DETAILED ACTION
This Office Action is sent in response to Applicant's Response filed 12/11/2025 for 18298994. Claims 62-80 and 112-114 are pending.
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 .
In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status.
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted on 12/11/2025 was filed before the mailing date of a first action. The submission is in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the IDS is being considered by the examiner.
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and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114.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 12/11/2025 has been entered.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments with respect to the 103 rejection of claim 62 have been considered but are not persuasive because the arguments do not apply to the newly cited Hauenstein reference being used in the current rejection of claim 62.
Claims 79 and 80 recite similar limitations to those recited in claim 62 and remain rejected upon a similar basis as claim 62 as stated above.
Dependent claims 63-78 and 112-114 are rejected at least based on their dependence from independent claim 62.
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.
The factual inquiries set forth in Graham v. John Deere Co., 383 U.S. 1, 148 USPQ 459 (1966), that are applied for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized as follows:
1. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art.
2. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue.
3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art.
4. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness.
Claims 62-80 and 112-114 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Bar-Zeev et al. (US 20200225747 A1) in view of Hauenstein et al. (US 20190065027 A1).
As to claim 62, Bar-Zeev discloses a method, comprising:
at a computer system in communication with a display generation component and one or more input devices [Fig. 1A, para 0058-0062, system device including display and input sensors]:
displaying, via the display generation component, an environment from a first viewpoint of a user of the computer system, the environment including a first object at a first location and a second object at a second location, different from the first location [Figs. 3, 5, para 0074-0075, 0087-0089, device displays environment as viewed by device user, where environment includes first affordance (read: object) and second affordance at respective positions (read: first location and second location) on table, note affordances displayed at different locations];
while displaying the environment including the first object and the second object, detecting, via the one or more input devices, a first interaction input, including movement [Figs. 2-3, 5, para 0069, 0074-0076, 0088-0089, system sensor detects user interaction with user eye movement while viewing displayed environment].
Note one of ordinary skill in the art would recognize that the broadest reasonable interpretation of a method (or process) claim having contingent limitations requires only those steps that must be performed and does not include steps that are not required to be performed because the condition(s) precedent are not met, thus the claim scope does not require the contingent limitations "performing a first operation involving manipulating the environment relative to a first reference point that is based on the first location of the first object in the environment in accordance with the movement, including moving the first object in a first manner in the environment relative to the first reference point" or "performing a second operation involving manipulating the environment relative to a second reference point, different from the first reference point, that is based on the second location of the second object in the environment in accordance with the movement, including moving the first object in a second manner, different from the first manner, in the environment relative to the second reference point" to be performed if the precedent conditions "in accordance with a determination that attention of the user of the computer system is directed to the first object when the first interaction input is detected" or "in accordance with a determination that the attention of the user of the computer system is directed to the second object when the first interaction input is detected" are not met, respectively [see MPEP 2111.04(II)].
Nevertheless, in an effort to advance compact prosecution, Bar-Zeev teaches in response to detecting the first interaction input [Figs. 2-3, 5, para 0069, 0074-0076, 0088-0089, system sensor detects user interaction with user eye movement while viewing displayed environment]:
in accordance with a determination that attention of the user of the computer system is directed to the first object when the first interaction input is detected [Fig. 5, para 0075-0076, 0088, determine device user interest (read: attention) in first affordance with user eye gaze overlapping first affordance]:
performing a first operation involving manipulating the environment relative to a first reference point that is based on the first location of the first object in the environment in accordance with the movement, including moving the first object in a first manner in the environment relative to the first reference point [Figs. 5-6, para 0088-0090, device moves first affordance displayed in environment at initial position (read: first reference point) of first affordance on table to depth (read: first manner) closer to user in response to determining eye movement]; and
in accordance with a determination that the attention of the user of the computer system is directed to the second object when the first interaction input is detected [Fig. 5, para 0075-0076, 0088, determine device user interest in second affordance with user eye gaze overlapping second affordance]:
performing a second operation involving manipulating the environment relative to a second reference point, different from the first reference point, that is based on the second location of the second object in the environment in accordance with the movement, including moving the first object … [Figs. 5-6, para 0088-0090, device moves second affordance displayed in environment at initial position (read: second reference point) of second affordance on table closer to user in response to determining eye movement, note second affordance is moved to a depth different (read: second manner) than first affordance].
Additionally, while Bar-Zeev does not specifically disclose "moving the first object in a second manner, different from the first manner, in the environment relative to the second reference point", Hauenstein discloses:
performing a first operation involving manipulating the environment relative to a first reference point that is based on the first location of the first object in the environment in accordance with the movement, including moving the first object in a first manner in the environment relative to the first reference point [Figs. 5C22-5C23, para 0295-0296, user gesture (read: first operation) rotating simulated environment with contact on (read: first reference point) virtual box (read: first object) displayed in environment rotates position of virtual box within rotated environment]; and
performing a second operation involving manipulating the environment relative to a second reference point, different from the first reference point, that is based on the second location of the second object in the environment in accordance with the movement, including moving the first object in a second manner, different from the first manner, in the environment relative to the second reference point [Figs. 5E12-5E13, para 0342-0343, user changing (read: second operation) position (read: second reference point) of reference mat (read: second object) displayed in environment displayed moves of virtual box anchored to moving reference mat]
Bar-Zeev and Hauenstein are analogous art to the claimed invention being from a similar field of endeavor of computer-generated environments. Thus, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the object movement in a second manner relative to the second reference point as disclosed by Bar-Zeev with the object movement as disclosed by Hauenstein with a reasonable expectation of success.
One of ordinary skill in the art would be motivated to modify Bar-Zeev as described above to increase user interface efficiency [Hauenstein, para 0471].
As to claim 63, Bar-Zeev discloses the method of claim 62.
As noted above, the claim scope does not require the contingent limitations "the determination that the attention of the user is directed to the first object when the first interaction input is detected" or "the determination that the attention of the user is directed to the second object when the first interaction input is detected" to be performed if the precedent conditions "a determination that a gaze of the user is directed to the first object when the first interaction input is detected" or "a determination that a gaze of the user is directed to the second object when the first interaction input is detected" are not met, respectively [see MPEP 2111.04(II)].
Nevertheless, in an effort to advance compact prosecution, Bar-Zeev teaches wherein:
the determination that the attention of the user is directed to the first object when the first interaction input is detected is based on a determination that a gaze of the user is directed to the first object when the first interaction input is detected [Fig. 5, para 0075-0076, 0088-0090, determine device user interest in first affordance when determining eye gaze direction overlapping first affordance], and
the determination that the attention of the user is directed to the second object when the first interaction input is detected is based on a determination that a gaze of the user is directed to the second object when the first interaction input is detected [Fig. 5, para 0075-0076, 0088-0090, determine device user interest in second affordance when determining eye gaze direction overlapping second affordance].
As to claim 64, Bar-Zeev discloses the method of claim 62, wherein:
the environment includes a virtual representation [] [Figs. 5, 7, para 0087-0088, virtual environment includes virtual table].
However, Bar-Zeev does not specifically disclose the user of the computer system is in a communication session with a second user of a second computer system while displaying the environment; and wherein "a virtual representation []" is "a virtual representation of the second user".
Hauenstein discloses:
the user of the computer system is in a communication session with a second user of a second computer system while displaying the environment [Figs. 5D1-5D3c, 5D12a-5D12b, para 0302-0305, 0325-0326, second device of second user (read: user of computer system) executes user interface (read: communication session) to collaboratively manipulate displayed environment with user of device];
a virtual representation of the second user [Figs. 5D2-5D3b, para 0305-0309, 0311, user interface displays environment including avatar (read: virtual representation) corresponding to user].
As noted above, the claim scope does not require the contingent limitations "performing the first operation includes concurrently repositioning the first object and the second object, and the virtual representation of the second user within the environment relative to the first reference point in accordance with the movement" or "performing the second operation includes concurrently repositioning the first object and the second object, and the virtual representation of the second user within the environment relative to the second reference point in accordance with the movement" to be performed if the precedent conditions "in accordance with the determination that the attention of the user of the computer system is directed to the first object when the first interaction input is detected and that the first object and/or the second object are shared with the second user of the second computer system" or "in accordance with the determination that the attention of the user of the computer system is directed to the second object when the first interaction input is detected and that the first object and/or the second object are shared with the second user" are not met, respectively [see MPEP 2111.04(II)].
Nevertheless, in an effort to advance compact prosecution, Bar-Zeev teaches in response to detecting the first interaction input [Figs. 2-3, 5, para 0069, 0074-0076, 0088-0089, system sensor detects user interaction with user eye movement while viewing displayed environment]:
in accordance with the determination that the attention of the user of the computer system is directed to the first object when the first interaction input is detected … [Fig. 5, para 0075-0076, 0088, determine device user interest in first affordance with user eye gaze overlapping first affordance], performing the first operation includes concurrently repositioning the first object and the second object, and the virtual representation [] within the environment relative to the first reference point in accordance with the movement [Figs. 5, 7-8, para 0088-0090, 0092, device enlarges and moves first affordance and table portion closer to user viewing environment from initial position of first affordance in response to determining eye movement]; and
in accordance with the determination that the attention of the user of the computer system is directed to the second object when the first interaction input is detected … [Fig. 5, para 0075-0076, 0088, determine device user interest in second affordance with user eye gaze overlapping second affordance], performing the second operation includes concurrently repositioning the first object and the second object, and the virtual representation [] within the environment relative to the second reference point in accordance with the movement [Figs. 5, 7-8, para 0088-0090, 0092, device enlarges and moves second affordance and table portion closer to user viewing environment from initial position of second affordance in response to determining eye movement].
Additionally, while Bar-Zeev does not explicitly disclose in response to detecting the first interaction input: in accordance with the determination that the attention of the user of the computer system is directed to the first object when the first interaction input is detected and that the first object and/or the second object are shared with the second user of the second computer system, performing the first operation includes concurrently repositioning the first object and the second object, and the virtual representation of the second user within the environment relative to the first reference point in accordance with the movement; and in accordance with the determination that the attention of the user of the computer system is directed to the second object when the first interaction input is detected and that the first object and/or the second object are shared with the second user, performing the second operation includes concurrently repositioning the first object and the second object, and the virtual representation of the second user within the environment relative to the second reference point in accordance with the movement, Hauenstein discloses: in response to detecting the first interaction input [Figs. 5D3a-5D4c, para 0312, 0492-0493, determine second device movement relative to displayed environment]:
in accordance with the determination that the attention of the user of the computer system is directed to the first object when the first interaction input is detected and that the first object and/or the second object are shared with the second user of the second computer system [Figs. 5D3a-5D4c, para 0310, 0312, 0490-0493, capture second device viewing (read: attention) mat with virtual box (read: first object) while second device moves and device user viewing virtual box], performing the first operation includes concurrently repositioning the first object and the second object, and the virtual representation of the second user within the environment relative to the first reference point in accordance with the movement [Figs. 5D3a-5D4c, para 0312, 0492-0493, update (read: first operation) user interface to change virtual box position and avatar position in displayed environment from initial perspective (read: first reference point) in response to determining second device movement]; and
in accordance with the determination that the attention of the user of the computer system is directed to the second object when the first interaction input is detected and that the first object and/or the second object are shared with the second user [Figs. 5D3a-5D4c, para 0310, 0312, 0490-0493, capture second device viewing mat while second device moves and device user viewing mat], performing the second operation includes concurrently repositioning the first object and the second object, and the virtual representation of the second user within the environment relative to the second reference point in accordance with the movement [Figs. 5D3a-5D4c, para 0312, 0492-0493, update (read: second operation) user interface to change mat position and avatar position in displayed environment from initial perspective (read: first reference point) in response to determining second device movement].
Bar-Zeev and Hauenstein are analogous art to the claimed invention being from a similar field of endeavor of computer-generated environments. Thus, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the environment, virtual representation, determining the attention of the user as directed to the first object or second object, and performing the first operation or second operation including repositioning objects as disclosed by Bar-Zeev with the displayed environment being used in a communication session with a second user, virtual representation of the second user, determining the attention of the user as directed to the first object or second object and sharing objects with the second user, and performing the first operation or second operation including repositioning objects and the virtual representation of the second user as disclosed by Hauenstein with a reasonable expectation of success.
One of ordinary skill in the art would be motivated to modify Bar-Zeev as described above to enable collaboration and increase operational efficiency [Hauenstein, para 0490].
As to claim 65, Bar-Zeev discloses the method of claim 64, wherein:
a virtual representation [] is displayed in an environment [] [Figs. 5, 7, para 0087-0088, virtual environment includes virtual table]; and
when the computer system performs the first operation or the second operation, the virtual representation [] is repositioned in the environment … [Figs. 5, 7-8, para 0088-0090, 0092, device enlarges and moves first affordance or second affordance and table portion closer to user viewing environment from initial position of first affordance or second affordance].
However, Bar-Zeev does not specifically disclose wherein: a virtual representation of the user of the computer system is displayed in an environment at the second computer system; and when the computer system performs the first operation or the second operation, the virtual representation of the user of the computer system is repositioned in the environment at the second computer system relative to a viewpoint of the second user based on the movement.
Hauenstein discloses wherein:
a virtual representation of the user of the computer system is displayed in an environment at the second computer system [Figs. 5D3a-5D4c, para 0309-0310, 0490-0491, user device displays environment including avatar corresponding to second device user]; and
when the computer system performs the first operation or the second operation, the virtual representation of the user of the computer system is repositioned in the environment at the second computer system relative to a viewpoint of the second user based on the movement [Figs. 5D3a-5D4c, para 0310, 0312, 0492-0493, change position of second device user avatar in environment as displayed by device interface of user viewing (read: viewpoint) environment when second device movement updates user interface].:
Bar-Zeev and Hauenstein are analogous art to the claimed invention being from a similar field of endeavor of computer-generated environments. Thus, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the virtual content displayed in an environment and performing the first operation or the second operation including repositioning objects as disclosed by Bar-Zeev with displaying an environment at a second device including a virtual representation of a user and repositioning the virtual representation of the user in the environment as viewed by a second user of the second device as disclosed by Hauenstein with a reasonable expectation of success.
One of ordinary skill in the art would be motivated to modify Bar-Zeev as described above to enable collaboration and increase operational efficiency [Hauenstein, para 0490].
As to claim 66, Bar-Zeev discloses the method of claim 65.
Bar-Zeev teaches detecting the first interaction input and a virtual representation displayed in the environment [Figs. 2-3, 5, para 0069, 0074-0076, 0088-0089, system sensor detects user interaction with user eye movement while viewing displayed environment including affordance] but not explicitly wherein, while the first interaction input is being detected, the virtual representation of the user of the computer system is visually deemphasized in the environment at the second computer system.
However, Bar-Zeev teaches wherein, while an interaction input is being detected, a virtual representation is visually deemphasized in the environment [Figs. 13-15, para 0097-0100, visually deemphasize another object in displayed environment in response to determining user gaze on object] and Hauenstein teaches the virtual representation of the user of the computer system in the environment at the second computer system [Figs. 5D3a-5d4c, para 0311-0312, second device displays environment including avatar of device user].
Bar-Zeev and Hauenstein are analogous art to the claimed invention being from a similar field of endeavor of computer-generated environments. Thus it would have been obvious to one skilled in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention apply the teachings of Bar-Zeev visually deemphasizing virtual content in an environment while detecting interaction input to the teachings of Hauenstein where virtual content in an environment includes a virtual representation of a user at another computer system with a reasonable expectation of success to result in wherein, while the first interaction input is being detected, the virtual representation of the user of the computer system is visually deemphasized in the environment at the second computer system [see MPEP 2143].
One of ordinary skill in the art would be motivated to apply this teaching to Bar-Zeev to improve user collaboration and operation efficiency [Hauenstein, para 0497].
As to claim 67, Bar-Zeev discloses the method of claim 62.
As noted above, the claim scope does not require the contingent limitations "performing the first operation includes repositioning the first object within the environment relative to a viewpoint of the user of the computer system in accordance with the movement" or "performing the second operation includes repositioning the second object within the environment relative to the viewpoint of the user in accordance with the movement" to be performed if the precedent conditions "in accordance with the determination that the attention of the user of the computer system is directed to the first object when the first interaction input is detected" or "in accordance with the determination that the attention of the user of the computer system is directed to the second object when the first interaction input is detected" are not met [see MPEP 2111.04(II)].
Nevertheless, in an effort to advance compact prosecution, Bar-Zeev teaches wherein: in response to detecting the first interaction input [Figs. 2-3, 5, para 0069, 0074-0076, 0088-0089, system sensor detects user interaction with user eye movement while viewing displayed environment]:
in accordance with the determination that the attention of the user of the computer system is directed to the first object when the first interaction input is detected [Fig. 5, para 0075-0076, 0088, determine device user interest (read: attention) in first affordance with user eye gaze overlapping first affordance]:
performing the first operation includes repositioning the first object within the environment relative to a viewpoint of the user of the computer system in accordance with the movement [Figs. 5-6, para 0088-0091, device enlarges and moves first affordance to position closer to device user viewing (read: viewpoint) displayed environment in response to determining eye movement]; and
in accordance with the determination that the attention of the user of the computer system is directed to the second object when the first interaction input is detected [Fig. 5, para 0075-0076, 0088, determine device user interest in second affordance with user eye gaze overlapping second affordance]:
performing the second operation includes repositioning the second object within the environment relative to the viewpoint of the user in accordance with the movement [Figs. 5-6, para 0088-0091, device enlarges and moves second affordance to position closer to device user viewing (read: viewpoint) displayed environment in response to determining eye movement].
As to claim 68, Bar-Zeev discloses the method of claim 67.
As noted above, the claim scope does not require the contingent limitations "performing the first operation includes concurrently repositioning the first object and the second object towards the viewpoint of the user within the environment in accordance with the movement", "performing the second operation includes concurrently repositioning the first object and the second object towards the viewpoint of the user within the environment in accordance with the movement", "performing the first operation includes concurrently repositioning the first object and the second object away from the viewpoint of the user within the environment in accordance with the movement", or "performing the second operation includes concurrently repositioning the first object and the second object away from the viewpoint of the user within the environment in accordance with the movement" to be performed if the precedent conditions "in accordance with a determination that the movement includes movement towards the viewpoint of the user and that the attention of the user of the computer system is directed to the first object when the first interaction input is detected", "in accordance with a determination that the movement includes movement towards the viewpoint of the user and that the attention of the user of the computer system is directed to the second object when the first interaction input is detected", "in accordance with a determination that the movement includes movement away from the viewpoint of the user and that the attention of the user of the computer system is directed to the first object when the first interaction input is detected", or "in accordance with a determination that the movement includes movement away from the viewpoint of the user and that the attention of the user of the computer system is directed to the second object when the first interaction input is detected" are not met [see MPEP 2111.04(II)].
Nevertheless, in an effort to advance compact prosecution, Bar-Zeev teaches wherein: in response to detecting the first interaction input [Figs. 2-3, 5, para 0069, 0074-0076, 0088-0089, system sensor detects user interaction with user eye movement while viewing displayed environment]:
in accordance with a determination that the movement includes movement … and that the attention of the user of the computer system is directed to the first object when the first interaction input is detected [Fig. 5, para 0075-0076, 0088, determine device user interest in first affordance with user eye gaze (read: movement) overlapping first affordance], performing the first operation includes concurrently repositioning the first object and the second object towards the viewpoint of the user within the environment in accordance with the movement [Figs. 5-6, para 0088-0091, device moves both affordances to position closer to device user viewing displayed environment in response to determining eye movement];
in accordance with a determination that the movement includes movement … and that the attention of the user of the computer system is directed to the second object when the first interaction input is detected [Fig. 5, para 0075-0076, 0088, determine device user interest in second affordance with user eye gaze (read: movement) overlapping second affordance], performing the second operation includes concurrently repositioning the first object and the second object towards the viewpoint of the user within the environment in accordance with the movement [Figs. 5-6, para 0088-0091, device moves both affordances to position closer to device user viewing displayed environment in response to determining eye movement].
Additionally, while Bar-Zeev does not explicitly disclose a determination that the movement includes movement towards the viewpoint of the user and that the attention of the user of the computer system is directed to the first object when the first interaction input is detected; a determination that the movement includes movement towards the viewpoint of the user and that the attention of the user of the computer system is directed to the second object when the first interaction input is detected; in accordance with a determination that the movement includes movement away from the viewpoint of the user and that the attention of the user of the computer system is directed to the first object when the first interaction input is detected, performing the first operation includes concurrently repositioning the first object and the second object away from the viewpoint of the user within the environment in accordance with the movement; and in accordance with a determination that the movement includes movement away from the viewpoint of the user and that the attention of the user of the computer system is directed to the second object when the first interaction input is detected, performing the second operation includes concurrently repositioning the first object and the second object away from the viewpoint of the user within the environment in accordance with the movement, Hauenstein discloses:
a determination that the movement includes movement towards the viewpoint of the user and that the attention of the user of the computer system is directed to the first object when the first interaction input is detected [Figs. 5C22-5C23, para 0295-0296, user input gesture on (read: attention directed to) virtual box moves along path moving virtual box toward user viewing environment displayed by device];
a determination that the movement includes movement towards the viewpoint of the user and that the attention of the user of the computer system is directed to the second object when the first interaction input is detected [Figs. 5E12-5E13, para 0296, 0342-0343, user changes reference mat position with reference grid line approaching user toward user viewing environment displayed by device].
Bar-Zeev and Hauenstein are analogous art to the claimed invention being from a similar field of endeavor of computer-generated environments. Thus, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the first interaction input including determining movement and attention directed to a first object or second object and performing a first or second operation as disclosed by Bar-Zeev with determining movement toward or away a user viewpoint and attention directed to a first or second object and performing a first or second operation as disclosed by Hauenstein with a reasonable expectation of success.
One of ordinary skill in the art would be motivated to modify Bar-Zeev as described above to increase user interface efficiency [Hauenstein, para 0471].
As to claim 69, Bar-Zeev discloses the method of claim 67, wherein: before detecting the first interaction input:
the first location is a first distance from the viewpoint of the user [Figs. 3, 9, para 0077, 0093, 0095, determine depth of smaller first affordance to user viewing environment], and
the second location is a second distance, smaller than the first distance, from the viewpoint of the user [Figs. 3, 9, para 0077, 0093, 0095, determine depth of larger second affordance to user viewing environment, where larger affordance has smaller depth value than smaller affordance];
the movement has a first magnitude [Figs. 2, 9, para 0069-0072, 0093-0094, user eye movement includes distance (read: first magnitude) of gaze depth].
As noted above, the claim scope does not require the contingent limitations "performing the first operation includes moving the first object from the first location to a third location in the environment relative to the viewpoint of the user in accordance with the movement, wherein the third location is a third distance from the first location" or "performing the second operation includes moving the second object from the second location to a fourth location in the environment relative to the viewpoint of the user in accordance with the movement, wherein the fourth location is a fourth distance, different from the third distance, from the second location" to be performed if the precedent conditions "in accordance with the determination that the attention of the user of the computer system is directed to the first object when the first interaction input is detected" or "in accordance with the determination that the attention of the user of the computer system is directed to the second object when the first interaction input is detected" are not met [see MPEP 2111.04(II)].
Nevertheless, in an effort to advance compact prosecution, Bar-Zeev teaches in response to detecting the first interaction input [Figs. 2-3, 5, para 0069, 0074-0076, 0088-0089, system sensor detects user interaction with user eye movement while viewing displayed environment]:
in accordance with the determination that the attention of the user of the computer system is directed to the first object when the first interaction input is detected [Figs. 5, 9, para 0075-0076, 0088, 0096, determine device user interest in first affordance with user eye gaze overlapping first affordance]:
performing the first operation includes moving the first object from the first location to a third location in the environment relative to the viewpoint of the user in accordance with the movement, wherein the third location is a third distance from the first location [Figs. 5, 9, 11, para 0088-0091, 0096, device moves first affordance from initial position on table to position (read: third location) with depth (read: third distance) closer to device user viewing displayed environment in response to determining eye movement]; and
in accordance with the determination that the attention of the user of the computer system is directed to the second object when the first interaction input is detected [Fig. 5, para 0075-0076, 0088, determine device user interest in second affordance with user eye gaze overlapping second affordance]:
performing the second operation includes moving the second object from the second location to a fourth location in the environment relative to the viewpoint of the user in accordance with the movement, wherein the fourth location is a fourth distance, different from the third distance, from the second location [Figs. 5, 9, 11, para 0088-0091, 0095-0096, device moves second affordance from initial position on table to position (read: fourth location) with depth (read: fourth distance) closer to device user viewing displayed environment in response to determining eye movement, note affordances maintain different depths due to the smaller enlarged affordance as compared to affordances at a same depth in Figure 12].
As to claim 70, Bar-Zeev discloses the method of claim 67.
As noted above, the claim scope does not require the contingent limitations "performing the first operation includes restricting movement of the first object to movement outside of a threshold distance from the viewpoint of the user" or "performing the second operation includes restricting movement of the second object to movement outside of the threshold distance from the viewpoint of the user" to be performed if the precedent conditions "in accordance with the determination that the attention of the user of the computer system is directed to the first object when the first interaction input is detected" or "in accordance with the determination that the attention of the user of the computer system is directed to the second object when the first interaction input is detected" are not met [see MPEP 2111.04(II)]. However, the claim would be allowable if rewritten in independent form where the broadest reasonable interpretation of the method claim includes positively meeting all precedent conditions and requiring performance of the corresponding contingent limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
As to claim 71, Bar-Zeev discloses the method of claim 70.
As noted above, the claim scope does not require the contingent limitations "performing the first operation includes moving the second object to within a first distance, less than the threshold distance, from the viewpoint of the user in accordance with the movement" to be performed if the precedent conditions "in accordance with the determination that the attention of the user of the computer system is directed to the first object when the first interaction input is detected" are not met [see MPEP 2111.04(II)]. However, the claim would be allowable if rewritten in independent form where the broadest reasonable interpretation of the method claim includes positively meeting all precedent conditions and requiring performance of the corresponding contingent limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
As to claim 72, Bar-Zeev discloses the method of claim 70.
As noted above, the claim scope does not require the contingent limitations "performing the second operation includes moving the first object to within a second distance, less than the threshold distance, from the viewpoint of the user in accordance with the movement" to be performed if the precedent conditions "in accordance with the determination that the attention of the user of the computer system is directed to the second object when the first interaction input is detected" are not met [see MPEP 2111.04(II)]. However, the claim would be allowable if rewritten in independent form where the broadest reasonable interpretation of the method claim includes positively meeting all precedent conditions and requiring performance of the corresponding contingent limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
As to claim 73, Bar-Zeev discloses the method of claim 62.
As noted above, the claim scope does not require the contingent limitations "performing the first operation includes rotating the first object within the environment relative to the first reference point in accordance with the movement" or "performing the second operation includes rotating the second object within the environment relative to the second reference point in accordance with the movement" to be performed if the precedent conditions "in accordance with the determination that the attention of the user of the computer system is directed to the first object when the first interaction input is detected" or "in accordance with the determination that the attention of the user of the computer system is directed to the second object when the first interaction input is detected" are not met [see MPEP 2111.04(II)].
Nevertheless, in an effort to advance compact prosecution, Bar-Zeev teaches in response to detecting the first interaction input [Figs. 2-3, 5, para 0069, 0074-0076, 0088-0089, system sensor detects user interaction with user eye movement while viewing displayed environment]:
in accordance with the determination that the attention of the user of the computer system is directed to the first object when the first interaction input is detected [Fig. 5, para 0075-0076, 0088, determine device user interest in first affordance with user eye gaze overlapping first affordance]:
performing the first operation includes [manipulating] the first object within the environment relative to the first reference point in accordance with the movement [Figs. 5-6, para 0088-0090, device enlarges first affordance displayed in environment at initial position of first affordance on table in response to determining eye movement]; and
in accordance with the determination that the attention of the user of the computer system is directed to the second object when the first interaction input is detected [Fig. 5, para 0075-0076, 0088, determine device user interest in second affordance with user eye gaze overlapping second affordance]:
performing the second operation includes [manipulating] the second object within the environment relative to the second reference point in accordance with the movement [Figs. 5-6, para 0088-0090, device enlarges second affordance displayed in environment at initial position of second affordance on table in response to determining eye movement].
Additionally, while Bar-Zeev does not specifically disclose wherein "[manipulating] the first object within the environment relative to the first reference point" and "[manipulating] the second object within the environment relative to the second reference point" are "rotating the first object within the environment relative to the first reference point" and "rotating the second object within the environment relative to the second reference point", respectively, Hauenstein discloses:
rotating the first object within the environment relative to the first reference point [Figs. 5C22-5C23, para 0295-0296, 0471, rotate first virtual box in environment as user perspective (read: first reference point) rotates]; and
rotating the second object within the environment relative to the second reference point [Figs. 5C3, 5C26-5C30, para 0484, rotate second virtual box in environment relative to reference mat (read: second reference point)].
Bar-Zeev and Hauenstein are analogous art to the claimed invention being from a similar field of endeavor of computer-generated environments. Thus, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify transforming different objects relative to different reference points as disclosed by Bar-Zeev with rotating different objects relative to different reference points as disclosed by Hauenstein with a reasonable expectation of success.
One of ordinary skill in the art would be motivated to modify Bar-Zeev as described above to improve user interface intuitiveness and efficiency [Hauenstein, para 0471, 0484].
As to claim 74, Bar-Zeev discloses the method of claim 73.
As noted above, the claim scope does not require the contingent limitations "performing the first operation includes concurrently rotating the first object and the second object within the environment relative to the first reference point in accordance with the movement" or "performing the second operation includes concurrently rotating the first object and the second object within the environment relative to the second reference point in accordance with the movement" to be performed if the precedent conditions "in accordance with the determination that the attention of the user of the computer system is directed to the first object when the first interaction input is detected" or "in accordance with the determination that the attention of the user of the computer system is directed to the second object when the first interaction input is detected" are not met [see MPEP 2111.04(II)].
Nevertheless, in an effort to advance compact prosecution, Bar-Zeev teaches in response to detecting the first interaction input [Figs. 2-3, 5, para 0069, 0074-0076, 0088-0089, system sensor detects user interaction with user eye movement while viewing displayed environment]:
in accordance with the determination that the attention of the user of the computer system is directed to the first object when the first interaction input is detected [Fig. 5, para 0075-0076, 0088, determine device user interest in first affordance with user interaction gaze overlapping first affordance]:
performing the first operation includes concurrently [manipulating] the first object and the second object within the environment relative to the first reference point in accordance with the movement [Figs. 5-6, para 0088-0091, device moves both affordances to position closer to device user viewing displayed environment from initial position of first affordance in response to determining eye movement]; and
in accordance with the determination that the attention of the user of the computer system is directed to the second object when the first interaction input is detected [Fig. 5, para 0075-0076, 0088, determine device user interest in second affordance with user interaction gaze overlapping second affordance]:
performing the second operation includes concurrently [manipulating] the first object and the second object within the environment relative to the second reference point in accordance with the movement [Figs. 5-6, para 0088-0091, device moves both affordances to position closer to device user viewing displayed environment from initial position of second affordance in response to determining eye movement].
Additionally, while Bar-Zeev does not specifically disclose wherein "concurrently [manipulating] the first object and the second object within the environment relative to the first reference point " and "concurrently [manipulating] the first object and the second object within the environment relative to the second reference point" are "concurrently rotating the first object and the second object within the environment relative to the first reference point" and "concurrently rotating the first object and the second object within the environment relative to the second reference point", respectively, Hauenstein discloses:
concurrently rotating the first object and the second object within the environment relative to the first reference point [Figs. 5C22-5C23, para 0295-0296, 0471, rotate virtual boxes in environment as user perspective rotates]; and
concurrently rotating the first object and the second object within the environment relative to the second reference point [Figs. 5C3, 5C26-5C30, para 0484, rotate virtual boxes in environment relative to reference mat].
Bar-Zeev and Hauenstein are analogous art to the claimed invention being from a similar field of endeavor of computer-generated environments. Thus, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify concurrent transforming objects relative to different reference points as disclosed by Bar-Zeev with concurrently rotating objects relative to different reference points as disclosed by Hauenstein with a reasonable expectation of success.
One of ordinary skill in the art would be motivated to modify Bar-Zeev as described above to improve user interface intuitiveness and efficiency [Hauenstein, para 0471, 0484].
As to claim 75, Bar-Zeev discloses the method of claim 62.
As noted above, the claim scope does not require the contingent limitations "performing the first operation includes rotating the first object within the environment relative to a viewpoint of the user of the computer system in accordance with the movement" or "performing the second operation includes rotating the second object within the environment relative to the viewpoint of the user in accordance with the movement" to be performed if the precedent conditions "in accordance with the determination that the attention of the user of the computer system is directed to the first object when the first interaction input is detected" or "in accordance with the determination that the attention of the user of the computer system is directed to the second object when the first interaction input is detected" are not met [see MPEP 2111.04(II)].
Nevertheless, in an effort to advance compact prosecution, Bar-Zeev teaches in response to detecting the first interaction input [Figs. 2-3, 5, para 0069, 0074-0076, 0088-0089, system sensor detects user interaction with user eye movement while viewing displayed environment]:
in accordance with the determination that the attention of the user of the computer system is directed to the first object when the first interaction input is detected [Fig. 5, para 0075-0076, 0088, determine device user interest in first affordance with user eye gaze (read: movement) overlapping first affordance]:
performing the first operation includes [manipulating] the first object within the environment relative to a viewpoint of the user of the computer system in accordance with the movement [Figs. 5-6, para 0088-0091, device enlarges and moves first affordance to position closer to device user viewing displayed environment in response to determining eye movement]; and
in accordance with the determination that the attention of the user of the computer system is directed to the second object when the first interaction input is detected [Fig. 5, para 0075-0076, 0088, determine device user interest in second affordance with user eye gaze (read: movement) overlapping second affordance]:
performing the second operation includes [manipulating] the second object within the environment relative to the viewpoint of the user in accordance with the movement [Figs. 5-6, para 0088-0091, device enlarges and moves second affordance to position closer to device user viewing (read: viewpoint) displayed environment in response to determining eye movement].
Additionally, while Bar-Zeev does not specifically disclose wherein "[manipulating] the first object within the environment" and "[manipulating] the second object within the environment" are "rotating the first object within the environment" and "rotating the second object within the environment", respectively, Hauenstein discloses:
rotating the first object within the environment relative to a viewpoint of the user [Figs. 5C22-5C23, para 0295-0296, 0471, rotate first virtual box in environment as user perspective rotates]; and
rotating the second object within the environment relative to the viewpoint of the user [Figs. 5C3, 5C26-5C30, para 0484, rotate second virtual box in environment as viewed in user perspective].
Bar-Zeev and Hauenstein are analogous art to the claimed invention being from a similar field of endeavor of computer-generated environments. Thus, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify transforming objects within an environment relative to a user viewpoint as disclosed by Bar-Zeev with rotating objects within an environment relative to a user viewpoint as disclosed by Hauenstein with a reasonable expectation of success.
One of ordinary skill in the art would be motivated to modify Bar-Zeev as described above to provide intuitive user interaction [Hauenstein, para 0471].
As to claim 76, Bar-Zeev discloses the method of claim 75.
As noted above, the claim scope does not require the contingent limitations "performing the first operation includes concurrently rotating the first object and the second object within the environment relative to the viewpoint of the user in accordance with the movement" or "performing the second operation includes concurrently rotating the first object and the second object within the environment relative to the viewpoint of the user in accordance with the movement" to be performed if the precedent conditions "in accordance with the determination that the attention of the user of the computer system is directed to the first object when the first interaction input is detected" or "in accordance with the determination that the attention of the user of the computer system is directed to the second object when the first interaction input is detected" are not met [see MPEP 2111.04(II)].
Nevertheless, in an effort to advance compact prosecution, Bar-Zeev teaches in response to detecting the first interaction input [Figs. 2-3, 5, para 0069, 0074-0076, 0088-0089, system sensor detects user interaction with user eye movement while viewing displayed environment]:
in accordance with the determination that the attention of the user of the computer system is directed to the first object when the first interaction input is detected [Fig. 5, para 0075-0076, 0088, determine device user interest in first affordance with user eye gaze overlapping first affordance]:
performing the first operation includes concurrently [manipulating] the first object and the second object within the environment relative to the viewpoint of the user in accordance with the movement [Figs. 5-6, para 0088-0091, device enlarges both affordances to position closer to device user viewing displayed environment in response to determining eye movement]; and
in accordance with the determination that the attention of the user of the computer system is directed to the second object when the first interaction input is detected [Fig. 5, para 0075-0076, 0088, determine device user interest in second affordance with user eye gaze overlapping second affordance]:
performing the second operation includes concurrently [manipulating] the first object and the second object within the environment relative to the viewpoint of the user in accordance with the movement [Figs. 5-6, para 0088-0091, device enlarges both affordances to position closer to device user viewing displayed environment in response to determining eye movement].
Additionally, while Bar-Zeev does not specifically disclose wherein "concurrently [manipulating] the first object and the second object within the environment relative to the viewpoint of the user" is "concurrently rotating the first object and the second object within the environment relative to the viewpoint of the user", Hauenstein discloses: concurrently rotating the first object and the second object within the environment relative to the viewpoint of the user [Figs. 5C22-5C23, para 0295-0296, 0471, rotate virtual boxes in environment as user perspective of environment through display rotates].
Bar-Zeev and Hauenstein are analogous art to the claimed invention being from a similar field of endeavor of computer-generated environments. Thus, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the concurrently manipulating objects within the environment relative to the user viewpoint as disclosed by Bar-Zeev with concurrently rotating objects within the environment relative to the user viewpoint as disclosed by Hauenstein with a reasonable expectation of success.
One of ordinary skill in the art would be motivated to modify Bar-Zeev as described above to provide intuitive user interaction [Hauenstein, para 0471].
As to claim 77, Bar-Zeev discloses the method of claim 62, wherein:
the first interaction input is concurrently associated with a first predefined portion of the user and a second predefined portion of the user [Figs. 2-3, para 0069-0073, user interaction using left user eye (read: first predefined portion) and right user eye (read: second predefined portion)]; and
the movement includes movement associated with the first predefined portion of the user and movement associated with the second predefined portion of the user [Figs. 2-3, para 0069-0073, user interaction with user eye movement defined by each of user's eyes].
As to claim 78, Bar-Zeev discloses the method of claim 62, further comprising
while displaying the environment including respective virtual content at a third location in the environment [Figs. 5, 7, para 0087-0088, virtual environment includes virtual table positioned (read: third location) within virtual environment], detecting, via the one or more input devices, a third interaction input [Figs. 5, 7, para 0074-0076, 0088, 0092, system sensor detects user interaction] that includes:
the attention of the user of the computer system directed toward the respective virtual content [Figs. 5, 7, para 0074-0076, 0088, 0092, determine device user interest (read: attention) in portion including table]; and
movement of a first predefined portion of the user [Figs. 5, 7, para 0074-0076, 0088, 0092, detect user interaction with user eye (read: first predefined portion) movement];
while detecting the third interaction input, receiving, via the one or more input devices, an indication corresponding to … the respective virtual content within the environment [Figs. 5, 7, para 0074-0076, 0088-0090, 0092, device sensor determines gaze direction from user eye movement corresponding to environment portion including table];
in response to receiving the indication, [manipulating] the respective virtual content … in the environment [Figs. 7-8, para 0092, enlarge displayed portion of environment including table]; and
in response to detecting the third interaction input:
performing a third operation involving manipulating the environment relative to a third reference point, different from the first reference point and the second reference point, that is based on the third location of the respective virtual content in the environment in accordance with the movement [Figs. 5, 7-8, para 0088, 0092, device enlarges designated portion (read: third reference point) including table positioned in environment in response to determining eye movement, note separate affordance and table objects displayed across different locations].
However, Bar-Zeev does not specifically disclose: a request to move the respective virtual content within the environment; and in response to receiving the indication, moving the respective virtual content to a fourth location, different from the third location, in the environment.
Hauenstein discloses:
a request to move the respective virtual content within the environment [Figs. 5C4-5C5, para 0465-0466, detect gesture to move virtual box in displayed environment]; and
in response to receiving the indication, moving the respective virtual content to a fourth location, different from the third location, in the environment [Figs. 5C4-5C5, para 0465-0466, perform operation to move virtual box from initial position to upward position in displayed environment].
Bar-Zeev and Hauenstein are analogous art to the claimed invention being from a similar field of endeavor of computer-generated environments. Thus, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the received indication manipulating virtual content as disclosed by Bar-Zeev with the indication including a request to move virtual content moving virtual content from a location to a different location as disclosed by Hauenstein with a reasonable expectation of success.
One of ordinary skill in the art would be motivated to modify Bar-Zeev as described above to increase device operability [Hauenstein, para 0461].
As to claim 79, Bar-Zeev and Hauenstein, combined at least for the reasons above, Bar-Zeev discloses a computer system that is in communication with a display generation component and one or more input devices, the computer system comprising: one or more processors; memory; and one or more programs, wherein the one or more programs are stored in the memory and configured to be executed by the one or more processors [Fig. 1A, para 0056, 0058-0062, system device includes display, input sensors, processors, memory storing instructions executed by processors], the one or more programs including instructions for: performing limitations substantially similar to those recited in claim 62 and is rejected under similar rationale.
As to claim 80, Bar-Zeev and Hauenstein, combined at least for the reasons above, Bar-Zeev discloses a non-transitory computer readable storage medium storing one or more programs, the one or more programs comprising instructions, which when executed by one or more processors of a computer system that is in communication with a display generation component and one or more input devices, cause the computer system to perform a method [Fig. 1A, para 0056, 0058-0062, memory stores instructions executed by system device processor including display and input sensors] comprising: limitations substantially similar to those recited in claim 62 and is rejected under similar rationale.
As to claim 112, Bar-Zeev discloses the method of claim 62.
As noted above, the claim scope does not require the contingent limitations "performing the first operation involving manipulating the environment relative to the first reference point includes moving the second object in a third manner relative to the first reference point" or "performing the second operation involving manipulating the environment relative to the second reference point includes moving the second object in a fourth manner, different from the third manner, relative to the second reference point" to be performed if the precedent conditions "in accordance with a determination that attention of the user of the computer system is directed to the first object when the first interaction input is detected" or "in accordance with a determination that the attention of the user of the computer system is directed to the second object when the first interaction input is detected" are not met [see MPEP 2111.04(II)].
Nevertheless, in an effort to advance compact prosecution, Bar-Zeev teaches wherein:
performing the first operation involving manipulating the environment relative to the first reference point includes moving the second object in a third manner relative to the first reference point [Figs. 5-6, para 0088-0090, device enlarges second affordance displayed in environment at initial position of first affordance on table in response to determining eye movement]; and
performing the second operation involving manipulating the environment relative to the second reference point includes moving the second object in a fourth manner… relative to the second reference point [Figs. 5-6, para 0088-0090, device enlarges second affordance displayed in environment at initial position of second affordance on table in response to determining eye movement].
Additionally, while Bar-Zeev does not specifically disclose moving the second object in a fourth manner, different from the third manner, relative to the second reference point, Hauenstein discloses:
performing the first operation involving manipulating the environment relative to the first reference point includes moving the second object in a third manner relative to the first reference point [Figs. 5C22-5C23, para 0295-0296, user gesture rotating simulated environment with contact on virtual box displayed in environment rotates position of reference mat within rotated environment]; and
performing the second operation involving manipulating the environment relative to the second reference point includes moving the second object in a fourth manner, different from the third manner, relative to the second reference point [Figs. 5E12-5E13, para 0342-0343, user changing position of reference mat displayed in environment anchored to (read: fourth manner) moving reference mat, note different elements of displaying view based on reference mat compared to rotated environment].
Bar-Zeev and Hauenstein are analogous art to the claimed invention being from a similar field of endeavor of computer-generated environments. Thus, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify moving the second object in a fourth manner as disclosed by Bar-Zeev with moving an object in a manner different from another manner in an environment relative to a reference point as disclosed by Hauenstein with a reasonable expectation of success.
One of ordinary skill in the art would be motivated to modify Bar-Zeev as described above to increase user interface efficiency [Hauenstein, para 0471].
As to claim 113, Bar-Zeev discloses the method of claim 62.
As noted above, the claim scope does not require the contingent limitations "the determination that the attention of the user of the computer system is directed to the first object when the first interaction input is detected includes the attention of the user being directed to the first object without being directed to the second object" or "the determination that the attention of the user of the computer system is directed to the second object when the first interaction input is detected includes the attention of the user being directed to the second object without being directed to the first object" to be performed if the precedent conditions "in accordance with a determination that attention of the user of the computer system is directed to the first object when the first interaction input is detected" or "in accordance with a determination that the attention of the user of the computer system is directed to the second object when the first interaction input is detected" are not met [see MPEP 2111.04(II)].
Nevertheless, in an effort to advance compact prosecution, Bar-Zeev teaches:
the determination that the attention of the user of the computer system is directed to the first object when the first interaction input is detected includes the attention of the user being directed to the first object without being directed to the second object [Figs. 5-6, para 0090-0091, determine device user interest in first affordance with user eye gaze moving to first affordance not corresponding to second affordance direction]; and
the determination that the attention of the user of the computer system is directed to the second object when the first interaction input is detected includes the attention of the user being directed to the second object without being directed to the first object [Figs. 5-6, para 0090-0091, determine device user interest in second affordance with user eye gaze moving to second affordance not corresponding to first affordance direction].
As to claim 114, Bar-Zeev discloses the method of claim 62, wherein: prior to detecting the first interaction input, the environment further includes a third object at a third location that is outside of a field of view of the user from the first viewpoint [Figs. 2-3, para 0074-0075, device displays environment as viewed by user (read: third object) performing eye movement, note physical user location outside user field of view as displayed by device];
As noted above, the claim scope does not require the contingent limitations "performing the first operation involving manipulating the environment relative to the first reference point further includes moving the third object relative to the first reference point" or "performing the second operation involving manipulating the environment relative to the second reference point further includes moving the third object relative to the second reference point" to be performed if the precedent conditions "in accordance with a determination that attention of the user of the computer system is directed to the first object when the first interaction input is detected" or "in accordance with a determination that the attention of the user of the computer system is directed to the second object when the first interaction input is detected" are not met [see MPEP 2111.04(II)].
Nevertheless, in an effort to advance compact prosecution, Bar-Zeev teaches:
performing the first operation involving manipulating the environment relative to the first reference point further includes moving the third object relative to the first reference point [Figs. 5-6, para 0088-0091, device moves first affordance displayed in environment at initial position of first affordance on table as user gaze moves to first affordance]; and
performing the second operation involving manipulating the environment relative to the second reference point further includes moving the third object relative to the second reference point [Figs. 5-6, para 0088-0091, device moves second affordance displayed in environment at initial position of second affordance on table as user gaze moves to second affordance].
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 LINDA HUYNH whose telephone number is (571)272-5240 and email is linda.huynh@uspto.gov. The examiner can normally be reached M-F between 9am-5pm.
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, Adam Queler can be reached at (571) 272-4140. 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.
/LINDA HUYNH/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2172
Prosecution Insights