DETAILED ACTION
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 10 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 10 recites the limitation "the first orientation information" in line 6. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
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 1-2, 5, 9, 15, 17, 20 and 22 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 a Mental Process. The claim(s) recite(s) “in response to an interaction operation… providing a first operation region, wherein the first operation region comprises at least one signal identifier; in response to a first touch operation acting on the first operation region, determining…a target signal identifier from the at least one signal identifier; providing…a second operation region and at least one first game object identifier” and “in response to a second touch operation acting on the second operation region, determining a target game object identifier from the at least one first game object identifier; and in response to an end of the second touch operation, sending a target signal for the target game object identifier according to the target signal identifier.” This amount to a mental determination of the targeting of game actions via a player providing inputs via touch. However, these claims could include a player touching regions of a physical game board such as in a board game or table game to indicate their game selections, and determinations that could be mentally performed by a human observing those actions.
This judicial exception is not integrated into a practical application because the additional elements of a terminal, processor, memory, computer readable medium, graphical user interface, and recitation of where steps are performed “by the terminal” amount to mere instructions to implement the abstract idea on a computer when claimed so generically at such a high level, see MPEP 2106.05(f). Further, recitation of touch operations for input amount to either abstract recitation of judging touch locations on a gaming display, which could also be performed on a physical display as described above, or at best amount to insignificant extra solution input activity, see MPEP 2106.05(g). As such the additional limitations fail to integrate the abstract idea into a practical application.
Dependent Claim 2, 5, 17, and 20 recite additional abstract element of the game or game board and as such fail to recite additional elements which integrate the abstract idea into a practical application. Claim 9 recites display of the graphical interface and game object identifier, but when claimed generically at such a high level this amounts to insignificant extra-solution display activity in the examiner’s opinion.
The claim(s) does/do not include additional elements that are sufficient to amount to significantly more than the judicial exception because terminal, processor, memory, computer readable medium, graphical user interface, and recitation of where steps are performed “by the terminal” amount to recitation of well-understood, routine and conventional computer functionality. Further, See Harte US 10,537,792, Col. 1 lines 36-47, which teach where it is well-known to use touch screen for providing inputs to games. See also Toyohara et al., US 6,368,210, Col. 6 lines 21-37, which teaches it is conventional to include a display with a user interface which shows game characters and arbitrary menus for providing game input. As such, even when considered with the claims as a whole the additional elements fail to add significantly more than the abstract idea.
Dependent Claim 2, 5, 17, and 20 recite additional abstract element of the game or game board and as such fail to recite additional elements which fail to add significantly more than the abstract idea. Claim 9 recites display of the graphical interface and game object identifier, but when claimed generically at such a high level this is conventional computer activity. See Toyohara et al. Col. 6 lines 21-37. As such these limitations fail to add significantly 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)(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.
Claims 1-7, 9, 15, and 17-22 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) as being anticipated by Xu, US 2023/0120147.
In Reference to Claims 1, 15, and 22
Xu teaches an electronic device comprising a processor, a memory and a computer program stored on the memory and capable of running on the processor, a non-transitory computer readable storage medium with a computer program stored thereon, where the computer program is executed by the processor (Fig. 19 and Par. 240-241), and a method for processing a game signal, and a method for processing a game signal comprising in response to an interaction operation acting on a graphical user interface provided by a terminal, providing, by the terminal, a first operation region, wherein the first operation region comprises at least one signal identifier; in response to a first touch operation acting on the first operation region, determining, by the terminal, a target signal identifier from the at least one signal identifier (Fig. 7, 10-12 Par. 109-112 Par. 178-189 Which teaches where in a game interface the player can activate a tactic selection wheel); providing, by the terminal, a second operation region and at least one first game object identifier through the graphical user interface; in response to a second touch operation acting on the second operation region, determining a target game object identifier from the at least one first game object identifier; and in response to an end of the second touch operation, sending a target signal for the target game object identifier according to the target signal identifier (Fig 7, 10-12, Par. 153-155, and Par. 180-181, 189 and 200 which teaches that after a tactic or “spell” selection wheel is presented a player selection wheel is presented, including where the player selection can be an “opposing object” see Fig. 11).
In Reference to Claim 2 and 17
Xu teaches wherein the first operation region comprises an inner-ring hot zone and a first outer-ring hot zone, and the inner-ring hot zone and the first outer-ring hot zone are divided based on a boundary of a hot zone; and the second operation region comprises a second outer-ring hot zone (Fig. 4-5, 7, 10-11 Par. 92-94 which teaches interaction wheels where the wheels include an “inner-ring” selection area with a cancel operation and a plurality of “outer-ring” operation areas for selecting tactics/spells/players/game objects).
In Reference to Claim 3 and 18
Xu teaches wherein providing the second operation region through the graphical user interface comprises: switching, while determining the target signal identifier in response to the first touch operation acting on the first operation region, the first operation region to the second operation region (Fig. 11-12 and Par. 178 “when the interaction control button on the interaction control panel is triggered and the interaction control button is associated with another object selection panel, the currently displayed interaction control panel is replaced with the another object selection panel in the UI, to help the user select an opposing virtual object through the another object selection panel, so that the selected own virtual object interacts with the selected opposing virtual object in an interaction manner corresponding to the triggered interaction control button.”).
In Reference to Claims 4 and 19
Xu teaches wherein the first touch operation is a first sliding operation from the inner-ring hot zone to the first outer-ring hot zone (Par. 80 and Par. 108-109); the at least one first game object identifier is located in the second operation region; wherein the switching the first operation region to the second operation region comprises switching the first operation region to a second operation region comprising the at least one first game object identifier (Fig. 11 and Par. 178).
In Reference to Claim 5 and 20
Xu teaches in response to determining the second touch operation is not detected, sending an initial signal for the target signal identifier (See Figure 12 which teaches that after selection of an ability on a tactical wheel the system then determines of a sliding operation or long press is displayed, and if the user is determined to “End the trigger operation before a set time window is reached” then the system will “Bind a corresponding function according to a product requirement.” And see Par. 193 where, for example, the bound corresponding function can be executing the tactic on the nearest player).
In Reference to Claim 6 and 21
Xu teaches wherein the second touch operation is a second sliding operation acting on the second outer-ring hot zone, and wherein determining the target game object identifier from the at least one first game object identifier comprises determining, in response to the second sliding operation acting on the second outer-ring hot zone, a corresponding first game object identifier of the second outer-ring hot zone selected by sliding as the target game object identifier (Par. 150-153 which teaches where the object selection wheel which selects an object via a sliding operation. See also Par. 178-179).
In Reference to Claim 7
Xu teaches generating, according to first orientation information of the virtual character and multiple pieces of second orientation information corresponding to the plurality of game objects, a second operation region comprising the at least one first game object identifier, and switching the first operation region to the second operation region (Fig. 11 and Par. 178 and 179 which teaches switching from a skill selection wheel to an opposing virtual object selection wheel. See also Par. 193 which teaches where the system determines information of game objects to, for example, select a nearest target as a default behavior of the skill wheel if no specific target is selected. Where the first orientation information of the virtual character and multiple pieces of second orientation information corresponding to the plurality of game objects are inherently needed to determine which object was closest).
In Reference to Claim 9
Xu teaches wherein providing a display region the graphical user interface while providing the first operation region and the second operation region through the graphical user interface wherein the at least one first game object identifier is located in the display region (Fig. 3 and Fig. 10-11 Which teaches a game where opposing players appear on screen along with a selection wheel interface and where the selection wheel includes a game object identifier. E.g. “Player 2” or “Opposing object b”).
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, 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 10-12 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Xu, US 2023/0120147, in view of Hu et al., US 12,280,310.
In Reference to Claim 10
Xu teaches wherein content displayed on the graphical user interface further comprises at least a part of a game scene (Fig. 3); and the method further comprises determining, according to the first orientation information and multiple pieces of second orientation information, multiple pieces of distance information between the virtual character identifier and the at least one second game object identifier (Par. 193 which teaches where the system determines information of game objects to, for example, select a nearest target as a default behavior of the skill wheel if no specific target is selected. Where the first orientation information of the virtual character and multiple pieces of second orientation information corresponding to the plurality of game objects are and multiple pieces of distance information between the virtual character identifier and the at least one second game object identifier are inherently needed to determine which object was closest); and determining, according to the multiple pieces of distance information, for a game object corresponding to the second game object identifier with a smallest distance from the virtual character identifier identification of a display object with a closest distance (Par. 193 where the system determines applying a skill to a closest object as a default behavior).
Further, Xu teaches where the system can be used for a variety of different game types (Par. 80 “The interaction task may be a virtual sports game, a shooting game, or a spell game.”). However, Xu does not explicitly teach acquiring a top view map of the game scene, wherein the top view map is provided with a virtual character identifier and at least one second game object identifier; or a gradient identifier of the game object in the display region, wherein the gradient identifier is configured to identify a game object with a closest distance.
Hu et al. teaches a game method with a touch based targeting selection interface (Col. 14 lines 23-63 “touch”) which teaches acquiring a top view map of the game scene, wherein the top view map is provided with a virtual character identifier and at least one second game object identifier (Fig. 3 and 5 and Col. 8 lines 1-15. Which teaches a map control and where the player and enemies are shown on the map. Further examiner also consider the view of the game in Hu et al. shown in Fig. 3 and 5 to constitute “top view map” of a game scene. Further see Fig. 7 and Col. 11 line 66 – Col. 12 line 6 and Fig. 10 and Col. 15 lines 37-45 which determining positions of displayed game objects to determine the closest object); and a gradient identifier of the game object in the display region, wherein the gradient identifier is configured to identify a game object with a closest distance (Fig. 4-5, Fig. 9-10, Col. 8 lines 47-58 and Col 13 Lines 7-16 which teaches labeling a selected enemy with a displayed visual indicator where the indicator can take a variety of different types including changing color of the target object. Where examiner considers a this to constitute a “gradient identifier”).
It would be desirable to modify the method of Xu to include a top down view and map and a gradient identifier of the closest game object as taught by Hu et al. in order to increase the enjoyment of the user by allowing them to use the target selection method of Xu in game genres which use a top down view and map such as “spell games” like MOBAs. And to allow players in the MOBA games to better identify which opponent game object is being targeted, including where that object is the default closest target of a skill, so that they can identify when the spell will be used on the wrong target and either select a different target or cancel the spell use (See Hu et al. Col. 1 lines 38-45).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of filing of the invention to modify the method of Xu to include a top down view and map and a gradient identifier of the closest game object as taught by Hu et al.
In Reference to Claim 11
Xu teaches a method as described above in reference to Claim 7. Further Xu teaches Xu teaches where the system can be used for a variety of different game types (Par. 80) and teaches where a default target of a skill used in a game can be a determined nearest game object (Par. 193). However, Xu does not explicitly teach displaying an orientation identifier of a game object corresponding to the target game object identifier.
Hu et al. teaches a game method with a touch based targeting selection interface (Col. 14 lines 23-63 “touch”) and which teaches displaying an orientation identifier of a game object corresponding to the target game object identifier (Fig. 7 and Col. 11 line 66 – Col. 12 line 6 and Fig. 10 and Col. 15 lines 37-45 which determining positions of displayed game objects to determine the closest object as a default skill target. Fig. 4-5, Fig. 9-10, Col. 8 lines 47-58 and Col 13 Lines 7-16 which teaches labeling a selected enemy with a displayed visual indicator where the indicator can take a variety of different types including a “Ray” from first virtual object to the target).
It would be desirable to modify the method of Xu to orientation identifier for the targeted game objects as taught by Hu et al. in order to increase the enjoyment of the player by allowing them to better identify which opponent game object is being targeted, including where that object is the default closest target of a skill, so that they can identify when the spell will be used on the wrong target and either select a different target or cancel the spell use (See Hu et al. Col. 1 lines 38-45).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of filing of the invention to modify the method of Xu to include an orientation identifier of the closest game object as taught by Hu et al.
In Reference to Claim 12
Xu and Hu et al. teach determining a position relationship between the virtual character and the game object corresponding to the target game object identifier, and displaying the orientation identifier of the game object corresponding to the target game object identifier according to the position relationship (Xu Par. 193 and Hu et al. Fig. 7 and Col. 11 line 66 – Col. 12 line 6 and Fig. 10 and Col. 15 lines 37-45 which teaches determination of the closest enemy as a default target, and Hu et al. Fig. 4-5, Fig. 9-10, Col. 8 lines 47-58 and Col 13 Lines 7-16 which teaches labeling the target with an orientation indicator).
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 8 and 13 are objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, but would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
Conclusion
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