maximum and minimum, is used, interpolation is performed. In other cases, for example, interpolation and extrapolation are performed…”)
1
generating a first user interface comprising at least a first graphical representation of the custom product, and displaying the first user interface on a computer display device;
receiving, via the first user interface, a plurality of adjustment parameters for improving a fit of the custom product in relation to user-
specific data;
1
based on, at least in part, the plurality of parameters of the custom product, generating a first graphical representation of the custom product;
generating a first user interface and displaying, on a computer display device, the first user interface comprising at least the first graphical representation of the custom product;
receiving, via the first user interface, a plurality of adjustment parameters for improving a fit of the custom product in relation to the user-specific data;
Generating a first graphical representation of the custom product and then displaying it on a computer with a generated first user interface reads on the limitation of the instant application.
1
based on the plurality of adjustment parameters and the plurality of parametric models, determining two particular parametric models, each having at least one parameter, of the plurality of corresponding parameters, that is within a particular tolerance of at least one parameter of the plurality of adjustment parameters of a particular parametric model of the two particular parametric models;
1
based on the plurality of adjustment parameters …
Beaver makes obvious the use of a plurality of parametric models, each having at least one parameter of the plurality of corresponding parameters, as well as the plurality of adjustment parameters.
Terai makes obvious determining two particular parametric models, each having at least one parameter of a particular parametric model of the two particular parametric models
Donelly makes obvious determining if models have at least one parameter that is within a particular tolerance of at least parameter related to measurements.
Beaver
{ a plurality of parametric models, each having at least one parameter of the plurality of corresponding parameters}
([Par 110] “The models may be parametric, i.e., they may have parameters that, through coded relationships, adjust the form of the model for a specific need. For instance, a set of 3D models may represent a bike helmet. Each model may fit a statistically normed human head of a specific age.” [Par 145-147] “ In some embodiments, a product option framework is configured to generate a product option framework user interface. Accordingly, each product options set is associated with logic and code to build a user interface element for each parametric product option. Furthermore, each product options set contains style hints so that each user interface element may be artfully placed to produce a high quality user experience…. The user interface elements may include… a size selector” [Par 201-202] “In some embodiments, the computer collaboration system may cause displaying, in a user interface executing in a user device of the customer, an interactive design along with annotations representing attributes, attribute groups and the locations within the design to which the attributes apply. The attributes, default values for the attributes and default ranges for the values for the attributes may be provided by an attribute engine which may be part of the computer collaboration system. The attribute engine may define and/or filter the attributes according to constraints provided by manufacturers, designers, or system administrators. In response to receiving, in the user interface, a rendering of the interactive design with the annotations, a user may select, using the functionalities of the user interface, a specific attribute or a specific attribute group at a specific location within the depiction of the interactive design and select or adjust a value associated with the attribute. For example, the user may select a width-attribute and use a slider object, provided by the user interface, to set a new value for the width parameter”)
{plurality of adjustment parameters}
([Par 145-147] “ In some embodiments, a product option framework is configured to generate a product option framework user interface. Accordingly, each product options set is associated with logic and code to build a user interface element for each parametric product option. Furthermore, each product options set contains style hints so that each user interface element may be artfully placed to produce a high quality user experience…. The user interface elements may include… a size selector” [Par 201-202] “In some embodiments, the computer collaboration system may cause displaying, in a user interface executing in a user device of the customer, an interactive design along with annotations representing attributes, attribute groups and the locations within the design to which the attributes apply. The attributes, default values for the attributes and default ranges for the values for the attributes may be provided by an attribute engine which may be part of the computer collaboration system. The attribute engine may define and/or filter the attributes according to constraints provided by manufacturers, designers, or system administrators. In response to receiving, in the user interface, a rendering of the interactive design with the annotations, a user may select, using the functionalities of the user interface, a specific attribute or a specific attribute group at a specific location within the depiction of the interactive design and select or adjust a value associated with the attribute. For example, the user may select a width-attribute and use a slider object, provided by the user interface, to set a new value for the width parameter”)
Terai
{ determining two particular parametric models, each having at least one parameter of a particular parametric model of the two particular parametric models}
([Abstract] “For a knit product to be graded, 2 sizes of pattern data are converted into knit data. Feature points that specify the shape of the knit product are generated for the converted 2 sizes of pattern data and an intermediate shape that specifies the shape of the knit product among the feature points are generated. The feature points and the intermediate shape for a target size are generated by interpolating or extrapolating among the feature points and the intermediate shapes according to the target size of the knit product. A closed loop is generated by connecting the feature points and the intermediate shapes and knit data for the target size is created by arranging a knit in a pattern specified by the loop.” [Page 2 Par 9-11] “The interpolation extrapolation unit 6 interpolates or extrapolates between the corresponding feature points and interpolates or extrapolates between the corresponding intermediate points with respect to the knit data for, for example, the maximum and the minimum two sizes. When using knit data for two sizes, interpolation or extrapolation may be performed linearly, and when three sizes or more exist, interpolation or extrapolation may be performed in a curved line with a quadratic curve or the like. When knit data for two sizes, maximum and minimum, is used, interpolation is performed. In other cases, for example, interpolation and extrapolation are performed…” [Page 4 Par 5-7] “We will consider the case where an apparel product tailored to each user is realized by knitting. When considering only the two components of width and length, the same processing as in FIG. 8 may be performed. When considering other components, FIG. 8 may be expanded to perform interpolation or extrapolation in a space of three or more dimensions. Although the intermediate points are used in the embodiment, the shape of the knit product between the feature points may be approximated by a curve or a straight line, and the feature points may be treated as the end points of the curve or the straight line. Using the parameter t, which is, for example, 0 for the feature point that is one end of the curve and 1 for the feature point that is the other end, approximates the shape of the knit product between the feature points as an algebraic curve of degree 2 or higher. be able to. If the shape of the knit product between the feature points is straight, it may be straight. Such a curve or a straight line and an intermediate point in the embodiment are called an intermediate shape between feature points, and the intermediate point generation unit 4 generates an intermediate shape automatically or by dialogue with a user. These curves or straight lines can be interpolated or extrapolated between sizes as well as intermediate points by interpolating or extrapolating between points with the same value of parameter t. Interpolation or extrapolation produces feature points at the target size and curves or straight lines that are intermediate shapes. Then, when the feature points and the intermediate shapes are connected in order, a closed loop is generated. Since feature points are the endpoints of curves or straight lines, interpolating or extrapolating between feature points means interpolating or extrapolating the endpoints of curves or straight lines. Further, connecting the feature points and the intermediate shapes means connecting the curves or straight lines having the intermediate shapes so that the end points are connected to each other.” [Page 3 Par 3] “FIG. 4 shows an intermediate generated by interpolation of the minimum size pattern data 10 and the maximum size pattern data 20, the minimum size knit data 15 and the maximum size knit data 25, and the knit data 15 and 25. The size knit data 35 is shown.” [Examiner’s note: the system of Terai takes 2 parametric models of clothing at different sizes then uses interpolation to generate models between those sizes based on the interpolation of feature points (i.e. control points)])
Donelly
{determining if models have at least one parameter that is within a particular tolerance of at least parameter related to measurements.}
([Par 69] “Size prediction is implemented by first determining a number of fit factors for a given garment model. Fit factors for a jacket may include such measurements as overarm circumference, biceps circumference, sleeve length and major circumference. Then, for each fit factor, a method of measuring the key dimensions on both the garment model and the body scan fit model are determined. Also for each fit factor, threshold values of the key dimension are determined to place the user into an appropriate size category.”)
1
generating, for the custom product, a parametric fit model having a plurality of fit model parameters;
1
… generating, for the custom product, a parametric fit model having a plurality of fit model parameters for improving the fit of the parametric physical product in relation to the user- specific data received from the user;
The more specific “generating, for the custom product, a parametric fit model having a plurality of fit model parameters for improving the fit of the parametric physical product in relation to the user- specific data received from the user;” reads on the more generic “generating, for the custom product, a parametric fit model having a plurality of fit model parameters;”
1
wherein each fit model parameter, of the plurality of fit model parameters, is computed by interpolating, for the at least one parameter of the two particular parametric models,
between one or more corresponding control points of a first parametric model of the two particular parametric models and one or more corresponding control points of a second parametric model of the two particular parametric models;
1
wherein each fit model parameter, of the plurality of fit model parameters, is computed by interpolating
between one or more corresponding 3D control points of a first particular parametric model and one or more corresponding 3D control points of a second particular parametric model;
Note that “a first particular parametric model” and “a second particular parametric model” read on a first and second parametric models from a set of two particular parametric models. Both are sets of two particular parametric models between which control points are interpolated.
Terai teaches performing this interpolation explicitly for “at least one parameter of the two particular parametric models”
Terai
([Par 69] “Size prediction is implemented by first determining a number of fit factors for a given garment model. Fit factors for a jacket may include such measurements as overarm circumference, biceps circumference, sleeve length and major circumference. Then, for each fit factor, a method of measuring the key dimensions on both the garment model and the body scan fit model are determined. Also for each fit factor, threshold values of the key dimension are determined to place the user into an appropriate size category.”)
1
wherein a fit model parameter, of the plurality of fit model parameters of the parametric fit model, is represented as a fit key-value pair;
1
wherein a fit model parameter, of the plurality of fit model parameters of the parametric fit model, is represented as a fit key-value pair;
transmitting the parametric fit model to a manufacturer to cause the manufacturer to produce a parametric physical product based on the plurality of fit model parameters of the parametric fit model.
transmitting the parametric fit model to a manufacturer to cause the manufacturer to: generate one or more manufacturing instructions based on the parametric fit model having the plurality of fit model parameters; based on the one or more manufacturing instructions, manufacture a parametric physical product using the received manufacturing instructions to manufacture the parametric physical product in accordance with the plurality of fit model parameters.
The manufacturing steps disclosed in ‘387 read on causing the manufacturer to “produce a parametric physical product based on the plurality of fit model parameters of the parametric fit model.”
2
The method of Claim 1, further comprising storing the parametric fit model, having the plurality of fit model parameters, in association with a user profile of a user.
7
The method of Claim 1, further comprising storing the parametric fit model, having the plurality of fit model parameters, in association with a user profile of the user.
3
The method of Claim 2, further comprising:
receiving a request to invite an
agent to collaborate on adjusting
the parametric fit model;
2
The method of Claim 1, further comprising:
receiving a request to invite an agent to collaborate on adjusting the parametric fit model;
Beaver teaches the features of instant claim 2 from which instant claim 3 depends
Beaver
Instant Claim 2:
further comprising storing the parametric fit model, having the plurality of fit model parameters, in association with a user profile of a user. ([Par 352] “ In some embodiments, a product description may include, or be associated with, a journaled list of modifications that have been submitted by users for an interactive design. The list may also include other information such as identifiers of the users who provided the modifications, global-key-values generated as the collaborators collaborated on the customized product, a history log of the modifications that have been accepted, reverted or deleted, comments that have been provided by the user, and the like” [Par 369] “User interface elements may be specific not only to a role assigned to a user, but also to an interactive design itself. For example, if platform 10 offers customizable ties and customizable scarfs, and a user profile for a user includes information indicating that the user is a male, then it is assumed that the user might want to customize a tie, not a scarf. Furthermore, it may be assumed that the user would like to customize a color, a material, and a shape of the tie. Based on that information, collaboration components 106 may select the user interface elements that are specific to the tie and to the selection of the tie attributes.”)
3
based on, at least in part, a plurality of fit parameters of the parametric fit model, generating a second graphical representation of the parametric physical product;
generating a second user interface and displaying, on a user computer display device, the second user interface comprising at least the second graphical representation of the parametric physical product;
generating a third user interface and displaying, on an agent computer display device, the third user interface comprising at least the second graphical representation of the parametric physical product;
receiving, via the second user interface, a plurality of user adjustment parameters for improving a fit of the parametric physical product;
receiving, via the third user interface, a plurality of agent adjustment parameters for improving a fit of the parametric physical product;
based on the plurality of user adjustment parameters, the
plurality of agent adjustment parameters and the plurality of fit parameters of the parametric physical product, generating, for the custom product, an adjusted parametric fit model having a plurality of new fit model parameters;
wherein a new fit model parameter, of the plurality of new fit model parameters of the adjusted parametric fit model, is represented as an adjusted fit key-value pair;
sending the adjusted parametric fit model to the manufacturer to cause the manufacturer to produce the parametric physical product based on a plurality of adjusted fit model parameters of the adjusted parametric fit model.
2
based on, at least in part, a plurality of fit parameters of the parametric fit model, generating a second graphical representation of the parametric physical product;
generating a second user interface and displaying, on a user computer display device, the second user interface comprising at least the second graphical representation of the parametric physical product;
generating a third user interface and displaying, on an agent computer display device, the third user interface comprising at least the second graphical representation of the parametric physical product;
receiving, via the second user interface, a plurality of user adjustment parameters for improving a fit of the parametric physical product;
receiving, via the third user interface, a plurality of agent adjustment parameters for improving a fit of the parametric physical product;
based on the plurality of user adjustment parameters, the plurality of agent adjustment parameters and the plurality of fit parameters of the parametric physical product, generating, for the custom product, an adjusted parametric fit model having a plurality of new fit model parameters;
wherein a new fit model parameter, of the plurality of new fit model parameters of the adjusted parametric fit model, is represented as an adjusted fit key-value pair;
sending the adjusted parametric fit model to the manufacturer to cause the manufacturer to produce the parametric physical product based on a plurality of adjusted fit model parameters of the adjusted parametric fit model.
4
The method of Claim 2, further comprising:
3
The method of Claim 1, further comprising:
Beaver teaches the features of instant claim 2 from which instant claim 4 depends.
Beaver
Instant Claim 2:
further comprising storing the parametric fit model, having the plurality of fit model parameters, in association with a user profile of a user. ([Par 352] “ In some embodiments, a product description may include, or be associated with, a journaled list of modifications that have been submitted by users for an interactive design. The list may also include other information such as identifiers of the users who provided the modifications, global-key-values generated as the collaborators collaborated on the customized product, a history log of the modifications that have been accepted, reverted or deleted, comments that have been provided by the user, and the like” [Par 369] “User interface elements may be specific not only to a role assigned to a user, but also to an interactive design itself. For example, if platform 10 offers customizable ties and customizable scarfs, and a user profile for a user includes information indicating that the user is a male, then it is assumed that the user might want to customize a tie, not a scarf. Furthermore, it may be assumed that the user would like to customize a color, a material, and a shape of the tie. Based on that information, collaboration components 106 may select the user interface elements that are specific to the tie and to the selection of the tie attributes.”)
4
receiving a request to adjust the parametric fit model;
based on, at least in part, a plurality of fit parameters of the parametric fit model, generating a fourth graphical representation of the parametric physical product;
generating a fourth user interface and displaying, on a user computer display device, the fourth user interface comprising at least the fourth graphical representation of the parametric physical product;
receiving, via the fourth user interface, a plurality of user adjustment parameters for improving a fit of the parametric physical product;
based on the plurality of user adjustment parameters and the plurality of fit parameters of the parametric physical product, generating, for the custom product, an adjusted parametric fit model having a plurality of new fit model parameters;
wherein a new fit model parameter, of the plurality of new fit model parameters of the adjusted parametric fit model, is represented as an adjusted fit key-value pair;
sending the adjusted parametric fit model to the manufacturer to cause the manufacturer to produce the parametric physical product based on a plurality of adjusted fit model parameters of the parametric fit model.
3
receiving a request to adjust the parametric fit model;
based on, at least in part, a plurality of fit parameters of the parametric fit model, generating a fourth graphical representation of the parametric physical product;
generating a fourth user interface and displaying, on a user computer display device, the fourth user interface comprising at least the fourth graphical representation of the parametric physical product;
receiving, via the fourth user interface, a plurality of user adjustment parameters for improving a fit of the parametric physical product;
based on the plurality of user adjustment parameters and the plurality of fit parameters of the parametric physical product, generating, for the custom product, an adjusted parametric fit model having a plurality of new fit model parameters;
wherein a new fit model parameter, of the plurality of new fit model parameters of the adjusted parametric fit model, is represented as an adjusted fit key-value pair;
sending the adjusted parametric fit model to the manufacturer to cause the manufacturer to produce the parametric physical product based on a plurality of adjusted fit model parameters of the parametric fit model.
5
The method of Claim 1, wherein the first user interface displays, on the computer display device, the first graphical representation of the custom product as a visualization of the parametric model of the custom product showing how the
parametric physical product, manufactured based on the plurality of fit model parameters using a plurality of fit key-values of the parametric fit model, fits the user having the user-specific data;
wherein the key-value pair is a data structure that includes an attribute key and a corresponding attribute value.
4
The method of Claim 1, wherein the first user interface displays, on the computer display device, the first graphical representation of the custom product as a visualization of the parametric model of the custom product showing how the parametric physical product, manufactured based on the plurality of fit model parameters using a plurality of fit key-values of the parametric fit model, fits the user having the user-specific data;
wherein the key-value pair is a data structure that includes an attribute key and a corresponding attribute value.
6
The method of Claim 5,
wherein the first user interface further displays one or more regions of the visualization of the
parametric model of the custom product;
wherein a region of the one or more regions of the visualization is adjustable using one or more functionalities of the first user interface;
wherein the one or more functionalities of the first user interface allow adjusting a fit of the parametric physical product to the user having the user-specific data.
5
The method of Claim 4, further comprising:
wherein the first user interface further displays one or more regions of the visualization of the parametric model of the custom product;
wherein a region of the one or more regions of the visualization is adjustable using one or more functionalities of the first user interface;
wherein the one or more functionalities of the first user interface allow adjusting a fit of the parametric physical product to the user having the user-specific data.
7
The method of Claim 6, further comprising: receiving, from the first user interface, a selection of a region, from the one or more regions, and an indication that the customized product should have either a looser fit or a tighter fit.
6
The method of Claim 5, further comprising: receiving, from the first user interface, a selection of a region, from the one or more regions, and an indication that the customized product should have either a looser fit or a tighter fit.
Claims 8-14. The elements of claim 8-14 are substantially the same as those of claims 1-7. Therefore, the elements of claims 8-14 are rejected due to the same reasons as outlined above for claims 1-7.
Particularly, Claims 8-14 of the instant application are rejected in view of claims 8-14 of ‘387 in further view of Beaver (US 20210266352 A1), Terai (JP 2021123826 A), and Donelly (US 20220253923 A1) Note that the order of the claims between the instant and copending application is:
8 <-> 8
9<->14
10<->9 (note the features of instant claim 9 from which instant claim 10 depends are taught by Beaver)
11<->10 (note the features of instant claim 9 from which instant claim 11 depends are taught by Beaver)
12<->11
13<->12
14<->13
Further note that the “One or more non-transitory computer-readable storage media storing one or more instructions,” disclosed by ‘387 reads on “A non-transitory computer-readable medium storing one or more instructions,” as in the instant application.
Claims 15 and 17-20. The elements of claim 15 and 17-20 are substantially the same as those of claims 1 and 3-7. Therefore, the elements of claims 15 and 17-20 are rejected due to the same reasons as outlined above for claims 1 and 3-7.
Particularly, claims 15 and 17-20 of the instant application are rejected in view of claims 15-19 of ‘387 in further view of Beaver (US 20210266352 A1), Terai (JP 2021123826 A), and Donelly (US 20220253923 A1) Note that the order of the claims between the instant and copending application is:
15 <-> 15
17<->16 (note the features of instant claim 16 from which instant claim 17 depends are taught by Beaver)
18<->17 (note the features of instant claim 16 from which instant claim 18 depends are taught by Beaver)
19<->18
20<->19
Note that since the contents of instant claim 16 are absent from the dependency tree of claim 15 of ‘387, it is not rejected under these grounds.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Michael P Mirabito whose telephone number is (703)756-1494. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 10:30 am - 6:30 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, Emerson Puente can be reached at (571) 272-3652. 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.
/M.P.M./Examiner, Art Unit 2187
/EMERSON C PUENTE/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2187