DETAILED ACTION
Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status
The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
Response to Amendment
This action is in response to the amendment filed on 10th November, 2025. Claims 1, 7, and 13 have been amended. Claims 3, 9, and 14 have been cancelled. Claims 1, 7, and 13 have been added. Claims 1-2, 4-8, 10-13, and 15-19 remain rejected in the application.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments with respect to Claims 1, 7, and 13 filed on 10th November, 2025, with respect to the rejection under 35 U.S.C. § 103, regarding that the prior art does not teach the limitation(s): "determining, during rendering, whether the 3D object is subject to a dynamic modification of the rendering effect" and "in response to user input, updating the rendering effect within the value range by modifying only pixels of the patch pictures associated with the 3D object" have been fully considered, but are moot because of new grounds for rejection. It has now been taught by the combination of Kirk and Du.
Regarding arguments to Claims 2, 4-6, 8, 10-12, and 15-19, they directly/indirectly depend on independent Claims 1, 7, and 13 respectively. Applicant does not argue anything other than independent Claims 1, 7, and 13. The limitations in those claims, in conjunction with combination, was previously established as explained.
Claim Objections
Claim 19 is objected to because of the following informalities:
Claim 19 recites the limitation(s): "the method of claim 1" on PG(s). 5, Line(s) 24; examiner suggests amending this to "The method of claim 1".Appropriate correction is required.
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.
Claims 1-2, 5, 7-8, 11, and 18 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kirk et al. (US 20200279385 A1, previously cited), hereinafter referenced as Kirk, in view of Du et al. (US 20190213778 A1), hereinafter referenced as Du.
Regarding Claim 1, Kirk discloses a method (Kirk, [0124]: teaches "a flow diagram that illustrates a method 800 of generating the three-dimensional (3D) volumetric video 236") comprising:
obtaining an atlas image (Kirk, [0124]: teaches "a flow diagram that illustrates a method 800 of generating the three-dimensional (3D) volumetric video 236 with an overlay representing visibility counts per pixel of a texture atlas <read on atlas image>"),
the atlas image packing patch pictures (Kirk, [0060]: teaches the texture atlas referring "to an image including multiple smaller images, usually packed together to reduce overall dimensions"),
the atlas image being representative of a three-dimensional scene (3D) (Kirk, [0060]: teaches "a scene <read on three-dimensional scene> associated with the 3D content may be rendered into one or more texture atlases");
[[obtaining metadata comprising, for a 3D object of the three- dimensional scene, an identification of the 3D object,]]
[[a value range for a rendering effect associated with the 3D object and]]
[[data associating the (3D) object with patch pictures of the atlas image;]]
rendering a view of the three-dimensional scene by inverse projecting the pixels of the atlas image for a point of view (Kirk, [0093]: teaches a 3D image of a skater viewed from one of multiple possible virtual camera positions as shown in FIG. 2C; [0083]: teaches the visibility histogram referring to "the histogram of pixel intensity values", where "the mapping <read on inverse-projecting> is a mapping of a value in the image back to the pixel in the texture map") and
PNG
media_image1.png
354
180
media_image1.png
Greyscale
[[by applying a default value belonging to the value range for the rendering effect to the pixels of the patch pictures associated with the (3D) object;]]
[[determining, during rendering, whether the 3D object is subject to a dynamic modification of the rendering effect;]]
[[in response to user input, updating the rendering effect within the value range by modifying only pixels of the patch pictures associated with the 3D object; and]]
[[displaying an interface to allow a user to modify the value of the rendering effect within the value range.]]
However, Kirk does not expressly disclose
obtaining metadata comprising, for a 3D object of the three- dimensional scene, an identification of the 3D object,
a value range for a rendering effect associated with the 3D object and
data associating the (3D) object with patch pictures of the atlas image;
by applying a default value belonging to the value range for the rendering effect to the pixels of the patch pictures associated with the (3D) object;
determining, during rendering, whether the 3D object is subject to a dynamic modification of the rendering effect;
in response to user input, updating the rendering effect within the value range by modifying only pixels of the patch pictures associated with the 3D object; and
displaying an interface to allow a user to modify the value of the rendering effect within the value range.
Du discloses
obtaining metadata comprising, for a 3D object of the three- dimensional scene, an identification of the 3D object (Du, [0030]: teaches a rendering component applying special effects indicated by metadata to rendered views of a textured, dynamic 3D model in a virtual scene <read on 3D scene>; Note: it should be noted that one skilled in the art would understand that metadata of a 3D object is a form of identification for said 3D object),
a value range for a rendering effect associated with the 3D object (Du, [0030]: teaches the rendering component applying special effects <read on rendering effect> indicated by metadata to rendered views of a textured, dynamic 3D model; [0032]: teaches a texture value including an opacity value <read on value range> that defines an opacity associated with a point/location) and
data associating the (3D) object with patch pictures of the atlas image (Du, [0106]: teaches the rendering component receiving view-dependent texture maps <read on data> for the dynamic 3D model, which include texture values for a dynamic texture atlas <read on patch pictures of atlas image>);
by applying a default value belonging to the value range for the rendering effect to the pixels of the patch pictures associated with the (3D) object (Du, [0153]: teaches the rendering component determining the initial texture weights for a current frame, which are based on texture values that include alpha/opacity values);
determining, during rendering, whether the 3D object is subject to a dynamic modification of the rendering effect (Du, FIG. 16 teaches setting metadata that indicates if special effects <read on rendering effect> are to be incorporated for rendered views for the current frame <read on dynamic modification>);
PNG
media_image2.png
461
170
media_image2.png
Greyscale
in response to user input, updating the rendering effect within the value range by modifying only pixels of the patch pictures associated with the 3D object (Du, [0196]: teaches a client computer system receiving user input to adjust special effects; [0201]: teaches the rendering component modifying texture values of texture maps <read on pixels of patch pictures> applied to a dynamic 3D model of a given viewpoint; [0213]: teaches, for a given viewpoint for a current frame, the rendering component assigning an alpha value <read on updating rendering effect within value range> depending on how close the normal vector value and output viewpoint are to being perpendicular, where parallel values are nearly transparent and perpendicular are nearly opaque); and
displaying an interface to allow a user to modify the value of the rendering effect within the value range (Du, [0196]: teaches a client computer system directly adjusting special effects in response to user input <read on displayed interface>, where the client computer system receives user input that indicates a setting and/or preference for the special effects <read on value modification of rendering effect that is within value range>).
Du is analogous art with respect to Kirk because they are from the same field of endeavor, namely utilizing texture atlases for 3D object rendering. Before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art to incorporate alpha and opacity values to texture data, as well as updating metadata regarding special effects as taught by Du into the teaching of Kirk. The suggestion for doing so would allow users to customize and modify special effects in real-time, thereby enhancing the overall user experience. Therefore, it would have been obvious to combine Du with Kirk.
Regarding Claim 7, it recites the limitations that are similar in scope to Claim 1, but in a device. As shown in the rejection, the combination of Kirk and Du discloses the limitations of Claim 1. Additionally, Kirk discloses a device comprising a memory associated with a processor configured for (Kirk, [0132]: teaches "a data processing system <read on device> suitable for storing and/or executing program code will include at least one processor coupled directly or indirectly to memory elements through a system bus"):…
Thus, Claim 7 is met by Kirk according to the mapping presented in the rejection of Claim 1, given the method corresponds to a device.
Regarding Claims 2 and 8, the combination of Kirk and Du discloses the method and the device of Claims 1 and 7 respectively. Additionally, Kirk further discloses wherein
[[when the value of the rendering effect is modified to a new value, the method comprises:]]
on condition that the metadata comprise data associating the 3D object with a bounding box, apply the new value to pixels of the associated patch pictures inverse projected in the bounding box (Kirk, [0063]: teaches the volumetric video analytics server 114 assigning a visible token value <read on data> to a texture coordinate in the visibility texture atlas, if the fragment is visible <read on condition>; [0063]: further teaches the volumetric video analytics server 114 retaining "the not visible token value in the visibility texture atlas if the fragment is not visible"; [0064]: teaches the volumetric video analytics server 114 determining the visibility of a 3D point for each pixel in the visibility texture atlas (the visible token value) by generating said "3D point and a corresponding bounding box using a depth atlas for each valid pixel in the visibility texture atlas"; [0067]: teaches a visibility histogram of the visibility texture atlas, where mapping of the atlas "is a mapping <read on inverse projected> of a value in the image back to the pixel in the texture map");
otherwise, apply the new value to pixels of the associated patch pictures (Kirk, [0069]: teaches the volumetric video analytics server 114 generating the curated selection of 3D volumetric content <read on applying the new value> based on the viewer telemetry data using the visibility counts per pixel).
However, Kirk does not expressly disclose
when the value of the rendering effect is modified to a new value, the method comprises:…
Du discloses
when the value of the rendering effect is modified to a new value (Du, FIG. 17 teaches receiving both updated texture maps for a current frame and metadata <read on new value> that indicates special effects <read on rendering effect>, which can include an updated viewpoint, where special effects are incorporated from the updated viewpoint for the dynamic 3D model; Note it should be noted that it is being interpreted that the texture values and metadata are updated for a new rendered view), the method comprises:…
PNG
media_image3.png
556
172
media_image3.png
Greyscale
Du is analogous art with respect to Kirk because they are from the same field of endeavor, namely utilizing texture atlases for 3D object rendering. Before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art to incorporate alpha and opacity values to texture data, as well as updating metadata regarding special effects as taught by Du into the teaching of Kirk. The suggestion for doing so would allow users to customize and modify special effects in real-time, thereby enhancing the overall user experience. Therefore, it would have been obvious to combine Du with Kirk.
Regarding Claims 5 and 11, the combination of Kirk and Du discloses the method and the device of Claims 1 and 7 respectively. Kirk does not expressly disclose the limitations of Claims 5 and 11; however, Du discloses wherein the rendering effect is
a transparency effect or a color filtering or a blurring or a contrast adapting (Du, [0212]: teaches the rendering component applying a glassy filter effect <read on transparency effect>).
Du is analogous art with respect to Kirk because they are from the same field of endeavor, namely utilizing texture atlases for 3D object rendering. Before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art to incorporate alpha and opacity values to texture data, as well as updating metadata regarding special effects as taught by Du into the teaching of Kirk. The suggestion for doing so would allow users to customize and modify special effects in real-time, thereby enhancing the overall user experience. Therefore, it would have been obvious to combine Du with Kirk.
Regarding Claim 18, the combination of Kirk and Du discloses the method of Claim 1. Kirk does not expressly disclose the limitations of Claim 18; however, Du discloses wherein the metadata further comprises
a flag identifying the rendering effect as user-adjustable or fixed for the 3D object (Du, [0181]: teaches a user being able to override how special effects are applied at a client computer system, where a server computer system sets metadata of the special effects and later incorporating user preferences <read on user adjustable>, thereby allowing the user, to some extent, personalize the stylization of rendered views of textured, dynamic 3D models; Note: it should be noted that it is being interpreted that the system some effects are not customizable; in addition, one skilled in the art would understand that boolean values are commonly used in metadata files, which are a type of flag).
Du is analogous art with respect to Kirk because they are from the same field of endeavor, namely utilizing texture atlases for 3D object rendering. Before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art to incorporate alpha and opacity values to texture data, as well as updating metadata regarding special effects as taught by Du into the teaching of Kirk. The suggestion for doing so would allow users to customize and modify special effects in real-time, thereby enhancing the overall user experience. Therefore, it would have been obvious to combine Du with Kirk.
Claims 4 and 10 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kirk et al. (US 20200279385 A1, previously cited), hereinafter referenced as Kirk, in view of Du et al. (US 20190213778 A1), hereinafter referenced as Du as applied to Claims 1, 7, and 13 above respectively, and further in view of Mertens (US 20160307602 A1, previously cited).
Regarding Claims 4 and 10, the combination of Kirk and Du discloses the method and the device of Claims 1 and 7 respectively. The combination of Kirk and Du does not expressly disclose the limitations of Claims 4 and 10; however, Mertens discloses wherein the metadata comprise
information indicating whether the value range for the rendering effect associated with the 3D object is an update of a previous or default value range for the rendering effect for the 3D object (Mertens, [0113]: teaches "selected histogram/range/color properties and/or parameters can include, e.g., one or more of at least one luminance value (
L
x
), a minimum and maximum luminance (
L
m
i
n
,
L
m
a
x
) <read on update of a default value range>, multipliers for specifying the relationship of a first and second luminance, etc.").
Mertens is analogous art with respect to Kirk, in view of Du because they are from the same field of endeavor, namely capturing video content. Before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art to have the user be able to update and modify parameters of the video, such as the luminance and color as taught by Mertens into the teaching of Kirk, in view of Du. The suggestion for doing so would allow the user to personalize their viewing experience that they deem is more suitable. Therefore, it would have been obvious to combine Mertens with Kirk, in view of Du.
Claims 6 and 12 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kirk et al. (US 20200279385 A1, previously cited), hereinafter referenced as Kirk, in view of Du et al. (US 20190213778 A1), hereinafter referenced as Du as applied to Claims 1, 7, and 13 above respectively, and further in view of Oyman (US 20210021664 A1, previously cited).
Regarding Claims 6 and 12, the combination of Kirk and Du discloses the method and the device of Claims 1 and 7 respectively. The combination of Kirk and Du does not expressly disclose the limitations of Claims 6 and 12; however, Oyman discloses wherein
the metadata are encoded in Supplemental Enhanced Information messages (Oyman, [0130]: teaches "HEVC SEI <read on Supplemental Enhanced Information> messages for each of the dedicated HEVC bitstreams may carry additional metadata on each encoded information, including occupancy map data 730, geometry data 736 and attribute data 714").
Oyman is analogous art with respect to Kirk, in view of Du because they are from the same field of endeavor, namely video data structures. Before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art to have high efficiency video coding (HEVC) SEI messages carry additional metadata, such as occupancy map data, geometry data, and attribute data as taught by Oyman into the teaching of Kirk, in view of Du. The suggestion for doing so would enable additional content to be superimposed in the volumetric video input, thereby allowing for more creative video. Therefore, it would have been obvious to combine Oyman with Kirk, in view of Du.
Claim 19 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kirk et al. (US 20200279385 A1, previously cited), hereinafter referenced as Kirk, in view of Du et al. (US 20190213778 A1), hereinafter referenced as Du as applied to Claim 1 above respectively, and further in view of Chang et al. (US 20220067979 A1), hereinafter referenced as Chang.
Regarding Claim 19, the combination of Kirk and Du discloses the method of Claim 1. The combination of Kirk and Du does not expressly disclose the limitations of Claim 19; however, Chang discloses wherein
the rendering effect is limited by a producer-defined minimum and maximum value stored as part of the metadata range (Chang, [0075]: teaches two-partial transparency levels, including minimum and maximum alpha quantization level for alpha values <read on rendering effect> that are stored in metadata; [0075]: further teaches the two partial-transparency levels being set by encoder device 204 <read on producer-defined>).
Chang is analogous art with respect to Kirk, in view of Du because they are from the same field of endeavor, namely processing texture data for 3D rendering. Before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art to implement a two-partial transparency level system for rendering 3D objects as taught by Chang into the teaching of Kirk, in view of Du. The suggestion for doing so would allow for automatic transparent effects to be applied on the 3D object at a given viewpoint, thereby yielding predictable results. Therefore, it would have been obvious to combine Chang with Kirk, in view of Du.
Claims 13 and 16 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kirk et al. (US 20200279385 A1, previously cited), hereinafter referenced as Kirk, in view of Du et al. (US 20190213778 A1), hereinafter referenced as Du, and further in view of Chang et al. (US 20220067979 A1), hereinafter referenced as Chang.
Regarding Claim 13, Kirk discloses a non-transitory storage medium storing video data (Kirk, [0129]: teaches a computer program product including "tangible and/or non-transitory computer-readable storage media for carrying or having computer executable instructions or data structures stored thereon"; [0118]: teaches the volumetric video 602 being stored in the telemetry database 110 of the telemetry server 108) comprising
an atlas image packing patch pictures, representative of a three-dimensional scene (Kirk, [0124]: teaches "a flow diagram that illustrates a method 800 of generating the three-dimensional (3D) volumetric video 236 with an overlay representing visibility counts per pixel of a texture atlas <read on atlas image>"; [0060]: teaches the texture atlas referring "to an image including multiple smaller images, usually packed together to reduce overall dimensions"; [0060]: further teaches "a scene <read on three-dimensional scene> associated with the 3D content may be rendered into one or more texture atlases"); and
[[metadata comprising instructions to limit a change of a rendering effect value associated with a 3D object to within a predefined range,]]
[[the metadata associating the 3D object with patch pictures of the atlas image; wherein]]
[[the metadata further includes a flag identifying the rendering effect as user-modifiable and]]
bounding-box data restricting the rendering modification to the associated object (Kirk, [0063]: teaches the volumetric video analytics server 114 retaining "the not visible token value in the visibility texture atlas if the fragment is not visible"; [0064]: teaches the volumetric video analytics server 114 determining the visibility of a 3D point for each pixel in the visibility texture atlas (the visible token value) by generating said "3D point and a corresponding bounding box using a depth atlas for each valid pixel in the visibility texture atlas").
However, Kirk does not expressly disclose
metadata comprising instructions to limit a change of a rendering effect value associated with a 3D object to within a predefined range,
the metadata associating the 3D object with patch pictures of the atlas image; wherein
the metadata further includes a flag identifying the rendering effect as user-modifiable.
Du discloses
[[metadata comprising instructions to limit a change of a rendering effect value associated with a 3D object to within a predefined range,]]
the metadata associating the 3D object with patch pictures of the atlas image (Du, [0106]: teaches the rendering component receiving view-dependent texture maps for the dynamic 3D model, which include texture values for a dynamic texture atlas <read on patch pictures of atlas image>); wherein
the metadata further includes a flag identifying the rendering effect as user-modifiable (Du, [0181]: teaches a user being able to override how special effects are applied at a client computer system, where a server computer system sets metadata of the special effects <read on rendering effect> and later incorporating user preferences <read on user-modifiable>, thereby allowing the user, to some extent, personalize the stylization of rendered views of textured, dynamic 3D models; Note: it should be noted that it is being interpreted that the system some effects are not customizable; in addition, one skilled in the art would understand that boolean values are commonly used in metadata files, which are a type of flag).
Du is analogous art with respect to Kirk because they are from the same field of endeavor, namely utilizing texture atlases for 3D object rendering. Before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art to incorporate alpha and opacity values to texture data, as well as updating metadata regarding special effects as taught by Du into the teaching of Kirk. The suggestion for doing so would allow users to customize and modify special effects in real-time, thereby enhancing the overall user experience. Therefore, it would have been obvious to combine Du with Kirk.
However, the combination of Kirk and Du does not expressly disclose
metadata comprising instructions to limit a change of a rendering effect value associated with a 3D object to within a predefined range.
Chang discloses
metadata comprising instructions to limit a change of a rendering effect value associated with a 3D object to within a predefined range (Chang, [0075]: teaches two-partial transparency levels <read on limit change>, including minimum and maximum alpha quantization level for alpha values <read on rendering effect value within predefined range> that are stored in metadata).
Chang is analogous art with respect to Kirk, in view of Du because they are from the same field of endeavor, namely processing texture data for 3D rendering. Before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art to implement a two-partial transparency level system for rendering 3D objects as taught by Chang into the teaching of Kirk, in view of Du. The suggestion for doing so would allow for automatic transparent effects to be applied on the 3D object at a given viewpoint, thereby yielding predictable results. Therefore, it would have been obvious to combine Chang with Kirk, in view of Du.
Regarding Claim 16, the combination of Kirk, Du, and Chang discloses the non-transitory storage medium of Claim 13. The combination of Kirk and Chang does not expressly disclose the limitations of Claim 16; however, Du discloses wherein the rendering effect is
a transparency effect or a color filtering or a blurring or a contrast adapting (Du, [0212]: teaches the rendering component applying a glassy filter effect <read on transparency effect>).
Du is analogous art with respect to Kirk, in view of Chang because they are from the same field of endeavor, namely utilizing texture atlases for 3D object rendering. Before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art to incorporate alpha and opacity values to texture data, as well as updating metadata regarding special effects as taught by Du into the teaching of Kirk, in view of Chang. The suggestion for doing so would allow users to customize and modify special effects in real-time, thereby enhancing the overall user experience. Therefore, it would have been obvious to combine Du with Kirk, in view of Chang.
Claim 15 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kirk et al. (US 20200279385 A1, previously cited), hereinafter referenced as Kirk, in view of Du et al. (US 20190213778 A1), hereinafter referenced as Du, and further in view of Chang et al. (US 20220067979 A1), hereinafter referenced as Chang as applied to Claim 13 above respectively, and further in view of Mertens (US 20160307602 A1, previously cited).
Regarding Claim 15, the combination of Kirk, Du, and Chang discloses the non-transitory storage medium of Claim 13. The combination of Kirk, Du, and Chang does not expressly disclose the limitations of Claim 15; however, Mertens discloses wherein the metadata comprise
an information indicating whether the value range for the rendering effect associated with the 3D object is an update of a previous or default value range for the rendering effect for the 3D object (Mertens, [0113]: teaches "selected histogram/range/color properties and/or parameters can include, e.g., one or more of at least one luminance value (
L
x
), a minimum and maximum luminance (
L
m
i
n
,
L
m
a
x
) <read on update of a default value range>, multipliers for specifying the relationship of a first and second luminance, etc.").
Mertens is analogous art with respect to the combination of Kirk, Du, and Chang because they are from the same field of endeavor, namely capturing video content. Before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art to have the user be able to update and modify parameters of the video, such as the luminance and color as taught by Mertens into the combined teaching of Kirk, Du, and Chang. The suggestion for doing so would allow the user to personalize their viewing experience that they deem is more suitable. Therefore, it would have been obvious to combine Mertens with the combination of Kirk, Du, and Chang.
Claim 17 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kirk et al. (US 20200279385 A1, previously cited), hereinafter referenced as Kirk, in view of Du et al. (US 20190213778 A1), hereinafter referenced as Du, and further in view of Chang et al. (US 20220067979 A1), hereinafter referenced as Chang as applied to Claim 13 above respectively, and further in view of Oyman (US 20210021664 A1, previously cited).
Regarding Claim 17, the combination of Kirk, Du, and Chang discloses the non-transitory storage medium of Claim 13. The combination of Kirk, Du, and Chang does not expressly disclose the limitations of Claim 17; however, Oyman discloses wherein
the metadata are encoded in Supplemental Enhanced Information messages (Oyman, [0130]: teaches "HEVC SEI <read on Supplemental Enhanced Information> messages for each of the dedicated HEVC bitstreams may carry additional metadata on each encoded information, including occupancy map data 730, geometry data 736 and attribute data 714").
Oyman is analogous art with respect to the combination of Kirk, Du, and Chang because they are from the same field of endeavor, namely video data structures. Before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art to have high efficiency video coding (HEVC) SEI messages carry additional metadata, such as occupancy map data, geometry data, and attribute data as taught by Oyman into the combined teaching of Kirk, Du, and Chang. The suggestion for doing so would enable additional content to be superimposed in the volumetric video input, thereby allowing for more creative video. Therefore, it would have been obvious to combine Oyman with the combination of Kirk, Du, and Chang.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Fleureau et al. (US 20230239451 A1) discloses encoding and decoding a volumetric scene that utilizes texture patches.
Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP § 706.07(a). Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a).
A shortened statutory period for reply to this final action is set to expire THREE MONTHS from the mailing date of this action. In the event a first reply is filed within TWO MONTHS of the mailing date of this final action and the advisory action is not mailed until after the end of the THREE-MONTH shortened statutory period, then the shortened statutory period will expire on the date the advisory action is mailed, and any nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) pursuant to 37 CFR 1.136(a) will be calculated from the mailing date of the advisory action. In no event, however, will the statutory period for reply expire later than SIX MONTHS from the mailing date of this final action.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to KARL TRUONG whose telephone number is (703)756-5915. The examiner can normally be reached 7:30 AM - 5:00 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, Kent Chang can be reached at (571) 272-7667. 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.
/K.D.T./Examiner, Art Unit 2614
/KENT W CHANG/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2614