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 .
Continued Examination Under 37 CFR 1.114
A request for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, including the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e), was filed in this application after final rejection. Since this application is eligible for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114. Applicant's submission filed on 12/4/2025 has been entered.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(b):
(b) CONCLUSION.—The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph:
The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the applicant regards as his invention.
Claims 21-24 and 26-40 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor (or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the applicant), regards as the invention.
Claim 21 recites the limitation "the origin of the first AR coordinate system" in line 13. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
First, the Examiner notes that in many contexts, the term “the origin” may find sufficient antecedent basis by implication, as a “coordinate system” inherently possesses an origin, such that generally, if a claim recites a “coordinate system,” a subsequent reference to “the origin” of that system is understood to refer to the inherent mathematical origin coordinates from which other coordinates are determine in relation. Thus initially, the Examiner’s initial review of such use of “the origin” was that it would be definite as it should simply refer to the only possible origin for each coordinate system. However, in the present claim, this inherent antecedent basis is insufficient and problematic to define the scope of the invention with reasonable certainty because the claim describes a dynamic process involving the modification of the first coordinate system where reference to “the origin of the first AR coordinate system” and “the same physical location” come after “applying an offset to the first AR coordinate system.” This creates two possible states for the “first AR coordinate system” and “the origin” of such a first AR coordinate system: an initial state of the coordinate system as it exists prior to the application of the offset; and a modified state of the coordinate system after the offset has been applied. Thus the recitation of “the origin” is indefinite because it is unclear to which of these two states the term refers. If “the origin” refers to the initial native coordinate system a device creates before applying an offset, then this would require the offset to be applied which synchronizes the first AR coordinate system in such a way that both initial native coordinate systems already have their initial origins set to the same physical location, where the application of the offset would not change the effective origin the devices uses. If “the origin” refers to the origin of the first AR coordinate system after an offset has been applied to it in its second state, then it is not required that the initial native origins of the device coordinate system are the same before applying any offset. Thus without further qualifying language such as introducing or defining an initial origin of the devices in some manner, or defining the origins of the devices earlier in the claim before modification of the coordinate system or perhaps defining the physical location both have as a common origin earlier in the claim, or for the broadest option, simply referring to “an origin” or the like initially, the scope of the claim is unclear. In the interest of compact prosecution the Examiner will interpret the claims as if they recite “an origin of the first coordinate system.”
Note that here line 14 recites “the origin of the second AR coordinate system” without antecedent basis for “the origin,” however this is not indefinite, illustrating how such language can at times be definite and in other contexts it is not. Here “the origin of the second AR coordinate system” cannot be seen to be modified or have multiple effective origins based on the claim language as the only origin of the second AR coordinate system would be the one implied by “the second AR coordinate system” which was referenced previously. Thus whatever origin is referenced can only be seen to refer to one possible origin as no other states for the second AR coordinate system are implied or possible. Likewise, use of “the same physical location” in line 13 is sufficiently definite even though no previous “physical location” or “same physical location” has previously been recited as “the same physical location” would refer to a state of being “the same” where “physical location” is implied by the AR coordinate system which is created necessarily in relation to the physical space or “reality” which is being augmented.
Note that independent claims 29 and 36 are rejected for the same reasons and are interpreted in the same manner as claim 1 as explained above.
Note that the dependent claims contain the same deficiency of the parent claims and are rejected for the same reasons.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
The following is a quotation of the appropriate paragraphs of 35 U.S.C. 102 that form the basis for the rejections under this section made in this Office action:
A person shall be entitled to a patent unless –
(a)(1) the claimed invention was patented, described in a printed publication, or in public use, on sale, or otherwise available to the public before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
(a)(2) the claimed invention was described in a patent issued under section 151, or in an application for patent published or deemed published under section 122(b), in which the patent or application, as the case may be, names another inventor and was effectively filed before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claim(s) 21-24, 26, 29-31, 33 and 36-38 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) and 102(a)(2) as being anticipated by Ishige et al1 (“Ishige”).
Regarding claim 21, Ishige teaches a method comprising:
generating, by a first device that utilizes a first augmented reality (AR) coordinate system, first location data for a second device that utilizes a second AR coordinate system that is different from the first AR coordinate system, wherein the first location data indicates a location of the second device in the first AR coordinate system (note “location data” even as specified as “location data indicates a location of the second device” is extremely broad as would be understood by one of ordinary skill of the art in the context of the invention as such location data could range from specific GPS coordinates accurate to a certain degree to some image feature data which is able to be analyzed to give some indication of a location of a second device as it is known in computer vision that for example camera parameters and image features may be used along with other measurements to determine a location of a device with respect to some location captured by such a device and thus any information which may in any way indicate a location of a second device to any degree of accuracy is within the scope of the claimed location data);
see Ishige, paragraphs 0057-0069 teaching utilizing a first device A utilizing a first AR coordinate system such as that generated where “each device generates the space coordinate system of the virtual space by analyzing the three-dimensional space structure of each real space” so that “the space coordinate systems of several devices may be configured to be coincident with the space coordinate system of the different device” such that this generated space coordinate system is a first AR coordinate system which must be synchronized/aligned with the space coordinate system generated by each device where as further taught in paragraphs 0070-0085 and figures 7A-10 “detector 152 can calculate a distance from the image capturing device 20 to the different device 50 (device B illustrated in FIG. 8) present in a predetermined direction in the recognized space (virtual space)” and “the coordinate of the center of the device B is represented by (0,0,d) in the space coordinate system (XYZ coordinate system) of the device A” and thus this d value represents the distance/location data that device A generates for Device B’s position as measured in Device A’s XYZ coordinate system, where along with the posture information being compared with between the devices this is first location data indicating a location of the second device B in the first AR coordinate system;
relatedly see Ishige, paragraphs 0086-0100 and figures 9-11, teaching “the process of the normalization of the space coordinate system of the different device (device B) in the information processing device 10 (device A)” such that device A is a first device utilizing a first AR coordinate system where the “space coordinate system” is an AR coordinate system and here “the normalizer 158 calculates a normalization value a for normalizing the space coordinate system of the device B from the distance to the device B in the AR space (virtual space) of the device A acquired in Step S112 and the distance to the device A in the device B received in Step S116” such that here is another example of first location data generated by the first device (generated meaning to cause to come into being in some format such as useable by the next processing stage for example) wherein this first location data indicates a location of the second device in the first AR coordinate system as this “distance” is based on the difference in position between the two devices and as “specifically, the normalization value a is calculated by dividing the distance (coordinate unit) to the device A in the space coordinate system of the device B with the distance (coordinate unit) to the device B in the space coordinate system of the device A” this means that here the position of device B is known in the first AR coordinate system );
receiving, by the first device from the second device, second location data for the second device, wherein the second location data indicates a location of the second device in the second AR coordinate system (see Ishige, paragraphs 0055-0066 as explained above which teaches posture information generated by the first device as first location information indicating the position of the second device in the first AR coordinate system and then as in paragraphs 0067-0085, “the normalizer 158 has a function of normalizing the space coordinate system of the different device based on the position information of the different device in the space coordinate system of the current device and the position information of the current device in the space coordinate system of the different device” where “specifically, the normalizer 158 calculates a normalization value for normalizing the space coordinate system of the different device based on the distance between the different device and the current device in the space coordinate system generated by the different device and the distance between the current device and the different device in the space coordinate system generated by the generator 156” and “various methods can be applied to calculate the distance between the current device and the different device in the space coordinate system” and “detector 152 can detect the distance from the information processing device 10 to the difference device 50 in the virtual space by, for example, analyzing the image of the different device 50 captured by the image capturing device 20.” Where “the detector 152 can, for example, obtain a value (a distance in the real space corresponding to a unit coordinate in the virtual space) by dividing the distance of the predetermined interval in the real space by the distance of the interval, in the virtual space, which corresponds to the predetermined interval, and multiply the relative distance by the obtained value to acquire the result of the multiplication as the absolute distance” and “normalization of the space coordinate system in the normalizer 158 is described with reference to FIG. 7B. The normalizer 158 acquires the coordinate unit to the device B in the space coordinate system (XYZ coordinate system) of the device A. In addition, the coordinate unit to the device A in the space coordinate system (X′Y′Z′ coordinate system) of the device B is acquired. The coordinate unit to the device A in the space coordinate system of the device B is received from the device B, which is the different device, by the transceiver 160” such that here then the first device receives second location data that indicates a location of the second device in the second AR coordinate system as the position data which is converted to distance data indicates the location of the second device in the second AR coordinate system;
note that additionally and alternatively, in line with the alternate explanation above wherein the first device generates first location data as in paragraphs 0077-0100 with respect to the normalization step, see Ishige, paragraphs 0077-0100 teaching that there is receiving of the second location data for the second device which indicates a location of the second device in the second AR coordinate system where “As illustrated in FIG. 8, the coordinate of the origin of the device A is represented by (0, 0, 0) in the space coordinate system (XYZ coordinate system) of the device A. The coordinate of the center of the device B is represented by (0, 0, d) in the space coordinate system (XYZ coordinate system) of the device B. Herein, d is a distance (coordinate unit) between the device A and the device B in the space coordinate system (XYZ coordinate system) of the device A”);
determining, based on the first location data and the second location data an offset between the first AR coordinate system and the second AR coordinate system (see Ishige, paragraphs 0055-0066 as explained above where the first location data corresponds to posture information indicating a position of the second device is aligned in its coordinate space with the first AR coordinate system and then teaches as in paragraphs 0067-0085 the second location data such as the relative distance from the first device in the second AR coordinate system and this allows to calculate an offset (considered to be any difference in which something is out of alignment with some dimension of a reference) between the first and second AR coordinate system where the value “a” may be considered an offset value where “normalization value a for normalizing the space coordinate systems of the device A and the device B is calculated according to the following Equation. (Normalization Value a)=(Distance (coordinate unit) to Device A in X′Y′Z′ Coordinate System)/(Distance (coordinate unit) to Device B in XYZ Coordinate System)” such that that determines the offset amount of the two space coordinate systems’ as it determines the difference between what each coordinate system refers to as a distance unit where then “coordinate (l, m, n) in the space coordinate system (X′Y′Z′ coordinate system) of the device B can be represented by using the normalization value a as follows. l=−ax, m=ay, n=−az+d” which allows the offset to be applied as further explained below ); and
applying the offset to the first AR coordinate system to synchronize the first AR coordinate system of the first device to the second AR coordinate system of the second device such that an origin of the first AR coordinate system is a same physical location in a three-dimensional space as the origin of the second AR coordinate system (see Ishige, wherein as in paragraphs 0067-0085 above the offset is applied through the relations where “normalization value a for normalizing the space coordinate systems of the device A and the device B is calculated according to the following Equation. (Normalization Value a)=(Distance (coordinate unit) to Device A in X′Y′Z′ Coordinate System)/(Distance (coordinate unit) to Device B in XYZ Coordinate System)” such that that determines the offset amount of the two space coordinate systems’ as it determines the difference between what each coordinate system refers to as a distance unit in relation to the calibrated distance d from the coordinate system which has its origin set by either device A or B, where then “coordinate (l, m, n) in the space coordinate system (X′Y′Z′ coordinate system) of the device B can be represented by using the normalization value a as follows. l=−ax, m=ay, n=−az+d” and here as can be seen with regard to figure 8, the origin of the first and second AR system both correspond to XYZ (0,0,0) as X’Y’Z’ is also used that as the basis of its origin in view of d and the transformation equation such that once the offset is applied to synchronize AR systems of A and B then an origin of the first AR coordinate system is a same physical location in a 3D space as an origin of the second AR coordinate system as both now treat the origin of the reference system as their mutual origin such that for example before the offset is applied, the first device’s origin is at its own location and after applying the offset by adding distance d, the device’s coordinate system is effectively shifted by distance d, where this distance d is the gap between devices meaning that shifting the system by d places the new effective origin at the location of the other device origin meaning that they share the same physical location for their origin; note that this synchronizes the first and second AR coordinate systems of the devices as for example as in paragraph 0084-0085 teaching “the space coordinate system of the device B may be normalized in the device A, and the normalization result may be transmitted to the device B. In addition, the normalization value a calculated in the device A may be transmitted to the device B. As illustrated in FIG. 8, the space coordinate system of the device B is represented by the space coordinate system of the device A by using the normalization value, so that it is possible to appropriately determine the relationship of the position of the virtual object disposed in the virtual space between the two devices” and for example this allows synchronized interactions with such objects for example as also disclosed in paragraphs 0037-0039 teaching “in the aforementioned technology, although a plurality of the users can recognize each other by sharing the virtual space, it is difficult to dispose a virtual object in the virtual space so that a plurality of devices shares the virtual object. Therefore, in view of the aforementioned issue, an information processing device 10 according to the embodiment is contrived. According to the information processing device 10, it is possible to easily share the virtual object superimposed on the virtual space that is recognized through analysis of the real space” and as in paragraphs 0041-0045 the purpose is for “information processing device 10 according to the embodiment shares the AR space with a different device, so that the AR object disposed in the AR space can be shared. For example, as illustrated in the explaining view 310 of FIG. 3, an AR ball as an example of the AR object disposed in the AR space is shared between a receiver and a sender, so that the AR ball can be treated like a ball in the real space. More specifically, the space coordinate system of the virtual space recognized by a device of the receiver side and the space coordinate system of the virtual space recognized by a device of the sender side are allowed to correspond to each other. Next, the virtual object is disposed in the space coordinate system shared by the two devices, so that information of the position, posture, or the like of the virtual object in the virtual space can be shared”;
additionally and alternatively, see Ishige, paragraphs 0064-0085 and figures 7A-8 as explained above where above after applying the offset, the effective origins of the device have now become equivalent, but both devices started out with a different initial physical location as their origin which corresponded to the center of each respective device in the 3D space, however, Ishige specifically teaches and suggests “in FIG. 8, although the origin of the space coordinate system is set to the central point of the device, the present invention is not limited to the example. A point other than the central point of the device, a point capable of determining the relationship of the position with respect to the device such as a point separated by a predetermined distance from the device may also be set to the origin” such that this teaches that the origin instead of being at the physical location of each device, is set at an origin some “predetermined distance” like d where then according to the principles of the relationship being described, both devices would have their offsets determined with respect to that origin, which would be the same physical location as both origins were initially, but synchronized through the simple geometric relationship where both use a same known origin as the basis of determining an offset and synchronization.
Regarding claim 22, Ishige teaches all that is required as applied to claim 1 and further teaches after applying the offset to the first AR coordinate system, displaying a virtual object at a common location in the first AR coordinate system at the first device and the second AR coordinate system at the second device (see Ishige, paragraphs 0037-0039 teaching “in the aforementioned technology, although a plurality of the users can recognize each other by sharing the virtual space, it is difficult to dispose a virtual object in the virtual space so that a plurality of devices shares the virtual object. Therefore, in view of the aforementioned issue, an information processing device 10 according to the embodiment is contrived. According to the information processing device 10, it is possible to easily share the virtual object superimposed on the virtual space that is recognized through analysis of the real space” and see also paragraph 0084 teaching “As illustrated in FIG. 8, the space coordinate system of the device B is represented by the space coordinate system of the device A by using the normalization value, so that it is possible to appropriately determine the relationship of the position of the virtual object disposed in the virtual space between the two devices” such that here this allows display of the virtual object at a common location in both device coordinate systems).
Regarding claim 23, Ishige teaches all that is required as applied to claim 21 and further teaches wherein the second device utilizes simultaneous location and mapping (SLAM) to determine the location of the second device (see Ishige, teaching that the second device may determine the location of the second device through processing the location simultaneously with mapping the location which generates a 3D coordinate system for the second device as in paragraphs 0065-0066 teaching “the generator 156 has a function of analyzing the three-dimensional space structure of the real space and generating the space coordinate system of the virtual space” and both the first and second device can determine their locations such that “after each device generates the space coordinate system of the virtual space by analyzing the three-dimensional space structure of each real space, the space coordinate systems of several devices may be configured to be coincident with the space coordinate system of the different device” and this means that a simultaneous location and mapping process is performed and for example as in paragraphs 0068-0069 “various methods can be applied to calculate the distance between the current device and the different device in the space coordinate system” and “the detector 152 can detect the position of the object as a relative position based on the extracted features while the position of the image capturing device 20 serves as a reference, and the generator 156 can perform the space recognition (generate a space coordinate) based on the detected relative position”).
Regarding claim 24, Ishige teaches all that is required as applied to claim 21 and further teaches wherein determining the offset comprises: determining first reference coordinates that indicate the location of the second device in the first AR coordinate system (see Ishige, paragraphs 0055-0066 and figures 5-6 teaching “the information processing device 10 includes a detector 152, a comparator 154, a generator 156, a normalizer 158, a transceiver 160, and the like” and “detector 152 has a function of detecting a different device which can transmit and receive predetermined information. The predetermined information is position information, posture information, and the like of the different device” and “detector 152 detects the posture information of the different device and supplies the posture information to the comparator 154” where “the posture information may be represented by the space coordinate system of each device” such that here the device 10 (which is “device A” as in figure 6) generates through the detector this first location information such as the “posture information” in “the space coordinates of each device” and the “different device” is the second device and based on this information “comparator 154 has a function of comparing the posture information of the different device supplied by the detector 152 with the posture information of the current device” and “comparator 154 compares the posture information of the different device with the posture information of the current device to determine whether or not the posture information of the two devices is coincident with each other” where “Whether or not the posture information is coincident with each other may be determined based on whether or not the space coordinate system of the different device and the space coordinate system of the current device are coincident with each other” where “comparator 154 can also obtain the posture information of the different device by analyzing the image of the different device which is captured by the image capturing device 20 and calculate a difference between the posture information of the different device thus obtained and the posture information of the current device” and for example “after each device generates the space coordinate system of the virtual space by analyzing the three-dimensional space structure of each real space, the space coordinate systems of several devices may be configured to be coincident with the space coordinate system of the different device” such that here the first device generates data about the second device as compared to the first AR coordinate system in order to determine if the posture of the device in the AR coordinate systems are coincident at the given locations of the devices and the postures may be related through a relationship where “If the coordinate system of the device A is set to (X, Y, Z) and the coordinate system of the device B is set to (X′, Y′, Z′), the device A and the device B have the following relationship. X=−X′, Y=Y′, Z=−Z′” );
obtaining second reference coordinates that indicate the location of the second device in the second AR coordinate system (see Ishige, paragraphs 0055-0066 as explained above which teaches posture information generated by the first device as first location information indicating the position of the second device in the first AR coordinate system and then as in paragraphs 0067-0085, “the normalizer 158 has a function of normalizing the space coordinate system of the different device based on the position information of the different device in the space coordinate system of the current device and the position information of the current device in the space coordinate system of the different device” where “specifically, the normalizer 158 calculates a normalization value for normalizing the space coordinate system of the different device based on the distance between the different device and the current device in the space coordinate system generated by the different device and the distance between the current device and the different device in the space coordinate system generated by the generator 156” and “various methods can be applied to calculate the distance between the current device and the different device in the space coordinate system” and “detector 152 can detect the distance from the information processing device 10 to the difference device 50 in the virtual space by, for example, analyzing the image of the different device 50 captured by the image capturing device 20.” Where “the detector 152 can, for example, obtain a value (a distance in the real space corresponding to a unit coordinate in the virtual space) by dividing the distance of the predetermined interval in the real space by the distance of the interval, in the virtual space, which corresponds to the predetermined interval, and multiply the relative distance by the obtained value to acquire the result of the multiplication as the absolute distance” and “normalization of the space coordinate system in the normalizer 158 is described with reference to FIG. 7B. The normalizer 158 acquires the coordinate unit to the device B in the space coordinate system (XYZ coordinate system) of the device A. In addition, the coordinate unit to the device A in the space coordinate system (X′Y′Z′ coordinate system) of the device B is acquired. The coordinate unit to the device A in the space coordinate system of the device B is received from the device B, which is the different device, by the transceiver 160” such that here then the first device receives second location data that indicates a location of the second device in the second AR coordinate system as the position data which is converted to distance data indicates the location of the second device in the second AR coordinate system;
note that additionally and alternatively, in line with the alternate explanation above wherein the first device generates first location data as in paragraphs 0077-0100 with respect to the normalization step, see Ishige, paragraphs 0077-0100 teaching that there is receiving of the second location data for the second device which indicates a location of the second device in the second AR coordinate system where “As illustrated in FIG. 8, the coordinate of the origin of the device A is represented by (0, 0, 0) in the space coordinate system (XYZ coordinate system) of the device A. The coordinate of the center of the device B is represented by (0, 0, d) in the space coordinate system (XYZ coordinate system) of the device B. Herein, d is a distance (coordinate unit) between the device A and the device B in the space coordinate system (XYZ coordinate system) of the device A”); and
determining the offset based on a difference between the first reference coordinates and the second reference coordinates (see Ishige, wherein as in paragraphs 0067-0085 above the offset is applied through the relations where “normalization value a for normalizing the space coordinate systems of the device A and the device B is calculated according to the following Equation. (Normalization Value a)=(Distance (coordinate unit) to Device A in X′Y′Z′ Coordinate System)/(Distance (coordinate unit) to Device B in XYZ Coordinate System)” such that that determines the offset amount of the two space coordinate systems’ as it determines the difference between what each coordinate system refers to as a distance unit where then “coordinate (l, m, n) in the space coordinate system (X′Y′Z′ coordinate system) of the device B can be represented by using the normalization value a as follows. l=−ax, m=ay, n=−az+d” and here as can be seen with regard to figure 8, the origin of the first and second AR system both correspond to XYZ (0,0,0) as X’Y’Z’ is also uses that as the basis of its origin in view of d and the transformation equation which transforms coordinates between each other as further taught in paragraphs 0093-0100 teaching “the coordinate designated in Step S202 is transformed into the coordinate of the device B in the AR space coordinate system based on the normalization value a calculated by the normalizer 158 (S206). As described above, the coordinate (l, m, n) of the device B in the space coordinate system can be represented as (−ax, ay, −az+d) by using the normalization value a and the distance d between the devices. Therefore, the coordinate (x, y, z) designated in Step S202 is transformed into the coordinate (−ax, ay, −az+d) of the device B in the AR space coordinate system” and “the coordinate transformed in Step S206 is transmitted to the device B through the transceiver 160 (S208). The device B receives the coordinate transmitted in Step S208 (S210). In this manner, the coordinate designated in the device A is transformed into the coordinate of the device B in the AR space coordinate system, and the transformed coordinate is transmitted to the device B, so that the space coordinate system of the AR space is shared. Therefore, it is possible to appropriately determine the relationship of the position of the AR object disposed in the AR space”).
Regarding claim 25, Ishige teaches all that is required as applied to claim 24 above and further teaches wherein the coordinate transformation includes an offset between the first reference coordinates and the second reference coordinates (see Ishige, paragraphs 0055-0066 as explained above where the first location data corresponds to posture information indicating a position of the second device is aligned in its coordinate space with the first AR coordinate system and then teaches as in paragraphs 0067-0085 the second location data such as the relative distance from the first device in the second AR coordinate system and this allows to calculate an offset (considered to be any difference in which something is out of alignment with some dimension of a reference) between the first and second AR coordinate system where the value “a” may be considered an offset value where “normalization value a for normalizing the space coordinate systems of the device A and the device B is calculated according to the following Equation. (Normalization Value a)=(Distance (coordinate unit) to Device A in X′Y′Z′ Coordinate System)/(Distance (coordinate unit) to Device B in XYZ Coordinate System)” such that that determines the offset amount of the two space coordinate systems’ as it determines the difference between what each coordinate system refers to as a distance unit where then “coordinate (l, m, n) in the space coordinate system (X′Y′Z′ coordinate system) of the device B can be represented by using the normalization value a as follows. l=−ax, m=ay, n=−az+d” which allows the offset to be applied).
Regarding claim 26, Ishige teaches all that is required as applied to claim 24 above and further teaches wherein the first device generates a first map using SLAM and the first map indicates the first reference coordinates (see Ishige, teaching that the second device may determine the location of the second device through processing the location simultaneously with mapping the location which generates a 3D coordinate system for the second device as in paragraphs 0065-0066 teaching “the generator 156 has a function of analyzing the three-dimensional space structure of the real space and generating the space coordinate system of the virtual space” and both the first and second device can determine their locations such that “after each device generates the space coordinate system of the virtual space by analyzing the three-dimensional space structure of each real space, the space coordinate systems of several devices may be configured to be coincident with the space coordinate system of the different device” and this means that a simultaneous location and mapping (SLAM) process is performed and for example as in paragraphs 0068-0069 “various methods can be applied to calculate the distance between the current device and the different device in the space coordinate system” and “the detector 152 can detect the position of the object as a relative position based on the extracted features while the position of the image capturing device 20 serves as a reference, and the generator 156 can perform the space recognition (generate a space coordinate) based on the detected relative position”); and wherein the second device generates a second map using SLAM and the second map indicates the second reference coordinates (see Ishige, as explained above wherein both devices generate maps using SLAM where the maps indicate the reference coordinates as the devices are localized into the mapped locations and the reference coordinates are within these mapped locations).
Regarding claims 29-31 and 33, the instant claims are directed toward a first electronic device comprising elements of “one or more processors” and “non-transitory memory” with programs including instruction to perform a method which is the same as the method performed in claims 21-22, 24 and 26, respectively. Ishige teaches the method performed by the first electronic device as well as the processor, memory and program elements corresponding to the method (see Ishige, paragraphs 0114-0123). In light of this, the limitations of claims 29-31 and 33, correspond to the limitations of claims 21-22 and 24 and 26, respectively; thus they are rejected on the same grounds as claims 21-22, 24 and 26, respectively.
Regarding claims 36-38, the instant claims are directed toward an embodiment of the invention as a “non-transitory computer-readable medium having instructions…when executed by a processor of a first device, cause the processor to perform operations comprising” the same functions as performed in the claims 21-22, and 24, respectively, as addressed above. Ishige also teaches such an embodiment corresponding to the method (see Ishige, paragraphs 0114-0123). In light of this, the limitations of claims 36-38 correspond to the limitations of claims 21-22, and 24, respectively; thus they are rejected on the same grounds as claims 21-22, and 24, respectively.
Double Patenting
The nonstatutory double patenting rejection is based on a judicially created doctrine grounded in public policy (a policy reflected in the statute) so as to prevent the unjustified or improper timewise extension of the “right to exclude” granted by a patent and to prevent possible harassment by multiple assignees. A nonstatutory double patenting rejection is appropriate where the conflicting claims are not identical, but at least one examined application claim is not patentably distinct from the reference claim(s) because the examined application claim is either anticipated by, or would have been obvious over, the reference claim(s). See, e.g., In re Berg, 140 F.3d 1428, 46 USPQ2d 1226 (Fed. Cir. 1998); In re Goodman, 11 F.3d 1046, 29 USPQ2d 2010 (Fed. Cir. 1993); In re Longi, 759 F.2d 887, 225 USPQ 645 (Fed. Cir. 1985); In re Van Ornum, 686 F.2d 937, 214 USPQ 761 (CCPA 1982); In re Vogel, 422 F.2d 438, 164 USPQ 619 (CCPA 1970); In re Thorington, 418 F.2d 528, 163 USPQ 644 (CCPA 1969).
A timely filed terminal disclaimer in compliance with 37 CFR 1.321(c) or 1.321(d) may be used to overcome an actual or provisional rejection based on nonstatutory double patenting provided the reference application or patent either is shown to be commonly owned with the examined application, or claims an invention made as a result of activities undertaken within the scope of a joint research agreement. See MPEP § 717.02 for applications subject to examination under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA as explained in MPEP § 2159. See MPEP § 2146 et seq. for applications not subject to examination under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA . A terminal disclaimer must be signed in compliance with 37 CFR 1.321(b).
The USPTO Internet website contains terminal disclaimer forms which may be used. Please visit www.uspto.gov/patent/patents-forms. The filing date of the application in which the form is filed determines what form (e.g., PTO/SB/25, PTO/SB/26, PTO/AIA /25, or PTO/AIA /26) should be used. A web-based eTerminal Disclaimer may be filled out completely online using web-screens. An eTerminal Disclaimer that meets all requirements is auto-processed and approved immediately upon submission. For more information about eTerminal Disclaimers, refer to www.uspto.gov/patents/process/file/efs/guidance/eTD-info-I.jsp.
Claims 21-23 and 29-31, 33 and 36-38 are rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claim 1 of US Patent No. 10803666 and in view of Ishige as explained below. Although the claims at issue are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other as will be explained below. Note the following table showing the independent claims with similarities rendered in bold.
Conflicting US Patent No. 10,803,666
Pending Application 18213040
Claim 1.
A method comprising:
at a first electronic device with one or more processors, a display, and one or more input devices:
transmitting, to a second electronic device, a feature set;
receiving, from the second electronic device, a selection of a feature from the feature set;
selecting, based on the selection of the feature, a reference location in a three-dimensional space;
obtaining, for the reference location in the three-dimensional space, first reference coordinates in an augmented reality coordinate system of the first electronic device;
obtaining, for the reference location in the three-dimensional space, second reference coordinates received from the second electronic device;
determining a coordinate transformation based on the first reference coordinates and the second reference coordinates; and
synchronizing the augmented reality coordinate system of the first electronic device with an augmented reality coordinate system of the second electronic device using the coordinate transformation.
Claim 21.
generating, by a first device that utilizes a first augmented reality (AR) coordinate system, first location data for a second device that utilizes a second AR coordinate system that is different from the first AR coordinate system, wherein the first location data indicates a location of the second device in the first AR coordinate system;
receiving, by the first device from the second device, second location data for the second device, wherein the second location data indicates a location of the second device in the second AR coordinate system;
determining, based on the first location data and the second location data an offset between the first AR coordinate system and the second AR coordinate system; and
applying the offset to the first AR coordinate system to synchronize the first AR coordinate system of the first device to the second AR coordinate system of the second device such that an origin of the first AR coordinate system is a same physical location in a three-dimensional space as the origin of the second AR coordinate system.
Thus it can be seen that the instant claim 21 and each independent claim is a somewhat broader version of the conflicting patented claim in many respects while making explicit certain features that may be present in the patented claims and thus is effectively a genus to the species recited in claim 1 of the conflicting patent. The remaining features of the dependent claims of the pending application are at least taught by Ishige as explained above. Thus modifying the conflicting claim 1 to arrive at the claimed invention for each dependent claim using the applicable techniques taught above by Ishige would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention as adding such features is known as explained above and doing so would yield predictable results and result in an improved system. Note that the abbreviated rationale above is provided in the interest of brevity and given that the claims are likely subject to further amendment.
Claims 21-40 are rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claim 1 of US Patent No. 11727648 and in view of Ishige as explained below. Note also that the limitations of conflicting claim 1 corresponds to the limitations of claims 27 and 34 of the pending application. Although the claims at issue are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other as will be explained below. Note the following table showing the independent claims with similarities rendered in bold.
Conflicting US Patent No. 11727648
Pending Application 18213040
Claim 1.
A method comprising:
at a first electronic device with a non-transitory memory and one or more processors:
selecting a reference location in a three-dimensional space;
obtaining, for the reference location, first reference coordinates in an augmented reality coordinate system of the first electronic device, wherein the first reference coordinates are associated with a first map of the three-dimensional space;
obtaining, from a second electronic device, a second map of the three-dimensional space that is associated with the second electronic device;
detecting a feature generated by the second electronic device, wherein the feature encodes second reference coordinates in an augmented reality coordinate system of the second electronic device;
determining a coordinate transformation based on a function of the first reference coordinates the second reference coordinates and a size of the first electronic device or the second electronic device;
synchronizing the augmented reality coordinate system of the first electronic device with the augmented reality coordinate system of the second electronic device using the coordinate transformation; and
while the augmented reality coordinate system of the first electronic device is synchronized with the augmented reality coordinate system of the second electronic device, modifying the first map based on the second map.
Claim 21.
generating, by a first device that utilizes a first augmented reality (AR) coordinate system, first location data for a second device that utilizes a second AR coordinate system that is different from the first AR coordinate system, wherein the first location data indicates a location of the second device in the first AR coordinate system;
receiving, by the first device from the second device, second location data for the second device, wherein the second location data indicates a location of the second device in the second AR coordinate system;
determining, based on the first location data and the second location data an offset between the first AR coordinate system and the second AR coordinate system; and
applying the offset to the first AR coordinate system to synchronize the first AR coordinate system of the first device to the second AR coordinate system of the second device such that an origin of the first AR coordinate system is the same physical location in a three-dimensional space as the origin of the second AR coordinate system.
Thus it can be seen that the instant claim is a somewhat broader version of the conflicting patented claim in many respects while making explicit certain features that may be present in the patented claims and thus is effectively a genus to the species recited in claim 1 of the conflicting patent as well as the other conflicting independent claims 11 and 19. The remaining features of the dependent claims of the pending application are at least taught by Ishige as explained above. Thus modifying the conflicting claim 1 to arrive at the claimed invention for each dependent claim using the applicable techniques taught above by Ishige would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention as adding such features is known as explained above and doing so would yield predictable results and result in an improved system. Note that the abbreviated rationale above is provided in the interest of brevity and given that the claims are likely subject to further amendment. Again it is important to note that claims 27 and 34, are anticipated by claim 1 as well, such that all claims are rejected. Here note that claims 27-28, 34-35 and 39-40 have their limitations regarding the size of the electronic device addressed by the conflicting claims, unlike for the other conflicting patent above.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 12/4/2025 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
Applicant first argues that the proposed amendments to the “applying the offset” step of the claims are not taught by Ishige. Applicant argues that this is because as in Figure 8, the origins shown for the different devices before any synchronization between devices is “XYZ(0,0,0)” and “X’Y’Z’(0,0,0)” where these are separated by a distance “d, from device A.” The Examiner respectfully disagrees. As explained above, the claim language initially thought to be sufficiently definite is rendered indefinite as “the origin of the first AR coordinate system” is used after the “applying the offset to the first AR coordinate system” such that as explained above it is not clear whether this refers to an initially used origin prior to offset being applied, or whether this refers to “the origin” of an offset and synchronized version of the first AR coordinate system. As noted above, since the claim requires that the state of “the first AR coordinate system” has been changed by “applying the offset…to synchronize the first AR coordinate system” then this introduces another possibility of what “the origin” of the first AR system now refers to. As explained in the rejection above, once the devices communicate their location data to one another including pose and distance calibrations, the effective origin of the non-reference device is changed to specifically refer to the same physical location as any time a device provides coordinates this “d” offset is applied such that objects are placed in relation to the same physical location being used as the origin. In a first embodiment as explained above, Ishige teaches that either device may serve as a reference device where this “d” offset is applied to the device designated as the origin. Thus since both relate to the same physical location through the offset, then after applying the offset to the first coordinate system to synchronize the first and second AR coordinate systems this is such that the origin of the first AR coordinate system which has been offset/synchronized is the same physical location in a 3D space as the origin of the second AR coordinate system.
Furthermore, as explained above, even were the limitation to be defined such that the initial origin of the first AR coordinate system and second AR coordinate system remain the same, this variation is also taught by Ishige specifically as in paragraph 0085 it is taught “in FIG. 8, although the origin of the space coordinate system is set to the central point of the device, the present invention is not limited to the example. A point other than the central point of the device, a point capable of determining the relationship of the position with respect to the device such as a point separated by a predetermined distance from the device may also be set to the origin.” This means that instead of the origin of each device being set with respect to a device center of one of the devices, both set their origin to “a point other than the central point of the device, a point capable of determining the relationship of the position with respect to the device such as a point separated by a predetermined distance from the device may also be set to the origin”. The Examiner notes that such an embodiment appears to be what was meant to be captured by the claims, though indefinitely as explained above. Regardless the Examiner notes that these additional teachings in Ishige thus anticipate another possible scope captured by the claims.
Applicant further argues with regard to “second location data indicates a location of the second device in the second AR coordinate system” that Ishige fails to teach this limitation, instead arguing that Ishige only teaches “a second location data that indicates the location of the first device (“device A”) in the second AR coordinate system of the second device (e.g., the “space coordinate system (X’Y’Z’ coordinate system) of the device B”)” as in paragraph 0079 of Ishige, because Ishige discloses “two location data of the two different devices” as where “normalizer 158 acquires the coordinate unit to the device B in the space coordinate system (XYZ coordinate system) of the device A” and “the coordinate unit to the device A in the space coordinate system (X’Y’Z’ coordinate system) of the device B.” The Examiner respectfully disagrees.
In Ishige, “location data” is not only equivalent to “the coordinate unit to the device A”. Rather, the claim very broadly uses “first location data” where this is simply data that “indicates a location of the second device in the first AR coordinate system” and “first location data for a second device” could be location data generated for a second device to use or could comprise an actual location for a second device that the first device generates somehow. Likewise regarding “second location data for the second device” which could be any type of location data related to the second data and could be location data of the actual location of the second device or could be any type of location information related to the second device so long as somehow it indicates a location of the second device in the second AR coordinate system. Thus when a device is designated the reference device coordinate system, either device A or B, during the gathering of the normalization information (including, but not limited to the “distance units” exchanged), each device generates location data comprising pose and distance calibration (with regard to a predetermined reference target such as one of the devices, or a remote point as explained above), and the first device generates such “first location data for a second device that utilizes a second AR coordinate system that is different…wherein the first location data indicates a location of the second device in the first AR coordinate system” as all of this information necessarily for normalization between device location is location data and this location data is for a second device to utilize. And when the second device generates its AR coordinate system it also generates similar normalization and calibration location information and when performing normalization to then synchronize the systems, that first device also must receive second location data for the second data that indicates a location of the device in the second AR coordinate system as for example this information tells the other device that based on the relation to the predetermined commonly used origin, it is located at some distance “d”. Regardless of which device is designated the reference, when exchanging location information, both establish a relationship through the offset “d” with respect to the origin (either a center of a device or a common remote origin), such that there are two location data of the second device in two AR coordinate systems of the first device and the second device, with a first device having first location data that indicates a location of the second device in the first AR coordinate system as both are aware the other device is located at a distance “d” and this location information is for the second device to use and indicates a second device is some distance d from the established initial origin. Then that first device that will be synchronized to the reference second device receives data from the reference device indicating the device is located at a proper position and orientation and at a certain distance from whatever is designated the origin, such that both establishing the same orientation and position with respect to the known distance, along with the “distance units” and the communication of this data to find the normalization value, to then apply as the offset, is where the first device receives such second location data of the second device in the second AR coordinate system. Thus it is all of the location data exchanged to determine the normalization value that indicates to both devices in both AR coordinate systems where exactly the other device is located in its own coordinate space as well as where it is in the other coordinate space, and not only the distance units.
The Examiner notes that more specifically limiting what is meant by “first location data for a second device” such as limiting whether this refers to location data that is for a second device to use, or whether this refer to a physical location of a second device in some specific way could be helpful in distinguishing over the prior art or at least make the claim language more clear as to what exactly is meant to be covered. Additionally, further defining, “first location indicates a location of the second device in the first AR coordinate system” such as how does it indicate the location, or what type of location is indicated, or how exactly is it indicated in the first AR coordinate system, could be helpful again in distinguishing over the prior art or at least make the claim language more clear as to what exactly is meant to be covered. Furthermore, more specific definition of location data and AR coordinate system data earlier in the claim could not only help to distinguish and more clearly define the claim for these earlier limitations, but could also help to relieve indefiniteness later in the claim that arises from such extremely broad initial recitations.
Applicant makes no more specific arguments regarding the claims, and thus all claims stand rejected as fully explained above.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Lee et al (US PGPUB NO. 20110298824) – see paragraphs 0050-0066 and figures 4A and 4b teaching for example that it is known to have two devices to establish their own AR coordinate systems and exchange location information so that the AR coordinate systems can be synchronized where each device has an offset established from the other device with respect to both devices having their origins located at the same physical location in space. For example as in figure 4A, devices may establish an origin by both designating the same initial physical location as their AR coordinate system origin, and as in figure 4B, “alternatively or in addition to using a common physical reference position as in figure 4A, a reference object within the real environment may be used as a reference position”. Further see paragraphs 0072-0107 further teaching “in a case where the arrangements of FIGS. 4A and 4B are both used, the positional relationship between the common reference position 1010 and the AR marker 1020 may be determined so that a smooth handover between the two methods can be achieved, and/or any disparity in estimates between the two techniques can be tracked. For example, a PED may determine its position relative to both the common reference position and the AR marker, and so determine the relation directly between the AR marker and the common reference position, so that knowledge of one can be used to calculate or verify the position of the other.”
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to SCOTT E SONNERS whose telephone number is (571)270-7504. The examiner can normally be reached Mon-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, Xiao Wu can be reached at (571) 272-7761. 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.
/SCOTT E SONNERS/Examiner, Art Unit 2613
/XIAO M WU/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2613
1 US PGPUB NO. 20120314936