DETAILED ACTION
1. This FINAL action is in response to Application No. 17/998,578 originally filed on 11/11/2022. The amendment presented on 11/03/2025 which claims 1, 10 - 13, 16 - 20 and 22 - 23 are currently amended, claims 2 - 9, 14 - 15 and 21 were previously canceled and claim 24 is currently cancelled is hereby acknowledged. Claims 1, 10 - 13, 16 - 20 and 22 - 23 are pending.
Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status
2. The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
Response to Amendments
3. This is in response to applicant’s communication filed on 03 November
2025, wherein: claims 1, 10 - 13, 16 - 20 and 22 - 23 are currently pending. Claims 1, 10 - 13, 16 - 20 and 22 - 23 have been amended. Claims 2 - 9, 14 - 15, 21 and 24 have been cancelled.
Response to Arguments
4. Applicant’s arguments filed on November 03, 2025 with respect to the rejections of claims 1, 10 - 13, 16 - 20 and 22 - 23 have been fully considered but are moot in view of new ground(s) of rejection.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC §102
5. In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status.
6. The following is a quotation of the appropriate paragraphs of 35 U.S.C. 102 that form the basis for the rejections under this section made in this Office action:
A person shall be entitled to a patent unless –
(a)(1) the claimed invention was patented, described in a printed publication, or in public use, on sale or otherwise available to the public before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
7. Claims 1, 10 - 11, 17 - 20, 22 and 23 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Ishii “US 2004/0130579”.
Re-claim 1, Ishii teaches an information processing apparatus, (fig. 1; 1) comprising:
circuitry (par. [0042] As shown in FIG. 1, the information processing apparatus 1 includes an input unit 11, a main controller 12, and a display 13. The information processing apparatus 1) configured to:
control a display to display a virtual space (fig. 8; 32) superimposed on a real space (fig. 8)
control the display (fig. 8; 13) to display a first plane and a second plane in the virtual space (fig. 8; 32), (par. [0094]) wherein
the first plane and the second plane correspond to a real object (fig. 8; 61 & 62) in the real space (fig. 8; 34 floor), (par. [0096] - [0098])
the first plane and the second plane are displayed at a first position and an orientation in the virtual space (fig. 8; 32), (par. [0098])
the first position and the orientation correspond to feature information of the real object (fig. 8; 61 & 62), (par. [0099]) and
the first plane is orthogonal to the second plane. (see fig. 8)
Re-claim 10, Ishii teaches wherein the circuitry (par. [0042] As shown in FIG. 1, the information processing apparatus 1 includes an input unit 11, a main controller 12, and a display 13. The information processing apparatus 1) is further configured to:
set a coordinate space in the virtual space (fig. 8; 32) based on a second position of the real object (fig. 8; 61 & 62) and a first posture of the real object (fig. 8; 61 & 62); (par. [0099]) and
control the display to display an image in the virtual space, (fig. 8; 32) wherein the image indicates the set coordinate space. (par. [0046] correspondence between those two coordinate systems is defined on the basis of particular information (for example, shape, position, angle, etc.) associated with the real object 14.)
Re-claim 11, Ishii teaches wherein the circuitry is further configured to control the display (fig. 8; 13) to display a region image, (par. [0094])
the region image indicates a region that corresponds to an arrangement of one of a virtual object or the real object (fig. 8; 61 & 62) on a virtual surface, (fig. 8; 34)
the virtual surface (fig. 8; 34) is in the virtual space, (fig. 8; 32)
the virtual surface (fig. 8; 34) corresponds to a real surface, (e. g. fig. 8; 14-1) and
the real surface (fig. 8; 14-1) is in the real space. (fig. 8; 31)
Re-claim 17, Ishii teaches wherein the circuitry is further configured to
control the display (fig. 8; 13) to display the first plane and the second plane in association with the first position of the real object (fig. 8; 61 & 62) and a second posture of the real object. (fig. 8 and pars. [0098] - [0099])
Re-claim 18, Ishii teaches wherein the circuitry is further configured to control the display to display the region image. (par. [0043] the operation performed by the user, and the main controller 12 displays a corresponding image on the display 13.)
Re-claim 19, is rejected as applied to claim 1 above because the scope and contents of the recited limitations are substantially the same.
Re-claim 20, the rejection of claim 1 is incorporated herein and only further limitations are addressed below.
Ishii teaches a non-transitory computer-readable medium having stored thereon, computer-executable instructions which, when executed by a computer, cause the computer to execute operations, (par. [0146]) the operations comprising:
Re-claim 22, Ishii teaches wherein the circuitry is further configured to:
acquire the feature information, based on a user operation, wherein the user operation corresponds to an operation to point at the real object. (par. [0076])
Re-claim 23, Ishii teaches wherein the first plane and the second plane are superimposed on the real object (fig. 8; 61 & 62) in the virtual space (fig. 8; 32). (fig. 8 and par. [0098])
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
8 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 of this title, 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.
9. The factual inquiries for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized as follows:
1. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art.
2. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue.
3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art.
4. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness.
10. Claims 12 - 13 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Ishii “US 2004/0130579” in view of Ishihara “US 2018/0101223”.
Re-claim 12, Ishii teaches all the limitations of claim 1 but Ishii does not explicitly teach wherein the circuitry is further configured to
generate a notification based on the display of the first plane and the second plane,
control a speaker to output a sound as the generated notification.
However, Ishihara teaches wherein the circuitry is further configured to
generate a notification based on the display of the first plane and the second plane; (par. [0063] The reference plane is a planar area in real space. For example, it is assumed that the real space is a room composed of a plurality of wall surfaces. In this case, the reference plane is one wall surface of the plurality of wall surfaces. and par. [0195] The first display control unit 14G includes a real space image 42 arranged in the virtual space,) and
control a speaker to output a sound as the generated notification. (par. [0018] FIG. 1, the input unit 18 receives various operations from the user. The input unit 18 is, for example, a mouse, a microphone for voice recognition, …)
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to further modify the invention of the combination with the teachings of Ishihara to provide a head mounted display include a device which presents feedback by senses, such as a piezo actuator for generating vibrations. (par. [0086])
Re-claim 13, Ishii in view of Ishihara teaches all the limitations of claim 12, Ishihara teaches wherein the circuitry is further configured to control a vibrator to give a stimulus to a tactile sense of a user as the notification. (pars. [0086] and [0092])
11. Claim 16 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Ishii “US 2004/0130579” in view of Yuki “JP 2016139199”.
Re-claim 16, Ishii teaches the information processing apparatus according to claim 1 the circuitry but Ishii does not explicitly teach wherein
the circuitry is further configured to;
reduce the real space to generate a reduced virtual space, wherein the real space is reduced based on three-dimensional information of the real space; and
display the reduced virtual space superimposed on the real space.
However, Yuki teaches wherein
the circuitry is further configured to;
reduce the real space to generate a reduced virtual space, and
display the reduced virtual space superimposed on the real space. (par. [0144])
Ishii in view of Yuki does not explicitly teach wherein the real space is reduced based on three-dimensional information of the real space;
However, it is a well-known feature for generating a reduces space obtained by reducing a three-dimensional space, and superimposing and displaying the same on the three-dimensional space.
Conclusion
12. Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP § 706.07(a). Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a).
A shortened statutory period for reply to this final action is set to expire THREE MONTHS from the mailing date of this action. In the event a first reply is filed within TWO MONTHS of the mailing date of this final action and the advisory action is not mailed until after the end of the THREE-MONTH shortened statutory period, then the shortened statutory period will expire on the date the advisory action is mailed, and any extension fee pursuant to 37 CFR 1.136(a) will be calculated from the mailing date of the advisory action. In no event, however, will the statutory period for reply expire later than SIX MONTHS from the date of this final action.
Contact Information
13. Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Sosina Abebe whose telephone number is (571) 270-7929. The examiner can normally be reached on Mon-Friday from 9:00-5:30 If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner's Supervisor, Temesghen Ghebretinsae can be reached on (571) 272-3017. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 703-872-9306. Information regarding the status of an application may be obtained from the Patent Application Information Retrieval (PAIR) system. Status information for published applications may be obtained from either Private PAIR or Public PAIR. Status information for unpublished applications is available through Private PAIR only. For more information about the PAIR system, see http://pair-direct.uspto.gov. Should you have questions on access to the Private PAIR system, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free).
/S.A/Examiner, Art Unit 2626
/TEMESGHEN GHEBRETINSAE/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2626 2/12/26B