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 07/17/2026 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
On page 8, Applicant argues that the prior arts do not teach “calculating a distance between the identified reference point in the actor model and a second reference point in the actor model, where the second reference point a reference point that is closest to the identified reference point and not physically connected to the identified reference point, and the second reference point is selected based on an ordered list of distances between the identified reference point and the one or more reference points in the actor model”.
In response: As shown in figs. 1A-1B, Wooly disclosed calculating a distance between the identified reference point in the actor model and a second reference point in the actor model, col. 6, lines 27-31, note that the actor skeleton 104 and the character skeleton 106 can be placed at any arbitrary positions relative to each other in the virtual space 100. For example, the skeletons 104 and 106 can be placed some distance from each other on the plane 102 (e.g., as shown here). Col. 11, lines 28-30, solver component used for calculating mismatch/misalignment. In addition to that, Blaylock teaches calculating a distance, para. [0101], note that process 300A may be used to take the average of specific set of vectors which may be calculated based on finding distances between points in the two trajectories, wherein the second reference point is a reference point that is closest to the identified reference point and not physically connected to the identified reference point, para. [0102], note that to do this delta vector calculation step efficiently including finding the nearest point in the new user data trajectory to the center-of-mass-aligned reference model trajectory, process 300A may be used to narrow the search space for the “nearest” reference model point in the new user data trajectory. The process 300A may be used to seek a match for the points of the previous user avatar's trajectory, and the second reference point is selected based on an ordered list of distances between the identified reference point and the one or more reference points in the actor model, para. [0117], note that points are then chosen starting with the beginning of the time series and working toward the end such that each is the distance from the previous as assigned by the distances calculated in the previous steps. Therefore, the stated argument is taught by the combination of the prior arts.
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.
Claim(s) 1, 9, 10, 18 and 19 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Wooley et al. (US Patent Number 9,001,132 B1, hereinafter “Wooley”) in view of Blaylock et al. (US Publication Number 2020/0058148 A1, hereinafter “Blaylock”).
(1) regarding claim 1:
As shown in figs. 1A-1F, Wooley disclosed a computer-implemented method of retargeting animation in an avatar model (col. 4, lines 44-46, note that this description relates to constraint scenarios for retargeting actor motion. Retargeting can involve applying the motion of one subject (e.g., a human actor) to another (e.g., a computer generated character).), the computer-implemented method comprising:
receiving, for an actor model and an avatar model, a set of correspondence relationships between one or more reference points in the actor model and one or more reference points in the avatar model (col. 5, lines 20-25, note that the virtual space 100 here includes an actor skeleton 104 and a character skeleton 106. In some implementations, each of the actor skeleton 104 and the character skeleton 106 is defined as a computer-based model having certain properties);
determining a misaligned reference point in the avatar model relative to the actor model (col. 6, lines 3-9, note that some parts of the character skeleton 106 in some sense correspond to those of a human body (e.g., the actor skeleton 104). For example, the character skeleton 106 has two legs with an articulated foot each, knee joints, a pelvis, a spine, a head and two arms with respective joints. However, the character skeleton 106 is taller than the actor skeleton 104 in the virtual space 100);
identifying, based on the set of correspondence relationships, a reference point in the actor model corresponding to the misaligned reference point in the avatar model (col. 5, lines 9-12, note that the proportions of the individual limbs of the character skeleton 106 to each other may differ from those of a human body (e.g., the actor skeleton 104).);
calculating a distance between the identified reference point in the actor model and second reference point in the actor model (col. 6, lines 27-31, note that the actor skeleton 104 and the character skeleton 106 can be placed at any arbitrary positions relative to each other in the virtual space 100. For example, the skeletons 104 and 106 can be placed some distance from each other on the plane 102 (e.g., as shown here). Col. 11, lines 28-30, solver component used for calculating mismatch/misalignment); and
adjusting a location of the misaligned reference point in the avatar model based on the distance (col. 8, lines 6-9, note that the root of the character skeleton 106 is first matched with the root of the actor skeleton 104, and thereafter the character skeleton is adjusted so that its feet (in this example) match those of the actor skeleton).
Wooley disclosed most of the subject matter as described as above except for specifically teaching calculating a distance, wherein the second reference point is a reference point that is closest to the identified reference point and not physically connected to the identified reference point, and the second reference point is selected based on an ordered list of distances between the identified reference point and the one or more reference points in the actor model.
However, Blaylock disclosed calculating a distance (para. [0101], note that process 300A may be used to take the average of specific set of vectors which may be calculated based on finding distances between points in the two trajectories), wherein the second reference point is a reference point that is closest to the identified reference point and not physically connected to the identified reference point (para. [0102], note that to do this delta vector calculation step efficiently including finding the nearest point in the new user data trajectory to the center-of-mass-aligned reference model trajectory, process 300A may be used to narrow the search space for the “nearest” reference model point in the new user data trajectory. The process 300A may be used to seek a match for the points of the previous user avatar's trajectory), and the second reference point is selected based on an ordered list of distances between the identified reference point and the one or more reference points in the actor model (para. [0117], note that points are then chosen starting with the beginning of the time series and working toward the end such that each is the distance from the previous as assigned by the distances calculated in the previous steps).
At the time of filing for the invention, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skilled in the art to teach calculating a distance, wherein the second reference point is a reference point that is closest to the identified reference point and not physically connected to the identified reference point, and the second reference point is selected based on an ordered list of distances between the identified reference point and the one or more reference points in the actor model. The suggestion/motivation for doing so would have been in order to predict a reference model for tracking and rendering; and, to use the computational systems, networking, or display hardware to seamlessly allow users to see their motion in real-time (abs.). Therefore, it would have been obvious to combine Wooley and Gupta with Blaylock to obtain the invention as specified in claim 1.
(2) regarding claim 9:
Wooley further disclosed the computer-implemented method of claim 1, wherein relative positions of the one or more reference points in the actor model are based on one of the positioning of a live object or a programmed character animation sequence (see figs. 1A-1F, note that motion sequence is presented. Col. 4, lines 59-63, note that he retargeting system lets a director specify in real time one or more aspects of the actor's captured motion that should be preserved in the solver processing and hence applied to the character, where other aspects may not be preserved).
The proposed rejection of claims 1 and 9 render obvious the steps of the non-transitory computer-readable media storage claims of 10 and 18 the system claims 19 because these steps occur in the operation of the proposed rejection as discussed above. Thus, the arguments similar to that presented above for claims 1 and 9 are equally applicable to claims 10 and 18-19.
Claim(s) 2-3, 5-12, 14-20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Wooley and Blaylock, and further in view of Gupta et al. (US Publication Number 2022/0232162 A1, hereinafter “Gupta”).
(1) regarding claim 2:
Wooley further disclosed the computer-implemented method of claim 1, further comprising calculating, based on one or more dimensions of the actor model, a distance value corresponding to a precise zone (col. 7, lines 8-11, note that a constraint applies to the character skeleton, and as a result a separate value will be calculated for the joint angle 110B which could differ from the joint angle 110A. Also see col. 12, lines 42-44, note that the solver component 518 determines one or more joint angles for the character skeleton using the activated one(s) of the limb solvers 518B and the stance solver 518A).
Wooley disclosed most of the subject matter as described as above except for specifically teaching a distance value corresponding to a transition zone.
However, Gupta disclosed a distance value corresponding to a transition zone (para. [0066], note that the AR pose system 102 generates and provides an additional user interface including the additionally identified sample pose images, and transitions display focus away from the camera viewfinder 202 to the additional user interface).
At the time of filing for the invention, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skilled in the art to teach a distance value corresponding to a transition zone. The suggestion/motivation for doing so would have been in order to iteratively modify portions of the generated pose guide to indicate that the subject depicted in the camera viewfinder stream is coming into alignment with the generated pose guide (abs.). Therefore, it would have been obvious to combine Wooley and Blaylock with Gupta to obtain the invention as specified in claim 2.
(2) regarding claim 3:
Wooley disclosed most of the subject matter as described as above except for specifically teaching further comprising modifying the location of the misaligned reference point based on the distance, the distance value corresponding to the precise zone, and the distance value corresponding to the transition zone.
However, Gupta disclosed modifying the location of the misaligned reference point based on the distance, the distance value corresponding to the precise zone, and the distance value corresponding to the transition zone (para. [0103], note that the AR pose system 102 determines that the respective portions overlap if both portions have the same starting and ending coordinate points—meaning that both portions have the same length and positioning relative to the subject in the camera viewfinder. And the AR pose system 102 determines that a segment of the retargeted reference body frame overlay a segment of the subject body frame if both segments have the same starting coordinates and if the ending points of both segments are within a threshold distance (e.g., within ten pixels)).
At the time of filing for the invention, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skilled in the art to teach modifying the location of the misaligned reference point based on the distance, the distance value corresponding to the precise zone, and the distance value corresponding to the transition zone. The suggestion/motivation for doing so would have been in order to iteratively modify portions of the generated pose guide to indicate that the subject depicted in the camera viewfinder stream is coming into alignment with the generated pose guide (abs.). Therefore, it would have been obvious to combine Wooley and Blaylock with Gupta to obtain the invention as specified in claim 3.
(3) regarding claim 5:
Wooley further disclosed the computer-implemented method of claim 1, wherein each entry in the ordered list of distances includes a corresponding distance from the identified reference point in the actor model to a corresponding reference point in the actor model (col. 13, lines 23-26, note that the root position of the character is automatically computed and adjusted from an initial matching position so that the character's joints assume the same pose and stance as the actor).
Wooley disclosed most of the subject matter as described as above except for specifically teaching wherein each entry in the ordered list of distances includes a distance.
However, Gupta disclosed teaching wherein each entry in the ordered list of distances includes a distance (para. [0090], note that the AR pose system 102 calculates distances between feature vectors to determine the appropriate cluster with which to group a feature vector).
At the time of filing for the invention, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skilled in the art to teach wherein each entry in the ordered list of distances includes a distance. The suggestion/motivation for doing so would have been in order to iteratively modify portions of the generated pose guide to indicate that the subject depicted in the camera viewfinder stream is coming into alignment with the generated pose guide (abs.). Therefore, it would have been obvious to combine Wooley and Blaylock with Gupta to obtain the invention as specified in claim 5.
(4) regarding claim 6:
Wooley further disclosed the computer-implemented method of claim 5, wherein a first entry in the ordered list of distances includes the distance and a direction from the identified reference point in the actor model to the second reference point in the actor model (col. 13, lines 38-43, note that when the ground constraint is activated using the control 702D, the "foot plants" of the actor are detected, and at these moments the feet of the character are constrained to be on the plane 102 (e.g., FIG. 1A), such as a ground mesh. If the ground is moved up and down, the character will move with it, but keep the same stance).
(5) regarding claim 7:
Wooley disclosed most of the subject matter as described as above except for specifically teaching wherein the method further comprises: receiving, for one or more of the reference points in the avatar model, an associated personal space distance value; and adjusting the location of the misaligned reference point in the avatar model such that a distance between the misaligned reference point and a reference point in the avatar model is not less than the personal space distance value associated with the reference point.
However, Gupta disclosed receiving, for one or more of the reference points in the avatar model, an associated personal space distance value (para. [0095], note that the AR pose system 102 performs an act 404 of extracting a reference body frame from the selected sample pose image. In one or more embodiments, the AR pose system 102 extracts a reference body frame from the selected sample pose image by identifying locations for joints and segments of the subject (e.g., the human figure) depicted in the selected sample pose image); and adjusting the location of the misaligned reference point in the avatar model such that a distance between the misaligned reference point and a reference point in the avatar model is not less than the personal space distance value associated with the reference point (para. [0130], note that the AR pose system 102 determines that a segment of the retargeted reference body frame overlay a segment of the subject body frame if both segments have the same starting coordinates and if the ending points of both segments are within a threshold distance (e.g., within ten pixels)).
At the time of filing for the invention, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skilled in the art to teach wherein the method further comprises: receiving, for one or more of the reference points in the avatar model, an associated personal space distance value; and adjusting the location of the misaligned reference point in the avatar model such that a distance between the misaligned reference point and a reference point in the avatar model is not less than the personal space distance value associated with the reference point. The suggestion/motivation for doing so would have been in order to iteratively modify portions of the generated pose guide to indicate that the subject depicted in the camera viewfinder stream is coming into alignment with the generated pose guide (abs.). Therefore, it would have been obvious to combine Wooley and Blaylock with Gupta to obtain the invention as specified in claim 7.
(6) regarding claim 8:
Wooley disclosed most of the subject matter as described as above except for specifically teaching wherein each of the actor model and the avatar model are associated with a single frame of an animated motion sequence having a plurality of frames.
However, Gupta disclosed wherein each of the actor model and the avatar model are associated with a single frame of an animated motion sequence having a plurality of frames (para. [0058], note that the camera viewfinder 202 displays a camera viewfinder stream of digital images or image frames depicting a subject 204 within a scene 206).
At the time of filing for the invention, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skilled in the art to teach wherein each of the actor model and the avatar model are associated with a single frame of an animated motion sequence having a plurality of frames. The suggestion/motivation for doing so would have been in order to iteratively modify portions of the generated pose guide to indicate that the subject depicted in the camera viewfinder stream is coming into alignment with the generated pose guide (abs.). Therefore, it would have been obvious to combine Wooley and Blaylock with Gupta to obtain the invention as specified in claim 8.
The proposed rejection of claims 2-3, 5-8 render obvious the steps of the non-transitory computer-readable media storage claims of 11-12, 14-17 and the system claims 20 because these steps occur in the operation of the proposed rejection as discussed above. Thus, the arguments similar to that presented above for claims 2-3, 5-8 are equally applicable to claims 11-12, 14-17 and 20.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 4, 13 and 21 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. The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter: “determining that a magnitude of the distance is greater than the distance value corresponding to the transition zone; and removing an adjustment to the location of the misaligned reference point based on the determination that the magnitude of the distance is greater than the distance value corresponding to the transition zone”, as recited in claims 4 and 13. And “calculating, based on one or more dimensions of the actor model, a first distance value corresponding to a precise zone and a second distance value corresponding to a transition zone, wherein, when a magnitude of the distance is greater than the first distance value and less than or equal to the second distance value, adjusting the location of the misaligned reference point includes scaling the distance based on a scaling factor”, as recited in claim 21.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Wang et al. (US Publication Number 2023/0123820 A1) disclosed method that utilize a character animation neural network informed by motion and pose signatures to generate a digital video through person-specific appearance modeling and motion retargeting.
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 communication from the examiner should be directed to Hilina K Demeter whose telephone number is (571) 270-1676.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, King Y. Poon could be reached at (571) 270-0728. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300.
Information regarding the status of an application may be obtained from the Patent Application Information Retrieval (PAIR) system. Status information for published applications may be obtained from either Private PAIR or Public PAIR. Status information for unpublished applications is available through Private PAIR only. For more information about PAIR system, see http://pari-direct.uspto.gov. Should you have questions on access to the Private PAIR system, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative or access to the automated information system, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000.
/HILINA K DEMETER/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2617
