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 .
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed on 07/14/2026 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
Generally, Examiner notes that Applicant relies on the presence of its own lexicography to establish patentability, however, while Applicant is allowed to be his own lexicographer in describing claim structures, Examiner must reject the claim based on the broadest reasonable interpretation of the claimed elements and not based on the presence of Applicant’s exact phrasing. See In re Morris, 127 F.3d 1048, 44 USPQ2d 1023 (Fed. Cir. 1997); MPEP 904.01(a).
Regarding the newly amended language of Claim 1, Applicant argues: “As highlighted above, the Applicant has amended the pending claims to recite an interactive process between a computer device (e.g., a terminal) and a server in which, an interaction signaling table is generated and the interaction signaling table includes a table type field that describes a type of the interaction operation and a business key field describing a business event indicated by the interaction operation. … Reilly does not teach a synchronization tool like the interaction signaling table that includes the table type field and business key field such that the server acquires different second immersive media content to be returned to the terminal for display because the performer in Reilly has no obligation to respond to the audience feedback data at all.”
Examiner notes that this argument is not clear. The claim does not require a performer to respond to the audience feedback data and the reasons for rejection do not rely on this function. The claims are directed to an interaction operation that is formatted as a table (a data structure that contains fields that indicate the type and data of the interaction). Reilly teaches that such interactions can be recorded by processing physical characteristics of a user or a performer and so on. Steines teaches that such interaction data can be formatted as a table-type data structure. See updated reasons for rejection below.
Applicant argues: “In order to improve the efficiency of the interactive process by allowing different interactive operations sharing the same synchronization tool, a mapping relationship is established between the table type field and the business key field in the interaction signaling table”
Examiner notes that these fields appear to describe a type of interaction and a corresponding data of the interaction (such as zoom + amount). These are logically and ordinarily linked information elements as noted in the prior art cited below. It is not clear that the claimed process is specifically linked to an unexpected efficiency over the prior art.
Claim Construction
Note that, for purposes of compact prosecution, multiple reasons for rejection may be provided for a claim or a part of the claim. The rejection reasons are cumulative, and Applicant should review all the stated reasons as guides to improving the claim language and advancing the prosecution toward an allowance.
Claim scope is not limited by claim language that suggests or makes optional but does not require steps to be performed by a method claim, or by claim language that does not limit an apparatus claim to a particular structure. However, examples of claim language, although not exhaustive, that may raise a question as to the limiting effect of the language in a claim are: (A) “adapted to” or “adapted for” clauses; (B) “wherein” clauses; and (C) “whereby” clauses. M.P.E.P. 2111.04. Other examples are where the claim passively indicates that a function is performed or a structure is used without requiring that the function or structure is a limitation on the claim itself. The clause may be given some weight to the extent it provides "meaning and purpose” to the claimed invention but not when “it simply expresses the intended result” of the invention. In Hoffer v. Microsoft Corp., 405 F.3d 1326, 1329, 74 USPQ2d 1481, 1483 (Fed. Cir. 2005). Further, during prosecution, claim language that may or may not be limiting should be considered non-limiting under the standard of the broadest reasonable interpretation. See M.P.E.P. 904.01(a); In re Morris, 127 F.3d 1048, 44 USPQ2d 1023 (Fed. Cir. 1997).
Component arrangements or rearrangements which do not modify operation of the device cannot be relied upon to patentably distinguish the claimed invention from the prior art. In re Seid, 161 F.2d 229, 73 USPQ 431 (CCPA 1947); In re Japikse, 181 F.2d 1019, 86 USPQ 70 (CCPA 1950) (shifting the position of the starting switch was not patentable because it would not have modified the operation of the device.)
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.
The factual inquiries 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 1, 8-11, 13, 18, 20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over US 20210366174 to Reilly (“Reilly”) in view of US 20220287676 to Steines (“Steines”).
Regarding Claim 1: “A method for processing immersive media data performed by a computer device, comprising:
in response to a video playback operation aiming at an immersive video, (For example “The VR system controller 12 can then subsequently transmit a stream of data to the audience devices 22 that includes the real-time audio data and the real-time body movement and facial expression for the 3D VR avatars 60. In such case, the audience devices 22 can initially construct and display the VR environment with the 3D VR avatars, and can then update the VR environment” which performs the video playback of the streamed VR immersive content. Reilly, Paragraphs 106, 107.)
generating a playback request corresponding to the video playback operation for acquiring first immersive media content of the immersive video and transmitting the playback request to a remote server; (For example, “At 422, the VR system controller 12 receives user input data from the audience devices 22 for controlling, for example, a viewpoint location and position within the 3D VR environment and, at 424, the VR system controller 12 outputs the audio/visual VR data to the audience devices 22. In this way, the VR system controller 12 can transmit only the data needed … The VR distribution server, for example, can receive the VR environment data from the VR system controller 12 and can distribute the VR environment data to the audience devices 22, as needed,” which acquires an immersive video content based on a user request of content to be played back on the user device. Reilly, Paragraph 107.)
receiving the first immersive media content returned by the remote server (“The VR distribution server, for example, … can distribute the VR environment data to the audience devices 22, as needed.” Reilly, Paragraph 107.)
and playing back the first immersive media content on a display of the computer device: (For example, “the VR system controller 12 outputs the audio/visual VR data to the audience devices 22. In this way, the VR system controller 12 can transmit only the data needed for the particular audience device 22 to display the visual data of the VR environment from that particular viewpoint location.” Reilly, Paragraph 107. Here a VR audience device “includes a computing device with a two-dimensional display” Reilly, Paragraph 10.)
in response to an interaction operation aiming at the first immersive media content, (“the VR system controller 12 generates an initial rendering … the VR system controller 12 receives user input data [interaction operation / feedback] from the audience devices 22 for controlling, for example, a viewpoint location and position within the 3D VR environment” Reilly, Paragraphs 105, 107. See examples of other input data in Paragraph 27.)
determining an information type field of a business event indicated by the interaction operation; (Under the broadest reasonable interpretation consistent with the specification and ordinary skill in the art, a business event can be a user interaction event, such as requesting a zoom, switching of content, or changing of the position, and the information type field can identify the type of the user operation. See Specification, Paragraphs 103, 3-5, 116-117. Prior art teaches examples of such user input information: “a viewpoint position or location and/or zoom level indicated by user input received by the audience device 22,” indicating that prior art also identifies types of operations including viewpoint change or zoom. Reilly, Paragraph 107. See additional treatment of a business key field below.)
recording an operation timestamp of the interaction operation; (“For example, the visual input synchronization module 30 can use time markers” Reilly, Paragraphs 71, 106. Similarly see “user interface data …be labelled, e.g. with a time stamp” in Steines, Paragraph 196.)
generating an interaction signaling [table] for the interaction operation based on the information type field and the operation timestamp of the interaction operation, (As noted above, “the VR system controller 12 generates an initial rendering … the VR system controller 12 receives user input data [interaction feedback] from the audience devices 22 for controlling, for example, a viewpoint location and position within the 3D VR environment” Reilly, Paragraphs 105, 107. This input data can be labeled with a timestamp as noted in Reilly, Paragraphs 71, 106 and similarly in Steines, Paragraph 196. See examples of other input data in Paragraph 27.)
Reilly does not explicitly teach that data is in a form of a “table.” Under the broadest reasonable interpretation consistent with the specification and ordinary skill in the art, the table is a data structure carrying multiple types of data within the same message. See examples in Specification Paragraphs 119-120. Reilly provides examples of such a data as noted in Paragraphs 107 and 26-27.
Steines describes this feature more explicitly, with tables embodied as “data packets (for example, as listed in Table 2) can comprise multiple types of data, e.g. data comprising instrument tracking data, data comprising HMD or other augmented reality display system tracking data and/or a data comprising patient or surgical site (e.g. a spine, joint, dental, vascular, organ or neural structure) tracking data and/or virtual user interface data and/or interaction with virtual user interface data ( e.g. with a tracked physical tool or instrument), all packaged within the same data packet.” Steines, Paragraphs 196, 198. Note that “TABLE 2 Data or data packets for wireless transmission and/or reception between two or more computing systems” just like it is used in Reilly. See Steines, Page 18. See statement of motivation below.)
the table including (i) a table type field describing a type of the interaction operation and (As noted above, the information type field can identify the type of the user operation. See Specification, Paragraphs 103, 3-5, 116-117. Prior art teaches examples of such user input information: “a viewpoint position or location and/or zoom level indicated by user input received by the audience device 22,” indicating that prior art also identifies types of operations including viewpoint change or zoom. Reilly, Paragraph 107. See formatting this information as a table / data structure above.)
(ii) a business key field describing a business event indicated by the interaction operation, wherein the business key field is configured to: … represent a zooming ratio corresponding to a zooming event when the table type field indicates that the interaction operation is a content zooming operation; … represent an event label and event status corresponding to a switching event when the table type field indicates that the interaction operation is a content switching operation; … represent first object position information of a business object viewing the first immersive media content when the table type field indicates that interaction operation is a first position interaction operation (Note that this element does not require the business key field to store any particular data, rather it indicates that this field is configured to store this type of data. Prior art teaches representing of such user input information for digital transmission and for commanding a computer processing operation: “a viewpoint position or location and/or zoom level indicated by user input received by the audience device 22,” indicating that prior art also identifies types of operations including viewpoint change or zoom. Reilly, Paragraph 107. See formatting such information as a table element above.)
and the first immersive media content belongs to a panoramic video; and (For example, “For example, the image data can be generated by a 3D 360° camera that captures image data of the interior of the concert space 44 from all angles,” thus providing a panoramic media. Reilly, Paragraph 102.)
represent second object position information of the business object viewing the first immersive media content when the table type field indicates that interaction operation is a second position interaction operation (Prior art teaches representing of input information for digital transmission and for commanding a computer processing operation, for example: “a viewpoint position or location and/or zoom level indicated by user input received by the audience device 22,” indicating that prior art also identifies types of operations including viewpoint change or zoom. Reilly, Paragraph 107. See formatting such information as a table element above.)
and the first immersive media content belongs to a volumetric video; (For example, the media can be volumetric: “The volumetric display, for example, can display the live [video] holographic data … such that the plurality of 3D VR avatars appear to be performing as holographs within an environment of the audience device.” Reilly, Paragraphs 95, 33.)
generating an interaction feedback message corresponding to the interaction operation (“the VR system controller 12 generates an initial rendering … the VR system controller 12 receives user input data [interaction feedback] from the audience devices 22 for controlling, for example, a viewpoint location and position within the 3D VR environment … The VR distribution server, for example, can receive the VR environment data [interaction feedback message] from the VR system controller 12.” Reilly, Paragraphs 105, 107. See examples of other input data in Paragraph 27.)
the interaction feedback message carrying the interaction signaling table (“the VR system controller 12 receives user input data from the audience devices 22 … The VR distribution server, for example, can receive the VR environment data [interaction feedback message] from the VR system controller 12.” Reilly, Paragraphs 105, 107.” Reilly, Paragraph 107. As noted above, the interaction data can be formatted and transmitted as a data structure corresponding to the claimed table. See Steines, Paragraphs 196, 198.)
transmitting the interaction feedback message including the interaction signaling table to a remote server, (“the VR system controller [remote server] 12 receives user input data [interaction feedback message] from the audience devices 22 for controlling, for example, [determining] a viewpoint location and position within the 3D VR environment” Reilly, Paragraph 107. See examples of other input data in Paragraph 27. “the VR system controller 12 can utilize a separate VR distribution server that is in communication with the VR system controller 12 and the VR audience devices 22. The VR distribution server, for example, can receive the VR environment data from the VR system controller 12 and can distribute the VR environment data to the audience devices 22, as needed.” Reilly, Paragraph 107. See formatting the interaction data as a table above.)
wherein the server is configured to: … extract the table type field and business key field from the interaction signalling table in the interaction feedback message, … determine the business event indicated by the interaction operation (First, note that details of a server on which the method operates do not limit the method to performing a particular step. Cumulatively, Prior art teaches : “the VR system controller [remote server] 12 receives user input data [interaction feedback message] from the audience devices 22 for controlling, for example, [determining] a viewpoint location and position within the 3D VR environment … VR system controller 12 can utilize a separate VR distribution server … The VR distribution server, for example, can receive the VR environment data [interaction feedback message] from the VR system controller 12 and can distribute the VR environment data to the audience devices 22, as needed,” in response to extracting the signaled information. Reilly, Paragraph 107. See formatting of signaling data as table data structures above, and detailed generation and extraction of information from data packets in Stenes, Paragraphs 196-198 and statement of motivation above.
As noted above, “The business event description includes at least one of the following: zooming event, switching event and position interaction event,” another words it is a user input regarding the video content. See Specification, Paragraphs 103, 3-5. Prior art teaches examples of such user input information field type: “a viewpoint position or location and/or zoom level indicated by user input received by the audience device 22.” Reilly, Paragraphs 107, and other examples in 26-27. See additional treatment of a business key field below.)
using the table type field and using the business key field, and (As noted above, Reilly and Steines provides examples that format interaction data into such field types in a table / data structure such as in Reilly, Paragraphs 107, 26-27 and Steines, Paragraphs 196-197 and various information type fields in Table 2. These are similar to the fields in Specification Paragraphs 103, 3-5)
acquire a second immersive media content which is rendered for responding to the interaction operation based on the business event; and (“The VR system controller 12 can then subsequently transmit a stream of data to the audience devices 22 that includes the real-time audio data and the real-time body movement and facial expression for the 3D VR avatars 60. … and, at 424, the VR system controller 12 outputs the audio/visual VR data to the audience devices 22,” which render the video data. Reilly, Paragraph 107.)
return the second immersive media content to the computer device: and … receiving, from the remote server, the second immersive media content and replacing the first immersive media content with the second immersive media content on the display associated with the computer device.” (“and, at 424, the VR system controller [content server] 12 outputs the audio/visual VR data to the audience devices 22 [computer device]. In this way, the VR system controller 12 can transmit only the data needed for the particular audience device 22 to display the visual data … The VR distribution server [another content server], for example, can receive the VR environment data from the VR system controller 12 and can distribute the VR environment data to the audience devices 22 [computer devices], as needed. … After outputting the audio/visual VR data to audience devices 22, the VR system controller 12 then loops back to 410 and receives additional facial expression data 410 and additional body movement data at 412, etc.” Reilly, Paragraphs 107-108. Thus the displayed media is updated / replaced continuously based on user interaction.)
Reilly does not describe the format in which the data is transmitted and received between devices and servers. To the extent that the term “a business key field” describes a field in a data structure, it is implicit that the digital data is transmitted and received by computers as fields in a data structure.
Cumulatively, Steines teaches that data describing immersive video content and environment can be organized as information fields in tables, data sets and data packets. See Steines, Paragraphs 195-198.
Therefore, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to supplement the teachings of Reilly to send a message carrying a business key field in the manner described in Steines, in order for the data elements to be “transmitted and/or received simultaneously” or “all packaged within the same data packet.” See Steines, Paragraphs 196, 198.
Finally, in reviewing the present application, there does not seem to be objective evidence that the claim limitations are particularly directed to: addressing a particular problem which was recognized but unsolved in the art, producing unexpected results at the level of the ordinary skill in the art, or any other objective indicators of non-obviousness.
Regarding Claim 8: “The method according to claim 1, wherein
a second type position field is used for describing position change information of the business object viewing the first immersive media content in a case that the first immersive media content is an immersive media content in an immersive video, (For example where “the 3D VR avatars being displayed at relative locations” the video content is an immersive volumetric video, and “each audience device is further configured to receive user input selecting and rotating a particular 3D VR avatar,” which describes a position change information. Reilly, Paragraphs 33 and 27 and similarly in 107.)
the immersive video is a volumetric video, (This element does not appear to limit the claim to performing a particular step. Cumulatively, prior art teaches: “In other features, each audience device includes a volumetric display and the live holographic data is displayed via the volumetric display.” Reilly, Paragraph 35.)
a field value of the second information type field corresponding to the object position information is a fourth field value and the second information type field with the fourth field value comprises the second type position field.” (See arranging such data into data tables, data sets, and data packets that incorporate data fields including time stamps in Stenes, Paragraphs 196-198. Although prior art does not provide examples of identical numbering and arrangement of data in a table, it is well understood that functionality of the data structure is based on knowing in advance the format of the data structure and the arrangements of the data in the data structure. Examples of specific data arrangements or rearrangements exemplify but do not modify this prior art function and thus do not patentably distinguish the claimed invention from the prior art. See Claim Construction section above. See statement of motivation in Claim 1.)
Regarding Claim 9: “The method according to claim 1, wherein the interaction feedback message further comprises
an extended description field; the extended description field comprises at least one of a signaling table number field, a signaling table identity field, a signaling table version field and a signaling table length field, (For example, see “Table 2” in Steines, Paragraph 189. Also note that Table 2 has an identity field describing “Data or data packets for wireless transmission and/or reception …” See Steines, Paragraph 189 and Table 2. Also note that numbering and labeling the data structures and data packets is a common practice. See Stenes, Paragraphs 250, 255, 132. See statement of motivation in Claim 1.)
wherein the signaling table number field is used for representing a total number of interaction signaling tables contained in the interaction feedback message; … the signaling table identity field is used for representing an identifier of each of the interaction signaling tables contained in the interaction feedback message; … the signaling table version field is used for representing a version number of each of the interaction signaling tables; and … the signaling table length field is used for representing a length of each of the interaction signaling tables.” (Note that these element describe potential uses of the data content, but do not require the method to employ additional data structures or it content beyond the limitations of the previous claim element. See reasons for rejection of the data structures above.)
Regarding Claim 10: “The method according to claim 1, wherein
the interaction feedback message further comprises an asset group attribute field and an asset group identity field, wherein the asset group attribute field is used for representing a dependency relationship between the first immersive media content and an immersive media content set contained in a target asset group; and (“For example, the visual input synchronization module 30 can use time markers associated with, or embedded within, the facial expression data and the body movement data to synchronize both sets of data together and generate the synchronized visual data,” exemplifying asset groups with time and location dependency relationships. Reilly, Paragraph 71. See treatment of data fields in Claim 1.)
the asset group identity field is used for representing an identifier of the target asset group.” (“For example, … the facial expression data and the body movement data” exemplifying identifiers of different data asset groups. Reilly, Paragraph 71. See treatment of data fields in Claim 1.)
Regarding Claim 11: “The method according to claim 10, wherein the asset group attribute field with a first attribute field value is used for representing that the first immersive media content belongs to the immersive media content set in a case that a field value of the asset group attribute field is the first attribute field value; and the asset group attribute field with a second attribute field value is used for representing that the first immersive media content does not belong to the immersive media content set in a case that a field value of the asset group attribute field is the second attribute field value.” (“For example, … the facial expression data and the body movement data,” where the facial expression data indicates that it is facial expression data and the body movement data indicates that it is not a facial expression data. Reilly, Paragraph 71. See treatment of data fields in Claim 1.)
Regarding Claim 12: “The method according to claim 1, wherein the business key field is configured to represent first object position information of a business object viewing the first immersive media content that belongs to a panoramic video when the interaction operation comprises a first position interaction operation or second object position information of the business object viewing the first immersive media content that belongs to a volumetric video when the interaction operation comprises a second position interaction operation.” (Under the broadest reasonable interpretation consistent with the specification and ordinary skill in the art, this element represents viewpoint information (first or second) from which the to view the immersive media content. Prior art teaches this feature: “At 422, the VR system controller 12 receives user input data from the audience devices 22 for controlling, for example, a viewpoint location and position within the 3D VR environment and, at 424, the VR system controller 12 outputs the audio/visual VR data to the audience devices 22. In this way, the VR system controller 12 can transmit only the data needed for the particular audience device 22 to display the visual data of the VR environment from that particular viewpoint location” Reilly, Paragraph 107.)
Claim 13, “A computer device,” is rejected for reasons stated for Claim 1, and because prior art teaches:
“a processor and a memory, (“processor hardware (shared, dedicated, or group) that executes code and memory hardware (shared, dedicated, or group) that stores code executed by the processor hardware.” Reilly, Paragraph 119.)
the processor being connected to the memory, the memory being configured to store a computer program that, when executed by the processor, enables the computer device to perform a method for processing immersive media data,” (“processor hardware (shared, dedicated, or group) that executes code and memory hardware (shared, dedicated, or group) that stores code executed by the processor hardware.” Reilly, Paragraph 119.)
Claim 18 is rejected for reasons stated for Claim 9, in view of the Claim 13 rejection.
Claim 20 is rejected for reasons stated for Claim 1, and because prior art teaches: “A non-transitory computer-readable storage medium, storing a computer program that, when executed by a processor of a computer device, enables the computer device to perform a method for processing immersive media data” (“The computer programs include processor-executable instructions that are stored on at least one non-transitory computer-readable medium” Reilly, Paragraph 127.)
Conclusion
THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. 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 MIKHAIL ITSKOVICH whose telephone number is (571)270-7940. The examiner can normally be reached Mon. - Thu. 9am - 8pm.
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, Joseph Ustaris can be reached at (571)272-7383. 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.
/MIKHAIL ITSKOVICH/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2483
Prosecution Insights