DETAILED ACTION
Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status
The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of 35 U.S.C. 112(a):
(a) IN GENERAL.—The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor or joint inventor of carrying out the invention.
The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112:
The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor of carrying out his invention.
Claims 1-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(a) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), first paragraph, as failing to comply with the written description requirement. The claim(s) contains subject matter which was not described in the specification in such a way as to reasonably convey to one skilled in the relevant art that the inventor or a joint inventor, or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the inventor(s), at the time the application was filed, had possession of the claimed invention. Claims 1, 8 and 15 recite
“wherein concentric circles of increasing diameter centered about the location of the activity for the user are offset from a location of the user and represent increasing distances between the location of the user and the location of the activity”. Examiner fails to find sufficient support in Applicant’s originally filed specification for an “offset” or “offset from a location of the user and represent increasing distances between the location of the user”. Applicant’s specification discloses FIG. 6, when the user is furthest from the location 602 at the outermost circle, and therefore the user is not “offset from a location”. Examiner fails to find sufficient support for “displaying the concentric circles centered about the location of the activity and the contextual information corresponding to the contextual information granularity level in the AR interface in three dimensions”. Applicant’s specification, paragraph 0060, discloses “Concentric circles around the location 602 represent distances between the user and the location 602 with increasing location being illustrated as a circle with increased diameter. As shown in FIG. 6, when the user is furthest from the location 602 at the outermost circle, the contextual information granularity level is relatively low and the AR goggles 601 will overlay contextual information at a relatively low level of information (i.e., 20%) and no interactive options (i.e., 0%) on the real-world display of the location 602. As the user moves to the intermediate circle, the contextual information granularity level is at an intermediate level and the AR goggles 601 will overlay contextual information at an intermediate level of information (i.e., 50%) and some interactive options (i.e., 30%) on the real-world display of the location 602. As the user moves to the closest circle, the contextual information granularity level is at a relatively high level and the AR goggles 601 will overlay contextual information at a relatively high level of information (i.e., 100%) and all of the interactive options (i.e., 100%) on the real-world display of the location 602”; and paragraph 0061, “updating of the contextual information granularity level as the distance changes to obtain a new contextual information granularity level of block 504 can be executed discretely or in discrete steps as illustrated by the concentric circles of discrete distances from the location 602. In these or other cases, the updating occurs when the user reaches certain predefined distances from the location 602, where the predefined distances can be determined or calculated by the machine-learning algorithm”. Applicant’s specification fails to recite “displaying the concentric circles centered about the location of the activity and the contextual information corresponding to the contextual information granularity level in the AR interface in three dimensions”.
Claims that are noted above as being rejected, but not specifically disclosed, are rejected based upon their dependency on rejected independent claims.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
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 (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) 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.
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.
Claim(s) 1-20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Goyal et al., U.S. Patent Number 9,353,965 B1, in view of Singh, U.S. Patent Number 11,024,091 B2.
Regarding claim 1, Goyal discloses a computer-implemented method for determining context granularity (col. 9, lines 11-12, derived data can be highly beneficial at a variety of different granularities), the computer-implemented method comprising: determining, from a perspective of a user, an activity for the user and a distance between the user and a location of the activity (col. 37, lines 45-49, depending on a user’s velocity, motion path/signature, identity, and/or distance from the smart-home device, the user interface can be modified), wherein concentric circles of increasing diameter centered about the location of the activity for the user are offset from a location of the user and represent increasing distances between the location of the user and the location of the activity (col. 37, lines 50-53, different user positions relative to a smart-home device; the responsive ranges are illustrated as concentric circles; responsive ranges may be oval; FIG. 23); ascertaining a contextual information granularity level for displaying contextual information relevant to the activity by determining one of the concentric circles in which the user is located (col. 38, lines 8-10, as the user moves within the range of the far-field proximity sensor, some embodiments may activate the user interface and display information in a far-field setting; the information displayed while the user is in the far-field region may be displayed in a large font size, using high contrasting colors); displaying the concentric circles centered about the location of the activity and the contextual information corresponding to the contextual information granularity level (FIG. 23, col. 37, lines 52-52, responsive ranges are illustrated as concentric circles; as defined by Applicant’s specification paragraph 0060, Concentric circles around the location 602 represent distances between the user and the location 602 with increasing location being illustrated as a circle with increased diameter); updating the contextual information granularity level as the distance between the user and the location of the activity changes and the user enters a new one of the concentric circles to obtain a new contextual information granularity level (col. 38, lines 20-26, as the user enters the near-field range, and thus generates a response on the near-field proximity sensor, the user interface of the smart-home device can change the display into a near-field setting; the near-field graphical display may include smaller fonts, menu options, textual/numerical information, and other information that would be more useful to a user).
However it is noted that Goyal col. 37, lines 39-44, responses generated by the far-field proximity sensor and the near-field proximity sensor are used to activate a user display; in addition to merely activating a user interface, some embodiments may offer more sophisticated and advanced user interface features. Goyal fails to disclose contextual information relevant to the activity in an augmented reality (AR) interface; displaying the concentric circles in three dimensional; blocking at least some detail of the concentric circles and a real-world display in the AR interface; displaying the contextual information corresponding to the new contextual information granularity level in the AR interface, wherein the displaying of the contextual information comprises overlaying the contextual information on and blocking at least some detail of the concentric circles and a real-world display in the AR interface.
Singh discloses contextual information relevant to the activity in an augmented reality (AR) interface (FIG. 3); blocking at least some detail of the concentric circles and a real-world display in the AR interface (FIG. 3); displaying the contextual information corresponding to the new contextual information granularity level in the AR interface, wherein the displaying of the contextual information comprises overlaying the contextual information on and blocking at least some detail of the concentric circles and a real-world display in the AR interface (col. 3, lines 45-50, determining a user's activity zone, highlighting a real-world object based on where the real-world object lies with respect to the activity zone, displaying a real-world object's AR information outside an activity zone, and displaying an association of the AR information with a real-world object; col. 8, lines 53-55, sample activity zone is shown as three-dimensional oval centered on the direction of activity; col. 1, lines 24-25, overlaid on top of a real-world view and block or obscure).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to include in the display of information as disclosed by Goyal, implementing the display as an AR interface as disclosed by Singh, to create an additional display option for viewing the information with display annotations overlaid on the real world.
Regarding claim 2, Singh discloses wherein the AR interface is supported by goggles wearable by the user (col. 1, lines 22-23, augmented reality (AR) glasses.
Regarding claim 3, Goyal discloses wherein the ascertaining is executed by a machine-learning algorithm and is based on real-time updateable historic data of the user, the activity and surroundings (col. 33, lines 14-22, recognition algorithms can be learning algorithms that dynamically update and store data in order to better recognize user intent; indication of user intent stored with the known motion signature can be updated based on whether the user actually interacts with the device).
Regarding claim 4, Goyal discloses wherein: at a lowest contextual information granularity level, the contextual informal includes no interactive options and no interactive options are displayed (col. 38, lines 9-10, may activate the user interface and display information in a far-field setting; col. 15-16, icons or graphics may be displayed), at a relatively low contextual information granularity level, the contextual information comprises a broad description of information relevant to the activity and interactive options relevant to the activity for interaction with by the user comprising a set of basic interactive options comprising a lighting or a highlighting of the location of the activity and alerts as to intervening objects to be avoided (col. 2, line 53, second graphical display includes an alert icon; FIG. 29), and at a relatively high contextual information granularity level, the contextual information comprises the broad description of the information relevant to the activity (col. 2, lines 54-55, the first graphical display includes a textual description of an alert message of the alert icon), a narrow description of the activity and additional information about a relationship between the activity and externalities and interactive options relevant to the activity for interaction with by the user comprising a set of basic, intermediate and advanced interactive options (col. 43, lines 412, discern a motion signature that the user is approaching; the user intends to interact; can use this information to provide progressively more information on the user interface as the user draws near).
Regarding claim 5, Goyal discloses wherein: the displaying of the contextual information corresponding to the contextual information granularity level comprises displaying a first level of the contextual information and displaying the first level of the interactive options, and the displaying of the contextual information corresponding to the new contextual information granularity level comprises displaying a second level of the contextual information, which differs from the first level, and displaying the second level of the interactive options, which differs from the first level (col. 40, lines 52-59, as the user move close to the smart-home device, the near field display can populate the graphical icon with textual information describing the alert; the alert icon has been populated with an indication that an alert has been received; additionally as the user moves closer to the smart home device, the graphical icon can be populated with menu options; the user can be presented with menu options to either read the alert or to ignore the alert).
Regarding claim 6, Singh discloses wherein the computer-implemented method further comprises displaying additional information of surroundings of the user and the location in the AR interface (col. 12, lines 32-34, additional AR information may be displayed if the user looks toward current AR information).
Regarding claim 7, Goyal discloses wherein each instance of the updating is discrete (col. 8, lines 3-6, updates can be automatically sent from the central server or cloud-computing system to devices (e.g., when available, when purchased, or at some routine intervals).
Regarding claims 8-14, they are rejected based upon similar rational as above claims 1-7. Goyal further discloses a non-transitory computer program product for determining context granularity, the computer program product comprising one or more computer readable storage media having computer readable program code collectively stored on the one or more computer readable storage media, the computer readable program code being executed by a processor of a computer system to cause the computer system to perform a method (col. 6, lines 40-43).
Regarding claims 15-20, they are rejected based upon similar rational as above claims 1, 2 and 5-7. Goyal further discloses a computing system comprising: a processor; a memory coupled to the processor; and one or more computer readable storage media coupled to the processor, the one or more computer readable storage media collectively containing instructions that are executed by the processor via the memory to implement cause the processor to perform steps (col. 6, lines 40-43).
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments, see page 9, filed 06/18/2026, with respect to the rejection(s) of claim(s) 1-20 under Singh, McHugh and MacBeth have been fully considered and are persuasive. Therefore, the rejection has been withdrawn. However, upon further consideration, a new ground(s) of rejection is made in view of Goyal in view of Singh. Applicant argues the prior art cited fails to disclose “concentric circles” as illustrated. Examiner responds Goyal discloses col. 37, lines 50-53, different user positions relative to a smart-home device; the responsive ranges are illustrated as concentric circles.
Applicant argues Singh fails to disclose a three-dimensional display and display the contextual information overlayed on and blocking at least some detail of concentric circles and real-world object in an AR display. Examiner responds Singh discloses col. 1, lines 24-25, overlaid on top of a real-world view and block or obscure; and further discloses col. 8, lines 53-55, sample activity zone is shown as three-dimensional oval centered on the direction of activity.
Conclusion
Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP § 706.07(a). Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a).
A shortened statutory period for reply to this final action is set to expire THREE MONTHS from the mailing date of this action. In the event a first reply is filed within TWO MONTHS of the mailing date of this final action and the advisory action is not mailed until after the end of the THREE-MONTH shortened statutory period, then the shortened statutory period will expire on the date the advisory action is mailed, and any nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) pursuant to 37 CFR 1.136(a) will be calculated from the mailing date of the advisory action. In no event, however, will the statutory period for reply expire later than SIX MONTHS from the mailing date of this final action.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Motilewa Good-Johnson whose telephone number is (571)272-7658. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday 6am-2:30pm.
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, Jason Chan can be reached at 571-272-3022. 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.
MOTILEWA . GOOD JOHNSON
Primary Examiner
Art Unit 2616
/MOTILEWA GOOD-JOHNSON/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2619
Prosecution Insights