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 .
Response to Amendment
The amendment filed on 7/22/26 has been entered and made of record. Claims 1, 3-4, 10, 16 and 18-19 are amended. Claims 1-20 are pending.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of 35 U.S.C. 112(a):
(a) IN GENERAL.—The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor or joint inventor of carrying out the invention.
The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112:
The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor of carrying out his invention.
Claim 13 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(a) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), first paragraph, as failing to comply with the written description requirement. The claim(s) contains subject matter which was not described in the specification in such a way as to reasonably convey to one skilled in the relevant art that the inventor or a joint inventor, or for pre-AIA the inventor(s), at the time the application was filed, had possession of the claimed invention.
Claim 13 recites limitation “based on receiving, via the communication circuitry, a signal indicating that the reference object is identified via a screen displayed in the first external electronic device, from the first external electronic device, transmitting, to the first external electronic device, the first content”. There is no written description within the specification to support the limitation.
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.
Claim 13 is 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 13 recites limitation “based on receiving, via the communication circuitry, a signal indicating that the reference object is identified via a screen displayed in the first external electronic device, from the first external electronic device, transmitting, to the first external electronic device, the first content”. It is unclear how a signal, received from first external electronic device, determines a transmission of a first content to the first external electronic device.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 103 which forms the basis for all obviousness rejections set forth in this Office action:
A patent for a claimed invention may not be obtained, notwithstanding that the claimed invention is not identically disclosed as set forth in section 102 of this title, 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.
Claims 1-12 and 14-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kies et al. (US 2021/0084259 A1) in view of Ryan et al. (US 2023/0376168 A1).
As to Claim 1, Kies teaches A wearable electronic device, comprising: a display; communication circuitry; memory comprising one or more storage media storing one or more instructions; and at least one processor comprising processing circuitry, wherein the one or more instructions, when executed by the at least one processor (Kies discloses a HMD 100 in Fig 1A& 1C), cause the wearable electronic device to:
display via the display a screen; based on a reference object being identified via the screen displayed via the display, request, via the communication circuitry, a server device, a content to be displayed as associated with the reference object (Kies discloses “such as capturing an image of an environment, analyzing the captured image to identify at least one object in the environment” in [0011]; “In some embodiments, the device processors may be configured to replicate real-world scenarios, such as by anchoring the digital representation of virtual content to an empty chair” in [0043]; “For actual environments, the device processor may analyze the captured image to identify people and objects (e.g., desk, table, chairs, walls, etc.) within the environment” in [0037]; “a processor in a server computing device commutatively coupled to the smartphone or head mounted device, or a processor associated a cloud network or a cloud-based computing system” in [0078]. Ryan discloses servers in [0325]);
receive, via the communication circuitry, from the server device, information regarding the content (Kies, [0078]. Ryan, [0325]);
in case that information regarding the content is received while the wearable electronic device is connected to an external electronic device and a state of the external electronic device corresponds to a preset state for displaying the content visually associated with the reference object display, via the display, a first content identified by the server device with respect to both a first user of the wearable electronic device and a second user of the external electronic device as visually associated with the reference object (Kies discloses “A device processor (e.g., a processor 121 in a participant's smartphone 200a, a processor 114 in a head mounted device 100a, etc.) may be configured to collaborate with other device processors (e.g., a processor 121 in a participant's smartphone 200b, processor 114 in a head mounted device 100b) to intelligently determine the display properties of a digital representation of virtual content, such as a remote participant 202… The device processors may use the parameters to determine various display properties and render the digital representation of virtual content, such as a remote participant 202, so that the virtual content is placed at a game table 206 and appears to each co-located participant 204a, 204b to be in within a fixed area 208, such as with respect to a real or virtual gameboard 207 [57” in [0057]. Ryan further discloses when the respective set of criteria (e.g. the distance between two computer systems is within a distance threshold) are satisfied, auto-sharing-control setting or share-from-camera setting is enabled in [0374]; “FIG. 10D illustrates computer system 600 displaying the camera application user interface sometime after John has walked into the theme park while the computer system 600 is displaying the camera application user interface and John has met Kevin in the theme park. At FIG. 10D, a determination has been made (e.g., without any intervening user input) that computer system 600 should be configured to automatically add captured media to the shared library. At FIG. 10D, computer system 600 makes this determination based on detecting that a computer system associated with Kevin (e.g., who is shown via live preview 1030 with John) is near computer system 600 (e.g., and that the respective set of criteria are satisfied, as described above in relation to FIG. 10C… At FIG. 10D, computer system 600 also displays notification 1044 to indicate that computer system 600 has been recently automatically configured to add ( e.g., to automatically add) captured media to the shared library ("You are now in shared library mode")” in [0375]); and
In case that the information regarding the content is received while the wearable electronic device is connected to the external electronic device and a state of the external electronic device is different from the preset state display, via the display, a second content different from the first content identified by the server device with respect to the first user of the wearable electronic device as visually associated with the reference object (Ryan discloses “FIG. 10E illustrates computer system 600 displaying the camera application user interface sometime after Kevin has left the theme park… that computer system 600 should not be configured to automatically add media to the shared library…” in [0376].)
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the invention of Kies with the teaching of Ryan so that a determination of automatically adding captured media is based on the relative position distance between two computer systems.
As to Claim 2, Kies in view of Ryan teaches The wearable device of claim 1, wherein the first content corresponds to a first cluster common to the first user and the second user, and wherein the second content corresponds to a second cluster of the first user (Ryan discloses a shared content (first content) display to the users within a distance threshold, and personal content (second content) display to the users over a distance threshold in [0374-0376].)
As to Claim 3, Kies in view of Ryan teaches The wearable device of claim 1, wherein the one or more instructions, when executed by the at least one processor, cause the wearable electronic device to:
in case that information regarding the content is received while a distance between the wearable electronic device and the external electronic device is shorter than a reference distance and a state of the external electronic device corresponds to the preset state display, via the display, the first content; and in case that information regarding the content is received while the distance is longer than the reference distance and a state of the external electronic device corresponds to the preset state, display, via the display, the second content (Ryan discloses a criteria can be a distance threshold in [0374, 0376].)
As to Claim 4, Kies in view of Ryan teaches The wearable device of claim 1, wherein the one or more instructions, when executed by the at least one processor, cause the wearable electronic device to:
in case that information regarding the content is received while a value indicating interaction history between the first user and the second user is higher than a reference value and a state of the external electronic device corresponds to the preset state, display, via the display, the first content; and in case that information regarding the content is received while the value is lower than the reference value and a state of the external electronic device corresponds to the preset state, display, via the display, the second content (Ryan discloses a criteria can be a interaction frequency threshold in [0290].)
As to Claim 5, Kies in view of Ryan teaches The wearable device of claim 4, wherein the interaction history includes at least one of an interaction between the first user and the second user in a social-network-service, communication history, or call connection history between the first user and the second user (Ryan discloses a criteria can be a interaction frequency threshold in [0290].)
As to Claim 6, Kies in view of Ryan teaches The wearable device of claim 1, wherein the one or more instructions, when executed by the at least one processor, cause the wearable electronic device to:
display, via the display, a visual object for synchronizing the content displayed as visually associated with the reference object with the second user; and based on identifying an input on the visual object while the second content is displayed, change the content displayed as visually associated with the reference object from the second content to the first content (Kies discloses “A device processor (e.g., a processor in a smartphone, in a head mounted device worn by a co-located participant, in a mobile device commutatively coupled to a head mounted device, etc.) may be configured to collaborate with other device processors (e.g., in smartphones, in head mounted devices worn by other co-located participants, etc.) to intelligently determine the display properties of a digital representation of virtual content, such as a remote participant… For actual environments, the device processor may analyze the captured image to identify people and objects (e.g., desk, table, chairs, walls, etc.) within the environment, capture or compute data (e.g., via a sensor array or processor). For virtual environments, the device processor may determine shapes and locations of various virtual objects in the environment. The device processor may compute various parameters for each of the identified objects based on the captured/computed data, and send the determined parameters to other device processors” in [0037]; “The device processors may use the parameters to determine various display properties and render the digital representation of virtual content, such as a remote participant 202, so that the virtual content is placed at a game table 206 and appears to each co-located participant 204a, 204b to be in within a fixed area 208, such as with respect to a real or virtual gameboard 207” in [0057]; see also [0062, 0074, 0083, 0094]. Ryan discloses a change event after detecting tap input in [0268].)
As to Claim 7, Kies in view of Ryan teaches The wearable device of claim 1, wherein the one or more instructions, when executed by the at least one processor, cause the wearable electronic device to:
based on the reference object being identified via the screen displayed via the display, identify whether that the wearable electronic device is connected to the external electronic device (Kies discloses “in block 710, the device processor may identify other devices… that are in close physical proximity (e.g., in the same environment, area, game room, etc.) to the device processor” in [0087]. Ryan also discloses a distance threshold in [0374, 0376]); and
based on identifying that the wearable electronic device is connected to the external electronic device, transmit, via the communication circuitry, to the server device, a signal indicating that the wearable electronic device is connected to the external electronic device with the request (Ryan discloses “In some embodiments, the communication includes Wi-Fi communication and/or Bluetooth communication. In some embodiments, computer system 600 determines that computer system 600 is near the particular person based on the location of computer system 600 and the location of the computer system of the particular person during a time while the application camera user interface is being displayed.” in [0374].)
As to Claim 8, Kies in view of Ryan teaches The wearable device of claim 1, wherein the one or more instructions, when executed by the at least one processor, cause the wearable electronic device to:
based on identifying that the connection between the wearable electronic device and the external electronic device is released while the second content is displayed, change the content displayed as visually associated with the reference object from the first content to the second content (Kies discloses “Some aspects may include capturing an updated image of the environment, analyzing the captured updated image to determine whether a number, location, position, or size of the identified object has changed, determining an updated parameter for the identified object in response to determining that the location, position, or size of the identified object has changed, determining whether a difference between the determined parameter and the determined updated parameter exceeds a threshold value, and determining an updated display property for the digital representation of the remote participant in response to determining that the difference between the determined parameter and the determined updated parameter exceeds the threshold value” in [0009], see also [0071, 0094]. Ryan discloses a change event after detecting tap input in [0268].)
As to Claim 9, Kies in view of Ryan teaches The wearable device of claim 1, further comprises a camera, wherein the one or more instructions, when executed by the at least one processor, cause the wearable electronic device to:
obtain, via the camera, images; display, via the display, the screen using the images; and identify the reference object being identified via the screen displayed via the display using the images (Kies discloses “A device may be configured to determining display properties for virtual content in an environment with a plurality of physical participants by capturing an image of the environment, analyzing the captured image to identify at least one object in the environment, determining a parameter for the identified object, and determining a display property of a digital representation of virtual content based on the determined parameter” in Abstract; “The head mounted devices 100a-d may compute various parameters (e.g., depth, distance, orientation, etc.) for the identified objects/people in the environment. The smartphones 200a, 200b and/or head mounted devices 100a-100d may use the computed/analyzed parameters to determine that the digital representation of the remote participant 202 should be rendered in the person-sized gap 306” in [0071]; “As another example, one device processor within the environment may be designated as the controller for determining display properties, and may do so based on inputs (e.g., position and orientation information and images capture by other head mounted displays) and use the collected information to determine the coordinated display properties.” in [0094]; see also Fig 7-10. Here, each position and orientation information is corresponding to a specific FOV.)
As to Claim 10, Kies teaches A method executed in an electronic device including communication circuitry, the method comprising:
identifying, using the communication circuitry, a first external electronic device; identifying, using the communication circuitry, a second external electronic device (Kies discloses “circuitry for sending and/or receiving wireless communication signals to/from wireless communication networks” in [0028]; “Identify other devices (e.g., smartphones) that are in close physical proximity to the device (e.g., in the same environment)” in Fig 7);
based on the first external electronic device being identified as accessing a position associated with a reference object, transmitting, to the first external electronic device, a first content to be displayed as visually associated with the reference object in the first external electronic device, the first content identified with respect to a first user of the first external electronic device (Kies discloses “such as capturing an image of an environment, analyzing the captured image to identify at least one object in the environment” in [0011]; “In some embodiments, the device processors may be configured to replicate real-world scenarios, such as by anchoring the digital representation of virtual content to an empty chair” in [0043]; “For actual environments, the device processor may analyze the captured image to identify people and objects (e.g., desk, table, chairs, walls, etc.) within the environment” in [0037]; “a processor in a server computing device commutatively coupled to the smartphone or head mounted device, or a processor associated a cloud network or a cloud-based computing system” in [0078].);
based on the second external electronic device being identified as accessing the position while the first external electronic device is positioned in the position, transmitting, to both the first external electronic device and the second external electronic device, a second content to be simultaneously displayed as visually associated with the reference object in the first external electronic device and the second external electronic device, the second content identified with respect to both the first user and a second user of the second external electronic device, the second content being different from the first content, and the first content being replaced with the second content in the first external electronic device (Kies discloses “A device processor (e.g., a processor 121 in a participant's smartphone 200a, a processor 114 in a head mounted device 100a, etc.) may be configured to collaborate with other device processors (e.g., a processor 121 in a participant's smartphone 200b, processor 114 in a head mounted device 100b) to intelligently determine the display properties of a digital representation of virtual content, such as a remote participant 202… The device processors may use the parameters to determine various display properties and render the digital representation of virtual content, such as a remote participant 202, so that the virtual content is placed at a game table 206 and appears to each co-located participant 204a, 204b to be in within a fixed area 208, such as with respect to a real or virtual gameboard 207 [57” in [0057]. Ryan further discloses when the respective set of criteria (e.g. the distance between two computer systems is within a distance threshold) are satisfied, auto-sharing-control setting or share-from-camera setting is enabled in [0374]; “FIG. 10D illustrates computer system 600 displaying the camera application user interface sometime after John has walked into the theme park while the computer system 600 is displaying the camera application user interface and John has met Kevin in the theme park. At FIG. 10D, a determination has been made (e.g., without any intervening user input) that computer system 600 should be configured to automatically add captured media to the shared library. At FIG. 10D, computer system 600 makes this determination based on detecting that a computer system associated with Kevin (e.g., who is shown via live preview 1030 with John) is near computer system 600 (e.g., and that the respective set of criteria are satisfied, as described above in relation to FIG. 10C… At FIG. 10D, computer system 600 also displays notification 1044 to indicate that computer system 600 has been recently automatically configured to add ( e.g., to automatically add) captured media to the shared library ("You are now in shared library mode")” in [0375].)
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the invention of Kies with the teaching of Ryan so that a determination of automatically adding captured media is based on the relative position distance between two computer systems.
Claim 11 is rejected based upon similar rationale as Claim 2.
As to Claim 12, Kies in view of Ryan teaches The method of claim 11, further comprising:
based on account information of the first user accessed the first external electronic device, identifying the first cluster and the second cluster (Ryan discloses “In some embodiments, the second set of criteria includes a criterion that is satisfied when a determination is made that the one or more candidate users are associated with (e.g., identified by) one or more accounts (and/or profiles) that have been linked (e.g., in software) (e.g., linked as having a relationship ( e.g., a family relationship and/or a friend and/or a close friend)) (e.g., via contact associates (e.g., contact cards and/or contact information) and/or a shared family account) to one or more accounts of one or more users of the computer system” in [0291]. Here, family member may be first cluster, while non-family member refers to second cluster.)
As to Claim 14, Kies in view of Ryan teaches The method of claim 10, further comprising:
based on the second external electronic device being identified as accessing the position while the first external electronic device is positioned in the position, identifying a distance between the first external electronic device and the second external electronic device; and based on the distance being identified as shorter than a reference distance, transmitting, to both the first external electronic device and the second external electronic device, the second content (Ryan discloses when the respective set of criteria (e.g. the distance between two computer systems is within a distance threshold) are satisfied, auto-sharing-control setting or share-from-camera setting is enabled in [0374]; “FIG. 10D illustrates computer system 600 displaying the camera application user interface sometime after John has walked into the theme park while the computer system 600 is displaying the camera application user interface and John has met Kevin in the theme park. At FIG. 10D, a determination has been made (e.g., without any intervening user input) that computer system 600 should be configured to automatically add captured media to the shared library. At FIG. 10D, computer system 600 makes this determination based on detecting that a computer system associated with Kevin (e.g., who is shown via live preview 1030 with John) is near computer system 600 (e.g., and that the respective set of criteria are satisfied, as described above in relation to FIG. 10C… At FIG. 10D, computer system 600 also displays notification 1044 to indicate that computer system 600 has been recently automatically configured to add (e.g., to automatically add) captured media to the shared library ("You are now in shared library mode")” in [0375].)
As to Claim 15, Kies in view of Ryan teaches The method of claim 10, further comprising:
based on the second external electronic device being identified as accessing the position while the first external electronic device is positioned in the position, identifying a value indicating interaction history between the first user and the second user; and based on the value being identified as higher than a reference value, transmitting, to both the first external electronic device and the second external electronic device, the second content (Ryan discloses a criteria can be a interaction frequency threshold in [0290]; determining sharing or non-sharing content based on a criteria in [0374-0376].)
Claim 16 recites similar limitations as claim 1 but in a method form. Therefore, the same rationale used for claim 1 is applied.
Claim 17 is rejected based upon similar rationale as Claim 2.
Claim 18 is rejected based upon similar rationale as Claim 3.
Claim 19 is rejected based upon similar rationale as Claim 4.
Claim 20 is rejected based upon similar rationale as Claim 5.
Conclusion
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 extension fee 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 date of this final action.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to WEIMING HE whose telephone number is (571)270-1221. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday, 8:30am-5:00pm.
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, Tammy Goddard can be reached on 571-272-7773. 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.
/Weiming He/
Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2611
Prosecution Insights