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 .
Applicant’s Submission of a Response
Applicant’s submission of a response on 12/31/2025 has been received and considered. In the response, no amendments were made. Applicant argued species II -V can all be used together, thus all claims 1 – 28 read on species I. After further review, the Examiner agrees with the Applicant. Therefore, claims 1- 28 are pending.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 103 which forms the basis for all obviousness rejections set forth in this Office action:
A patent for a claimed invention may not be obtained, notwithstanding that the claimed invention is not identically disclosed as set forth in section 102, if the differences between the claimed invention and the prior art are such that the claimed invention as a whole would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which the claimed invention pertains. Patentability shall not be negated by the manner in which the invention was made.
Claims 1 – 3, 5, 8 – 12, 14, 17 – 22, 24 and 27 – 28 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Matsuzaki (US Patent No. 10,653,947) in view of Yoshinobu et al. (US Pub. No. 20210299599 A1).
As per claim 1, Matsuzaki discloses a non-transitory computer-readable storage medium having stored therein instructions that, when executed by a processor of an information processing apparatus, cause the information processing apparatus to (see Col. 1, lines 52 – 65 and Col. 10, lines 19 – 40), during a waiting period before start of the game (when a new operation is ready to be performed in accordance with a progress of the game, the operation model video about the operation may start to be output, Col. 2, lines 49 – 52), display a model video in which a model object imitating a player holding a controller makes a pose set in advance according to the type of the game (operation model video providing a model of how to operate the input apparatus, wherein operation model video contains at least a part of a body of an operator of the input apparatus, Col. 1, lines 52 – 65 and Col. 2, lines 18 – 21, and may take the form of “animation or CG” rather than live action, Col. 9, lines 45 - 49), and for a first type of game, display the model video as an animation in which the model object rotates from an orientation in which a front side of the model object is displayed to an orientation in which at least a part of a back side of the model object is displayed (see Fig.4:32); start the game after the waiting period, display at least a motion instruction indicating a motion to be performed by the player in the game (an animation video indicating an animation occurring in the game when the operation indicated by the operation model video is performed, Col. 2, lines 22 – 27), perform an evaluation of movement of the controller on the basis of operation data acquired from the controller including an inertial sensor, and cause the game to progress on the basis of the evaluation (acceleration sensor, see Fig. 3, Col. 5, lines 4 – 22).
Matsuzaki does not expressly disclose executing a plurality of types of games in succession.
Yoshinobu et al. teaches a game apparatus in which game programs for a plurality of games each including at least a title scene in which a title screen is displayed and a play scene in which a play screen is displayed are stored in a storage medium and executed in a predetermined order, with the system switching from one game to the next when the prior game ends (see [0006] – [0010]).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to combine the pre-game operation model video of Matsuzaki with a succession of games framework in view of Yoshinobu et al. in order to allow each game in a succession of games has its own “how-to-hold” tutorial.
As per claim 2, Matsuzaki discloses during the waiting period, display the model video by the model object imitating a player holding controllers with left and right hands thereof; and
in the game, perform the evaluation on the basis of first operation data acquired
from a first controller and second operation data acquired from a second controller ( the input apparatus may have two controllers. In the case of the input apparatus having two controllers, different inputs can be accepted by the input apparatus depending on the relative relationship between the positions and velocities of the two controllers, the controller is configured by connecting a first controller and a second controller to each other, see Col. 2, lines 41 – 48 and Col. 4, lines 8 – 12).
As per claim 3, Matsuzaki discloses the first type of game includes a second type of game in which the pose is set as a laterally asymmetric pose for the model object (an operation model video showing a model of an operation, different inputs can be accepted by the input apparatus depending on the relative relationship between the positions and velocities of the two controllers, see Col. 2, lines 41 – 49, which encompasses asymmetric controller positions).
As per claim 5, Matsuzaki discloses a third type of game included in the first type of game, display the model video as an animation in which the model object rotates from the orientation in which the front side of the model object is displayed to an orientation in which an oblique back portion of the model object is displayed; and for a fourth type of game included in the first type of game, display the model video as an animation in which the model object rotates from the orientation in which the front side of the model object is displayed to an orientation in which a back portion of the model object is displayed (the operation model video may contain at least a part of a body of an operator of the input apparatus, since the operation model video contains at least a part of the body of the operator, information such as how to grab the input apparatus can also be conveyed, and the user can learn the proper operation, any animated camera/model rotation would show partial back, full back, side and the front of the model, see Col. 2, lines 15 – 21).
As per claim 8, Matsuzaki discloses display the model video by rendering the model object in the virtual space on the basis of a virtual camera; and for the first type of game, display the model video while rotating the model object or the virtual camera from a positional relationship in which the front side of the model object faces the virtual camera to a positional relationship in which the back side or an oblique back side of the model object faces the virtual camera (the operation model video may be rendered as “animation or CG”, see Col. 9, ll. 45–49, as a computer-generated image rendered from a virtual scene. Whether one rotates the model or moves the camera to achieve a desired viewpoint change is a basic implementation choice well within the ordinary skill in the 3D-graphics art and represents the conventional approach to rendering CG character animations).
As per claim 9, Matsuzaki discloses display the model video as an animation in which the model object makes the pose, while rotating the model object or the virtual camera (the operation model video may be rendered as “animation or CG”, see Col. 9, ll. 45–49, as a computer-generated image rendered from a virtual scene. Whether one rotates the model or moves the camera to achieve a desired viewpoint change is a basic implementation choice well within the ordinary skill in the 3D-graphics art and represents the conventional approach to rendering CG character animations).
As per claims 10 – 12, 14, 17 and 18, the instant claims are a system in which corresponds to the non-transitory computer readable storage medium of claims 1 – 3, 5, 8 – 9. Therefore, it is rejected for the reasons set forth above.
As per claim 19, the instant claim is an apparatus in which corresponds to the non-transitory computer readable storage medium of claim 1. Therefore, it is rejected for the reasons set forth above.
As per claims 20 – 22, 24, 27 and 28, the instant claims are a method in which corresponds to the non-transitory computer readable storage medium of claims 1 – 3, 5, 8 – 9. Therefore, it is rejected for the reasons set forth above.
Examiner’s Note
Claims 4, 6, 7, 13, 15, 16, 23, 25 and 26 are objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, but would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims. Matsuzaki in view of Yoshinobu et al. does not expressly teach or suggest in a predetermined scene before the plurality of types of games are executed in succession, set one of the left and right hands of the player as a dominant hand; and for the second type of game, according to the set dominant hand, in the display of the model video, cause the model object to make a first pose or a second pose laterally inverted from the first pose, and in the game, swap the first operation data and the second operation data used for the evaluation, and perform the evaluation; wherein the third type of game is a game in which the pose is set as a pose in which the left and right hands are positioned in front of the model object and for a fifth type of game in which the pose is set as a laterally symmetric pose for the model object and which is not included in the first type of game, display the model video as an animation remaining in an orientation in which the front side or the back side of the model object is displayed.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Lutz (US Patent No. 11,638,874) teaches changing a state of a game object in a video game.
Imai (US Patent No. 11,383,159) teaches a control program for a game device connectable to an operation device that is held by a player or attached to a certain position on the body of the player. The control program causes the game device to execute the following: causing a first image to be displayed on a display device in order to cause the player to perform a movement such that a posture of the operation device becomes a specified posture; retrieving posture information relating to the posture of the operation device at a certain timing; determining a degree of matching between the posture of the operation device and the specified posture based on the retrieved posture information; and causing a second image in accordance with the determination result to be displayed on the display device.
Suzuki et al. (US Pub. No. 2021/0001226) teaches an information processing apparatus acquires action data based on an output of a sensor according to a fitness action performed by a player, and executes a game event. In the game event, the information processing apparatus designates at least one type of fitness event from among a plurality of types of fitness events. Each fitness event causes the player to perform a fitness action. During the game event, the information processing apparatus executes a fitness event that causes the player to perform a fitness action corresponding to the designated fitness event until an ending condition is satisfied.
He et al. (US Patent No. 10,870,053) teaches perspective mode switching, wherein the terminal device receives a perspective switching instruction when the terminal device is in a first perspective mode in which the terminal device displays a scenario from a first perspective. The terminal device determines a second perspective mode to display the scenario from a second perspective. Next, the terminal devices adjusts a first display parameter of a first model of the scenario from the first perspective and a second display parameter of a second model of the scenario from the second perspective according to a preset rule for a transition from the first perspective mode to the second perspective mode.
Sato (US Patent No. 8,777,742) teaches A game device in which a first comparison unit compares an exemplary model posture (posture that is supposed to be adopted by a player) at a reference time and a posture of the player indicated by posture data acquired by a posture data acquiring unit at a compared time.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ANKIT B DOSHI whose telephone number is (571)270-7863. The examiner can normally be reached Mon - Fri. ~8:30 - ~5:30.
Examiner interviews are available via telephone, in-person, and video conferencing using a USPTO supplied web-based collaboration tool. To schedule an interview, applicant is encouraged to use the USPTO Automated Interview Request (AIR) at http://www.uspto.gov/interviewpractice.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Dmitry Suhol can be reached at 571-272-4430. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300.
Information regarding the status of published or unpublished applications may be obtained from Patent Center. Unpublished application information in Patent Center is available to registered users. To file and manage patent submissions in Patent Center, visit: https://patentcenter.uspto.gov. Visit https://www.uspto.gov/patents/apply/patent-center for more information about Patent Center and https://www.uspto.gov/patents/docx for information about filing in DOCX format. For additional questions, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000.
/ANKIT B DOSHI/Examiner, Art Unit 3715
Prosecution Insights