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 .
In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments have been considered but are moot because the new ground of rejection does not rely on any reference applied in the prior rejection of record for any teaching or matter specifically challenged in the argument.
Ur (US 2015/0181632) is now relied upon for more specifically disclosing performing line of sight communications between multiple near eye devices.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of 35 U.S.C. 112(a):
(a) IN GENERAL.—The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor or joint inventor of carrying out the invention.
The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112:
The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor of carrying out his invention.
Claim 22 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(a) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), first paragraph, as failing to comply with the written description requirement. The claim(s) contains subject matter which was not described in the specification in such a way as to reasonably convey to one skilled in the relevant art that the inventor or a joint inventor, or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the inventor(s), at the time the application was filed, had possession of the claimed invention.
Claim 22 recites “after establishing the LOS data transmission session with the other near-eye display device:
detect the other near-eye display device as not being within the communication range or the LOS angle-of-arrival of the near-eye display device; and
responsive to detecting the other near-eye display device as not being within the communication range or the LOS angle-of-arrival, terminate the LOS data transmission session with the other near-eye display device.” which is not supported by applicant’s specification as originally filed.
While applicant’s specification indicates “The session may be terminated upon input from one of the users or upon expiration of a timer (e.g., maximum allowed duration for communication or a prolonged quiet period). (see paragraph 72), there does not appear to be any disclosure of terminating the LOS data transmission session with the other near-eye display device “responsive to detecting the other near-eye display device as not being within the communication range or the LOS angle-of-arrival”, as recited within the claim.
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 1-8, 14-21 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Ur et al. (Ur) (US 2015/0181632) in view of Lim et al. (Lim) (US 2024/0355069) (of record).
As to claim 1, Ur discloses a near eye display device (Fig. 1; 120; paragraph 19) comprising:
an augmented reality (AR) or virtual reality (VR) display (127, paragraph 19-20);
an image capture device (122, paragraph 20);
an audio sub-system (123; paragraph 19-20).
a wireless communication sub-system (paragraph 19) configured to:
detect another near-eye display device as being within a line-of-sight (LOS) of the near-eye display device (another device within line of sight of the device camera; paragraph 21-25, 40); and
responsive to detecting the other near-eye display device as being within the LOS, establish a LOS data transmission session with the other near-eye display device (paragraph 21-25, 40-41).
While Ur discloses communicating with devices within range and within line-of-sight (paragraph 24-25), Ur fails to specifically disclose detecting another device as being within a communication range and a line-of-sight (LOS) angle-of-arrival.
In an analogous art, Lim discloses a communication system (see Fig. 5-6) to allow communications between different users of near-eye devices (first and second AR glasses; 511, 521; see Fig. 5-6; paragraph 109) by detecting the second near-eye display device is within a range and an angle-of-arrival (AoA) (Fig. 5-6; paragraph 106-107, 122-123, 134-135) so as to increase the accuracy of detecting a specific desired AR device to be connected (paragraph 100, 106-107, 121-122, 135).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Ur’s system to include detecting another device as being within a communication range and a line-of-sight (LOS) angle-of-arrival, as taught in combination with Lim, for the typical benefit of increasing the accuracy of detecting a specific desired AR device to be connected (paragraph 100, 106-107, 121-122, 135).
As to claim 2, Ur and Lim disclose wherein at least one of the AR or VR display, the image capture device, or the audio sub-system of the near-eye display device is used for the LoS data transmission session (see Ur at paragraph 28 and Lim at Fig. 6, paragraph 109-113).
As to claim 3, Ur and Lim disclose wherein the wireless communication sub-system comprises an ultra-wide band (UWB) transceiver (see Lim at Fig. 3, paragraph 100, 106-107, 115, 121-122).
As to claim 4, Ur and Lim disclose wherein the wireless communication sub-system further comprises an additional transceiver (such as Bluetooth, WIFI; see Ur at paragraph 19, 25 and Lim at Fig. 3, paragraph 100, 115, 133-135).
As to claim 5, Ur and Lim disclose wherein the UWB transceiver is used to detect the other near-eye display device as within the range and the angle of arrival of the near-eye display device (see Lim at paragraph 106-107, 121-122, 135), and
one of the UWB transceiver or the additional transceiver is used to facilitate the LoS data transmission (see Ur at paragraph 19, 25 and Lim at paragraph 100, 115, 135).
As to claim 6, Ur and Lim disclose wherein one of the UWB transceiver or the additional transceiver is selected to facilitate the LoS data transmission based on at least one of an available power in the near-eye display device and the other near eye display device, a noise level of an environment, or a selected communication mode (see Lim at paragraph 119-120, 133-135).
As to claim 7, Ur and Lim wherein upon detection of the other near-eye display device as being within the range and the angle of arrival of the near-eye display device, a wearer of the near-eye display device is provided with an audio, visual, or audio- visual indication to initiate the LoS data transmission session (see Ur at paragraph 26 and Lim at paragraph 119-120).
As to claim 8, Ur and Lim disclose wherein the wireless communication sub-system of the first near-eye display device is further configured to:
search for another near-eye display device within the range and the angle of arrival of the near- eye display device to establish another LoS data transmission session (see Ur at paragraph 25 and Lim at paragraph 119-121).
As to claim 14, Ur discloses detecting, by a wireless communication sub-system (paragraph 19) of a first near eye device (Fig. 1; 120; paragraph 19) a second near eye device as being within a line-of-sight (LOS) of the first near-eye display device (another device within line of sight of the device camera; paragraph 21-25, 40); and
upon selection of the LoS communication by the wearer of the first near-eye display device, establishing a LoS communication session with the second near-eye display device (paragraph 21-25, 40-41).
While Ur discloses communicating with devices within range and within line-of-sight (paragraph 24-25), Ur fails to specifically disclose detecting another device as being within a communication range and a line-of-sight (LOS) angle-of-arrival, and responsive to detecting the second near-eye display device as being within the communication range and LOS angle of arrival, providing an indication to a wearer of the first near-eye display device regarding an availability of line-of-sight data transmission with the second near-eye display device.
In an analogous art, Lim discloses a communication system (see Fig. 5-6) to allow communications between different users of near-eye devices (first and second AR glasses; 511, 521; see Fig. 5-6; paragraph 109) by detecting the second near-eye display device is within a range and an angle-of-arrival (AoA) (Fig. 5-6; paragraph 106-107, 122-123, 134-135) and responsive to detecting the second near-eye display device as being within the communication range and angle of arrival, providing an indication to a wearer of the first near-eye display device regarding an availability of line-of-sight data transmission with the second near-eye display device (paragraph 107, 119-120, 123) so as to increase the accuracy of detecting a specific desired AR device to be connected (paragraph 100, 106-107, 121-122, 135).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Ur’s system to include detecting another device as being within a communication range and a line-of-sight (LOS) angle-of-arrival, and responsive to detecting the second near-eye display device as being within the communication range and LOS angle of arrival, providing an indication to a wearer of the first near-eye display device regarding an availability of line-of-sight data transmission with the second near-eye display device, as taught in combination with Lim, for the typical benefit of increasing the accuracy of detecting a specific desired AR device to be connected (paragraph 100, 106-107, 121-122, 135).
As to claim 15, Ur and Lim disclose wherein establishing the LoS data transmission with the second near-eye display device comprises:
employing at least one of an audio communication mode or a video communication mode (see Ur at paragraph 28 and Lim at Fig. 6, paragraph 109-113).
As to claim 16, Ur and Lim disclose selecting a communication mode of the LoS data transmission based on at least one of an available power in the first and second near-eye display devices, a noise level of an environment, a distance between the first and second near-eye display devices (switching from BLE to UWB when the second device enters a certain area; see Lim at paragraph 133), or the angle of arrival (see Lim at paragraph 135).
As to claim 17, Ur and Lim disclose wherein providing the indication to the wearer of the first near-eye display device regarding the availability of the LoS data transmission comprises:
providing with an audio, visual, or audio-visual indication to accept the LoS data transmission (see Lim at paragraph 107, 119-120, 123).
As to claim 18, Ur and Lim disclose searching for additional near-eye display devices within the communication range and the LOS angle of arrival of the first near-eye display device to establish additional LoS data transmission sessions with the additional near eye display devices (see Ur at paragraph 25 and Lim at paragraph 81, 106-107, 122, 133-136).
As to claim 19, Ur and Lim establishing a plurality of LoS data transmissions simultaneously with a plurality of additional near-eye display devices in a unidirectional or bidirectional broadcast mode (see Ur at paragraph 25 and Lim at paragraph 81, 106-107, 122, 133-136).
As to claim 20, Ur and Lim disclose wherein the wireless communication sub-system comprises an ultra-wide band (UWB) transceiver (see Lim at Fig. 3, paragraph 100, 106-107, 115, 121-122), and
detecting the second near-eye display device as being within the communication range and the LOS angle-of-arrival of the first near-eye display device comprises using the UWB transceiver to detect the second near-eye display device (see Ur at Fig. 1, paragraph 19-25 and Lim at Fig. 3, paragraph 100, 106-107, 115, 121-122).
As to claim 21, Ur and Lim disclose wherein the wireless communication sub- system is further configured to, after establishing the LOS data transmission session with the other near-eye display device, transmit audio or video data to the other near-eye display device while the other near-eye display device is within LOS of the near-eye display device (see Ur at paragraph 28 and Lim at Fig. 6, paragraph 109-113).
Claim 22 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Ur and Lim and further in view of Taylor et al. (Taylor) (US 2019/0391637).
As to claim 22, while Ur and Lim disclose wherein the wireless communication sub- system is configured to establish the LOS data transmission session with the other near-eye display device,
they fail to specifically disclose detect the other near-eye display device as not being within the communication range or the LOS angle-of-arrival of the near-eye display device; and
responsive to detecting the other near-eye display device as not being within the communication range or the LOS angle-of-arrival, terminate the LOS data transmission session with the other near-eye display device.
In an analogous art, Taylor discloses a communication system (see Fig. 2-3; paragraph 46-49) wherein a user wearing an AR near-eye display device will establish communications with a second user wearing a second AR near-eye display device within line of sight (users wearing headsets communicating; Fig. 2, paragraph 49-52), detect the second near-eye display device as not being within the communication range or the LOS angle-of-arrival of the near-eye display device and responsive to detecting the other near-eye display device as not being within the communication range or the LOS angle-of-arrival, terminate the LOS data transmission session with the other near-eye display device (terminating the communication channel when one user looks away from the other; paragraph 55) so as to providing a simple method for the users to end communications when desired (paragraph 55).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Ur and Lim’s system to include detect the other near-eye display device as not being within the communication range or the LOS angle-of-arrival of the near-eye display device; and responsive to detecting the other near-eye display device as not being within the communication range or the LOS angle-of-arrival, terminate the LOS data transmission session with the other near-eye display device, as taught in combination with Taylor, for the typical benefit of providing a simple method for the users to end communications when desired (paragraph 55).
Conclusion
THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a).
A shortened statutory period for reply to this final action is set to expire THREE MONTHS from the mailing date of this action. In the event a first reply is filed within TWO MONTHS of the mailing date of this final action and the advisory action is not mailed until after the end of the THREE-MONTH shortened statutory period, then the shortened statutory period will expire on the date the advisory action is mailed, and any nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) pursuant to 37 CFR 1.136(a) will be calculated from the mailing date of the advisory action. In no event, however, will the statutory period for reply expire later than SIX MONTHS from the mailing date of this final action.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to James R Sheleheda whose telephone number is (571)272-7357. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 8 am-5 pm CST.
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, Benjamin Bruckart can be reached at (571) 272-3982. 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.
/James R Sheleheda/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2424