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 .
The Applicant’s amendment and argument received on 09/29/2025 has been considered. It is noted that claims 1-36 had been cancelled. Claims 37, 40, 48, 51, and 56 have been amended.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
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.
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 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.
Claims 37-40, 44, 46-51, 55, and 56 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Scott et al (US 2010/0045701) in view of Huang et al (US 2013/0124326).
Regarding claims 37, 44, 46-48, 55, and 56: Scott et al discloses a computer-implemented method for network-centric augmented reality processing, the computer-implemented method comprising: receiving camera data associated with an augmented reality environment representing a premises, wherein the camera data is captured by a camera circuitry (see paragraphs [0060]-[0069], showing camera data for mapping and providing input for augmented reality); receiving at least one indication associated with a plot corner set comprising a plurality of plot corners configured to be generated as the camera circuitry navigates the premises, the at least one indication associated with a portion of the camera data (see paragraphs [0060]-[0069], showing camera data for mapping and providing input for augmented reality); and generating an environment plot by mapping each plot corner in the plot corner set as a corner location in the augmented reality environment associated with the premises (see paragraphs [0060]-[0069], showing camera data for mapping and providing input for augmented reality).
In an analogous invention, Huang et al teaches receiving via one of more user interactions with an augmented reality interface, at least one indication associated with a plot corner set (see paragraph [0008], showing a user interface for receiving user interaction with the dynamic digital content).
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the invention to modify Scott’s camera data as taught by Huang’s user interface interactions for the purpose of having a system for capturing objects in a real world and displaying in a mixed augmented reality and having an interface for user interaction with that augmented reality. This yields the expected result of increasing the user’s satisfaction and enjoyment in the system.
Regarding claims 38 and 49: Scott et al discloses wherein receiving the at least one indication associated with the plot corner set comprises: receiving a first indication in response to user input data indicating existence of a first plot corner in the camera data (see paragraphs [0004], [0005]); and mapping, based on the camera data and first mapping device position data, the first plot corner to a first corner location in the augmented reality environment (see paragraphs [0060]-[0069]).
Regarding claims 39 and 50: Scott et al discloses the computer-implemented method further comprising: receiving second mapping device position data indicating traversal to a second mapping device position (see paragraphs [0060]-[0069], showing camera data for mapping and providing input for augmented reality); receiving a second indication in response to second user input data indicating existence of a second plot corner in the camera data (see paragraphs [0004], [0005], showing user input being tracked and detected); and mapping, based on the camera data and the second mapping device position data, the second plot corner to a second corner location in the augmented reality environment (see paragraphs [0060]-[0069]).
Regarding claims 40 and 51: Scott et al discloses wherein receiving the at least one indication associated with the plot corner set comprises: receiving the camera data associated with first mapping device position data; detecting a first plot corner in the camera data (see paragraphs [0060]-[0069]); and mapping, based on the second mapping device position data and the camera data, the first plot corner to a first corner location in the augmented reality environment (see paragraphs [0060]-[0069]).
Claims 41-43, 45, and 52-54 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Scott et al (US 2010/0045701) in view Huang et al (US 2013/0124326) and further in view of Berelejis et al (US 2015/0347850).
Regarding claims 41, 45, and 52: Scott et al discloses the invention substantially as claimed. However, Scott et al did not explicitly disclose the computer-implemented method further comprising: receiving a second indication of a networked device based on the camera data; and mapping the networked device with a networked device location in the augmented reality environment, wherein the environment plot further comprises the networked device location.
In an analogous invention, Berelejis et al teaches the computer-implemented method further comprising: receiving a second indication of a networked device based on the camera data; and mapping the networked device with a networked device location in the augmented reality environment, wherein the environment plot further comprises the networked device location (see abstract; paragraphs [0019]-[0023]).
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the invention was made to modify Scott’s camera data as taught by Berelejis’ networked device for the purpose of having a system for capturing objects in a real world and displaying in a mixed augmented reality. This yields the expected result of increasing the user’s satisfaction and enjoyment in the system.
Regarding claims 42 and 53: Scott et al discloses the invention substantially as claimed. However, Scott et al did not explicitly disclose wherein receiving the second indication of the networked device comprises: receiving the second indication in response to user input data indicating existence of the networked device in the camera data; and mapping, based on the camera data and a first mapping device position data the networked device to the networked device location in the augmented reality environment.
In an analogous invention, Berelejis et al teaches wherein receiving the second indication of the networked device comprises: receiving the second indication in response to user input data indicating existence of the networked device in the camera data; and mapping, based on the camera data and a first mapping device position data the networked device to the networked device location in the augmented reality environment (see abstract; paragraphs [0019]-[0023]).
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the invention was made to modify Scott’s camera data as taught by Berelejis’ networked device for the purpose of having a system for capturing objects in a real world and displaying in a mixed augmented reality. This yields the expected result of increasing the user’s satisfaction and enjoyment in the system.
Regarding claims 43 and 54: Scott et al discloses the invention substantially as claimed. However, Scott et al did not explicitly disclose wherein receiving the second indication of the networked device comprises: receiving the camera data associated with first mapping device position data; detecting the networked device in the camera data; and mapping, based on the first device positioning data and the camera data, the networked device to the networked device location in the augmented reality environment.
In an analogous invention, Berelejis et al teaches wherein receiving the second indication of the networked device comprises: receiving the camera data associated with first mapping device position data; detecting the networked device in the camera data; and mapping, based on the first device positioning data and the camera data, the networked device to the networked device location in the augmented reality environment (see abstract; paragraphs [0019]-[0023]).
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the invention was made to modify Scott’s camera data as taught by Berelejis’ networked device for the purpose of having a system for capturing objects in a real world and displaying in a mixed augmented reality. This yields the expected result of increasing the user’s satisfaction and enjoyment in the system.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to claims 37-56 have been considered but are moot because the new ground of rejection does not rely on the combination of reference applied in the prior rejection of record for any teaching or matter specifically challenged in the argument.
Conclusion
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 ADETOKUNBO OLUSEGUN TORIMIRO whose telephone number is (571)270-1345. The examiner can normally be reached Mon-Fri (8am - 4pm).
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, Peter Vasat, can be reached on (571)270-7625. 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.
/ADETOKUNBO O TORIMIRO/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3715