Detailed Action
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.
The factual inquiries set forth in Graham v. John Deere Co., 383 U.S. 1, 148 USPQ 459 (1966), that are applied 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.
In considering patentability of the claims the examiner presumes that the subject matter of the various claims was commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the claimed invention(s) absent any evidence to the contrary. If this application names joint inventors, Applicant is advised of the obligation under 37 CFR 1.56 to point out the inventor and effective filing dates of each claim that was not commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the later invention in order for the examiner to consider the applicability of 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(C) for any potential 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) prior art against the later invention.
Claims 1-5 and 7-9 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Osman et al (US 2019/0377473 A1) in view of What is WebVR? (as evidenced by WVR.pdf and Youtube.com).
Regarding claim 1, Osman discloses a method for providing large scale and arrangements of visual information (Abstract), the method comprising selectively defining a user-configurable format (Abstract: enable placement of user interface elements in the virtual space to define a virtual reality user interface for an interactive application), implementing said user-configurable format within a head mounted display (100). WVR suggests—where Osman does not disclose—streaming, from a user-defined stream URL defined within the user-configurable format (p. 3), video ingest and playout in a wearable form factor (p. 3), wherein an API is integrated into an application configured to accrue requirements of a hardware control supporting protocols (p. 1) including at least one of REST, TCP, UDP, RS-232, VISCA, RS-422, RS-485, USB HID, and handle routing and switching of video sources (p. 3: URL streaming inherently uses TCP/IP). It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the invention to combine the disclosures of Osman and WVR in order to have immersive experiences using the web and familiar interfaces.
Regarding claim 2, WVR suggests—where Osman does not disclose—wherein said API supports said configuration for signal architecture and user-control of said head mounted display (pp. 1-3), and a set of computer-executable instructions are stored on non-transient computer-readable media for integrating hardware and software components associated with said application (pp. 1-3). It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the invention to combine the disclosures of Osman and WVR in order to have immersive experiences using the web and familiar interfaces.
Regarding claim 3, Osman discloses associating encryption and security features with said streaming (¶ [0130]).
Regarding claim 4, Osman discloses a system for controlling, routing and viewing sources from COTS command center in HMD (Abstract), the system comprising a microprocessor, command and data storage (Fig. 5) facilitating interaction with at least one of, or a combination of, video routing, switching, USB KYM, USB HID, video processing hardware, camera control protocols and transcoding hardware, and other device or devices that support 3rd party control from within a User Interface in the VR environment (Abstract), a user interface comprising at least one of graphical buttons, faders, knobs, text display fields and input for graphical user interfaces in a user-configurable format (510 and ¶ [0092]), and a socket to a device receiving and processing control signals (Fig. 5), the device comprising a control system processor or a server (Fig 5), wherein the user-configurable format is implemented within a head mounted display (Figs. 6A-1 – 6A-2). WVR suggests—where Osman does not disclose—an API integrated into an application configured to accrue requirements of a hardware control supporting protocols (p. 1) including at least one of REST, TCP, UDP, RS-232, VISCA, RS- 422, RS-485, USB HID, and handle routing and switching of video sources (p. 3: URL streaming inherently uses TCP/IP), and video ingest and playout in a wearable form factor is streamed from a user-defined stream URL defined within the user-configurable format (p. 3).
Regarding claim 5, Osman discloses wherein multiple media streaming textures are created within a gaming engine or 3d virtual environment (¶ [0130]), a syntax sent from the gaming engine is assigned to an external control server when a user interacts with the interface in the gaming engine, within the gaming engine or 3d environment, when a user interacts with a component of the graphical user interface, user defined commands are sent to an external control server, and external control server parses and repackages a syntax sent from a gaming engine using the control server to communicate with one or more external hardware devices using associated communication protocol and syntax (¶ [0130]: game server may receive game commands directly from clients via network or game server system).
Regarding claim 7, Osman discloses wherein said microprocessor, command and data storage incorporates an open API built within a game engine facilitating said interaction with said at least one of, or a combination of, video routing, switching, USB KVM, USB HID, video processing hardware, camera control protocols and transcoding hardware, and other device or devices that support 3rd party control from within said User Interface in the VR environment (Abstract).
Regarding claims 8 and 9, Osman discloses wherein said user interface is within said gaming engine or 3d environment (Fig. 2).
Claim 6 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Osman in view of WVR and Phillips et al (US 2020/0037043 A1).
Regarding claim 6, Phillips suggests—where Osman does not disclose—wherein the multiple media streaming textures include objects that play streaming videos as a property of a surface within the 3d environment (Figs 28A – 28C). It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the invention to combine the disclosures of Osman and Phillips in order to facilitate placement of ads in the game scene.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to claim(s) 1 and 4 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.
.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to STEVE ROWLAND whose telephone number is (469) 295-9129. The examiner can normally be reached on M-Th 10-8. If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor Dmitry Suhol can be reached at (571) 272-4430. The fax number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is (571) 273-8300.
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.
Applicant may choose, at his or her discretion, to correspond with Examiner via Internet e-mail. A paper copy of any and all email correspondence will be placed in the appropriate patent application file. Email communication must be authorized in advance. Without a written authorization by applicant in place, the USPTO will not respond via e-mail to any correspondence which contains information subject to the confidentiality requirement as set forth in 35 U.S.C. 122.
Authorization may be perfected by submitting, on a separate paper, the following (or similar) disclaimer:
PNG
media_image1.png
18
19
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Recognizing that Internet communications are not secure, I hereby authorize the USPTO to communicate with me concerning any subject matter of this application by electronic mail. I understand that a copy of these communications will be made of record in the application file.
PNG
media_image1.png
18
19
media_image1.png
Greyscale
See MPEP 502.03 for more information.
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.
/STEVE ROWLAND/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3715