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 .
DETAILED ACTION
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to the pending claims have been considered but are moot because of the new ground of rejection below.
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 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.
Claim(s) 1-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Berg (US 2003/0083132 A1) in view of Rosenblatt (US 2015/0379808 A1) and further in view of Borke (US 2016/0267699 A1).
1. Berg discloses a gaming system comprising: a processor; and a memory device that stores a plurality of instructions, which when executed by the processor [0009], cause the processor to:
cause a display, by a display device, of a play of a wagering game by a player [0009] (claim 20);
cause a display, by the display device, of an indication of an image use triggering event in association with a symbol display having a plurality of symbols thereon [0012], [0022];
cause a display, by the display device, of an indication of receipt of a player image of the player [0012], [0022];
cause a display, by the display device, of an enhanced player image in a position on the symbol display replacing one of the symbols on the symbol display, wherein the enhanced player image is formed from the player image of the player and a pose image based on a person other than the player, wherein the pose image shows a pose of the person that is different from a pose of the player in the player image [0012], [0022], (claim 35);
cause a display, by the display device, of an indication that the enhanced player image is part of a winning symbol combination [0012], [0022]; and
thereafter, cause a display, by the display device, of the symbol display without the enhanced player image (i.e. players image is erased from the system and disappears from the display at the end of play of game), [0022].
If not inherent, Rosenblatt discloses using an image of the player as a symbol in a reel game to trigger a winning symbol combination (Abstract, Figs. 6–8, [0062]–[0065]). It would have been obvious to modify Berg with Rosenblatt to provide a more personalized reel game.
Berg does not specifically disclose but Borke discloses extracting a skeletal model from a tracked person and processing it as a simplified stick-figure skeleton that “shows a pose of the subject” but “does not show the subject.” This stick-figure pose data is fed as direct input to the avatar rendering/synthesis pipeline (functionally equivalent to an image-to-image translation software program) to create an enhanced/posed avatar whose body is based on the stick-figure pose while the head/face can be supplied from a separate player image, [0059], [0071]-[0074], [0093], (Fig. 6).
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skilled in the art to use Borke’s stick-figure pose image (derived from a subject other than the player) as the “pose image” input to an image-to-image translation software program together with Berg’s player image to create the enhanced player image and would have been motivated for a more efficient, real-time pose rendering with reduced storage and avoidance of undesired player poses as expressly recognized by Borke [0096].
2. Berg, Rosenblatt and Borke discloses the gaming system of Claim 1, which comprises a camera configured to take a picture of the player to obtain the player image; Berg [0012].
3. Berg, Rosenblatt and Borke discloses the gaming system of Claim 1, which is configured to obtain the player image from a remote source; Rosenblatt, [0023].
4. Berg, Rosenblatt and Borke discloses the gaming system of Claim 1, wherein the player image comprises the face and hair of the player, and the enhanced player image is based on the face and hair of the player, and the pose of the subject in the pose image for the body of the enhanced player image; Berg [0012], (claims 35-36).
5. Berg, Rosenblatt and Borke discloses the gaming system of Claim 4, wherein the pose image is a stick figure pose image that shows a stick figure having the pose of the subject; Berg (i.e. cartoon character), (claim 35); Borke [0059], [0071]-[0074], [0093], (Fig. 6).
6. Berg, Rosenblatt and Borke discloses the gaming system of Claim 1, wherein the pose image is a stick figure pose image that shows a stick figure having the pose of the subject; Berg (i.e. cartoon character), (claim 35); Borke [0059], [0071]-[0074], [0093], (Fig. 6).
7-9. Berg, Rosenblatt and Borke discloses the gaming system of Claim 1, which is configured to receive the pose image from a sequence creation system separate from the gaming system and separate from the image-to-image translation software program or to receive the pose image from a sequence creation system separate from the gaming system and separate from the image-to-image translation software program, wherein the sequence creation system is configured to use a human image processing software program to create the pose image from a human pose image of the subject other than the player, which is configured to use an image-to-image translation software program to create the enhanced player image based on the pose of the subject in the pose image and the player image; Borke [0059], [0071]-[0074], [0093], (Fig. 6).
10. Berg, Rosenblatt and Borke discloses the gaming system of Claim 1, which is configured to execute the image-to-image translation software program to create the enhanced player image based on the pose of the person in the pose image and the player image; Berg (claim 35-36); Borke [0059], [0071]-[0074], [0093], (Fig. 6).
11-14. Berg, Rosenblatt and Borke discloses a gaming system comprising: a camera; a processor; and a memory device that stores a plurality of instructions, which when executed by the processor, cause the processor to: cause a display, by a display device, of a play of a wagering game by a player; cause a display, by the display device, of an indication of an image use triggering event in association with a symbol display having a plurality of symbols thereon; cause the camera to take a picture of the player to obtain a player image of the player; receive a stick figure pose image from a sequence creation system that is separate from the gaming system, wherein the stick figure pose image shows a stick figure based on a subject other than the player and does not show the subject, wherein a pose of the stick figure in the stick figure pose image is different from a pose of the player in the player image; cause an enhanced player image to be created using the player image of the player and the stick figure pose image as inputs to an image-to-image translation software program, wherein the enhanced player image is based on the pose of the stick figure in the stick figure pose image for a body of the enhanced player image and does not show the stick figure and does not show the subject; cause a display, by the display device, of the enhanced player image in a position on the symbol display replacing one of the symbols on the symbol display; cause a display, by the display device, of an indication that the enhanced player image is part of a winning symbol combination; and thereafter, cause a display, by the display device, of the symbol display without the enhanced player image as similarly discussed above.
15-19. Berg, Rosenblatt and Borke discloses a gaming system comprising: a camera; a processor; and a memory device that stores a plurality of instructions, which when executed by the processor, cause the processor to: cause a display, by a display device, of a play of a wagering game by a player; cause a display, by the display device, of an indication of an image use triggering event in association with a symbol display having a plurality of symbols thereon; cause the camera to take a picture of the player to obtain a player image of the player; receive a pose image from a sequence creation system that is separate from the gaming system and separate from an image-to-image translation software program, wherein the pose image is based on a subject other than the player, the pose image shows a pose of the subject that is different from a pose of the player in the player image, and the pose image does not show the subject; cause an enhanced player image to be created using the player image of the player and the pose image as inputs to the image-to-image translation software program, wherein the enhanced player image is based on the pose of the subject in the pose image for a body of the enhanced player image; cause a display, by the display device, of the enhanced player image in a position on the symbol display replacing one of the symbols on the symbol display; and thereafter, cause a display, by the display device, of the symbol display without the enhanced player image as similarly discussed above.
20. Berg, Rosenblatt and Borke discloses the gaming system of Claim 15, wherein the symbol display is one of part of a play of the wagering game and a secondary game, Berg [0013].
Filing of New or Amended Claims
The examiner has the initial burden of presenting evidence or reasoning to explain why persons skilled in the art would not recognize in the original disclosure a description of the invention defined by the claims. See Wertheim, 541 F.2d at 263, 191 USPQ at 97 (“[T]he PTO has the initial burden of presenting evidence or reasons why persons skilled in the art would not recognize in the disclosure a description of the invention defined by the claims.”). However, when filing an amendment an applicant should show support in the original disclosure for new or amended claims. See MPEP § 714.02 and § 2163.06 (“Applicant should specifically point out the support for any amendments made to the disclosure.”). Please see MPEP 2163 (II) 3. (b)
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.
Correspondence
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to SENG H LIM whose telephone number is (571)270-3301. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday (9-5).
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, David L. Lewis can be reached at (571) 272-7673. 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.
/Seng H Lim/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3715
Prosecution Insights