DETAILED ACTION
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 101
35 U.S.C. 101 reads as follows:
Whoever invents or discovers any new and useful process, machine, manufacture, or composition of matter, or any new and useful improvement thereof, may obtain a patent therefor, subject to the conditions and requirements of this title.
Claims 10-13 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 101 because the claimed invention is directed to an abstract idea without significantly more. Specifically the claims are directed to the abstract idea of a mental process. Claim 10 recites “receiving… a vibration description file corresponding to the target vibration scenario associated with a virtual object, the vibration description file including (i) a first parameter that indicates a location of the virtual object, and (ii) a second parameter indicating an attribute of the vibration; determining…a target vibration object from among a plurality of vibration objects of the service terminal based on the location of the virtual object;” These limitations as claim describe a series of judgement whereby a human could observe an application and then mentally determine which a haptic vibration effect to associate with a particular application scenario. For example, a game designer determining what haptic effects, (e.g. timing, duration, strength) should be associated with particular moments in a game based on a location of a game object and some other parameters. Generic recitation of a “file” in this case could amount to little more than writing the determined vibration scenario down.
This judicial exception is not integrated into a practical application because the additional elements of performing the method by “processing circuitry of a service terminal” Represent mere instructions to implement the abstract idea on a computer, see 2106.05(f) and “driving the target vibration object to vibrate based on the attribute of the vibration” simply recite outputting the haptic feedback in a well-known and high-level manner and represent insignificant extra solution outputting activity, see MPEP 2106.05(g). As such these limitations fail to integrate the abstract idea into a practical application.
Dependent Claims 11-12 represent additional abstract observations and judgements made in determining the vibration scenario and vibration description information. In relation to Claims 11 examiner considers at least the parameters of “vibration start time,” “vibration end time,” “vibration duration,” and “vibration intensity” to be design judgements that could be made in the mind of a human. As such, these limitations fail to integrate the abstract idea into a practical application. Dependent Claim 13 further recites insignificant extra solution outputting activity in driving the vibration. As such, these limitations fail to integrate the abstract idea into a practical application.
The claim(s) does/do not include additional elements that are sufficient to amount to significantly more than the judicial exception because the additional elements of “processing circuitry of a service terminal” and “driving the target vibration object to vibrate based on the attribute of the vibration” represent routine and conventional computer activity well-known in the art. See for example Heubel, US 2019/0163271 Par. 3 which teaches that conventional video game devices include conventional haptic feedback systems in order to provide tactile feedback such as vibration to a user. And where those systems include actuators in user devices that are sent signals according to events in a simulated or virtual environment to drive the vibration effects. As such, even when considered as a whole, the additional elements fail to add significantly more than the abstract idea.
Claims 11-12 represent additional abstract observations and judgements made in determining the vibration scenario and vibration description information. In relation to Claims 11 examiner considers at least the parameters of “vibration start time,” “vibration end time,” “vibration duration,” and “vibration intensity” to be design judgements that could be made in the mind of a human. As such, the limitations of these dependent claims fail to add significant more than the abstract idea. Claim 13 further recites routine and conventional haptic feedback output outputting activity as described above in reference to Heubel. As such, the limitations of these dependent claims fail to add significant more than the abstract idea.
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)(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.
Claims 10-13 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) as being anticipated by Huang et al., US 2023/0251714.
In Reference to Claim 10
A method for generating a vibration for a target vibration scenario, the method comprising: receiving, by processing circuitry of a service terminal (Fig. 1 and Par. 88. See Fig. 4 and Par. 127 which teaches a mobile phone as a terminal), a vibration description file corresponding to the target vibration scenario associated with a virtual
Object (Fig. 7A and Par. 135-137 which teaches determining a vibration response for a particular game scene. See Table 1 and Par. 139 which teaches that this can use an XML file to map between the game scenario and the vibration output), the vibration description file including (i) a first parameter that indicates a location of the virtual object (Table 1, Par. 141, and 204 which teaches game scenarios that indicate a direction. Such as “Vibration caused by footsteps, indicating that a person is coming from the left side”, and “Vibration caused by footsteps, indicating that a person is coming from the left side” and this can include a corresponding mapping to a left or right motor. See also Fig. 4 and Par. 130) and (ii) a second parameter indicating an attribute of the vibration; determining, by the processing circuitry (Par. 104-105 which teaches that the vibration mode mapping includes a variety of parameters and “The parameters of the vibration waveform may include but are not limited to: vibration strength, a vibration start time, vibration duration, and a vibration type.”), a target vibration object from among a plurality of vibration objects of the service terminal based on the location of the virtual object (Table 1 which teaches scenarios based on the location of a virtual object, i.e. footsteps from an object to the left or right, and Fig. 7A-&B and Par. 137, 161-198 which teaches where the method determines which motors to vibrate and how to vibrate them based on the device configuration file and the game scenario parameters. See Tables 2-4); and driving the target vibration object to vibrate based on the attribute of the
Vibration (Fig. 7B and Par. 104-105 and 197-198).
In Reference to Claim 11
Huang et al. teaches where the second parameter indicates at least one of a vibration start time, a vibration duration, a vibration end time, a vibration frequency, or vibration intensity (Par. 104-105 “The parameters of the vibration waveform may include but are not limited to: vibration strength, a vibration start time, vibration duration, and a vibration type” and Par. 134 “When the vibration mode is different, at least one of the following vibration parameters of the motor in the electronic device is different: the quantity of vibrating motors, vibration strength, start vibration time, vibration duration, and a vibration type. The vibration type may be but is not limited to rotor vibration and/or linear vibration.”).
In Reference to Claim 12
Huang et al. teaches obtaining, by the processing circuitry, vibration capability information indicating a vibration capability of the service terminal, the vibration capability information comprising M vibration objects in the service terminal and attribute parameters of the M vibration objects; and selecting the target vibration object from the M vibration objects based on the location of the virtual object (Fig. 7B and Par. 159, 176 and 182-195. See in particular Par. 159 “Optionally, in this embodiment of this application, the KIT layer may include an API for querying the quantity of motors, and the application layer may invoke the API to query and obtain the quantity of motors.” See Fig. 4, Par. 130 which teaches where the location of motors in the terminal is determined, such as left and right motors and Table 1 and Par. 204 which teaches where a vibration scenario is based on the location of a virtual object in the game scenario. I.e. footsteps from a virtual object coming from the left or the right and driving the motor on the left or the right).
In Reference to Claim 13
Huang et al. teaches activating the selected vibration object to vibrate based on the second parameter included in the vibration description file (Fig. 7A-7B, Par. 134 and 197-198. Table 1 and Par. 139 which teaches storing the vibration mapping and storing it as an XML file).
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 1-9 and 14-20 allowed.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 08/25/2025 have been fully considered. Regarding Claims 1-9 and 14-20 in light of applicant’s amendments to the claims, rejection under 35 U.S.C. 101 and 35 U.S.C. 102/103 have been withdrawn. However, examiner notes that amended Claim 10 is significantly broader claim scope than the proposed amendments discussed in the interview on 07/22/2025, including lacking any recitation of the vibration waveform and vibration waveform editor as well as the simulation with the initial parameters of the virtual object for determination of the vibration description file. New grounds of rejection under 35 U.S.C. 101 and 102 have been provided to better address the new scope of the amended claims 10-13.
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.
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to CARL V LARSEN whose telephone number is (571)270-3219. The examiner can normally be reached Monday through Friday; 10:00 am - 6:30 pm.
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, Dmitry Suhol can be reached at (571) 272-4430. 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.
/CARL V LARSEN/ Examiner, Art Unit 3715