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 with respect to independent claim(s) have been considered but are moot because the new ground of rejection does not rely on any reference applied in the prior rejection of record for any teaching or matter specifically challenged in the argument.
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) 1-2, 7-10, 14-15, 20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over D2 US 20210349177 A1 in view of D0 US 20130103446 A1 and evidenced by E1 US 8570274 B1.
Regarding claims 1, 8, 9 and 15 D2 teaches
1, 8, 9, 15. (Currently Amended) A method for specifying an object, the method comprising:
Operating the pointing device in pointing mode by
determining a first position of a first locator and a second position of a second locator in the pointing device in a virtual space([0099] determine the exact position of the pointing device and pointing direction + fig. 9 implicit /obvious distance between antennas is known ), based on a first transmission delay of a data communication between the first locator and a locating device and a second transmission delay of a data communication between the second locator and the locating device; [0075](using TOF) [0082](using phase difference and fig. 6 also evidence by E1 US 8570274 B1 teaches well known methods to identify two positions on pointing device by identifying positions of different antennas col 8 lines 40 – col 9 line 20 )
determining pointing of the pointing device based on the first position of the first locator and the second position of the second locator[0128];
wherein the first locator and the second locator are disposed in the pointing device. (fig. 9)
but does not teach while D0 teaches
determining whether a pointing device is in a pointing mode or a control mode; [0052]
identifying that the pointing device is in the pointing mode; [0052]
and determining a specified virtual object based on the pointing of the pointing device, [0055]
It would be obvious to one of ordinary skills in the art at the time of the filing to modify invention by D2 with invention by D0 in order to initiate the operation with virtual objects on display.
Regarding claim 2 D2 teaches
2, 10, 16.(Currently Amended) The method of claim 1, wherein the determining the pointing of the pointing device comprises determining a direction in which a connecting line between the first position of the first locator and the second position of the second locator extends along a pointing end of the pointing device(fig. 6), as the pointing of the pointing device, and (fig. 6)
But does not teach while D0 teaches
wherein the determining the specified virtual object comprises determining a virtual object located in the direction of the pointing device as the specified virtual object.(fig. 4a-c)
It would be obvious to one of ordinary skills in the art at the time of the filing to modify invention by D2 with invention by D0 in order to initiate the operation with virtual objects on display.
Regarding claim 7 D2 does not teach but D0 teaches
7, 14, 20. (Currently Amended) The method of claim 2, further comprises: determining whether the pointing device is switched to the control mode, based on the specified virtual object; and performing a corresponding operation on the virtual object specified by the pointing device, based on the control of the pointing device, after the pointing device is switched to the control mode.[0052-0055]
It would be obvious to one of ordinary skills in the art at the time of the filing to modify invention by D2 with invention by D0 in order manipulate virtual objects on the screen.
Claim(s) 3-6, 11-13, 16-19 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over D2 US 20200034501 A1 in view of D0 US 20130103446 A1 and further in view of E1 US 8570274 B1.
Regarding claim 3 D2 does not teach but E1 teaches
3, 11, 16.(Currently Amended) The method of claim 2, wherein the determining the first position of the first locator and the second position of the second locator in the pointing device in the virtual space comprises determining the first position of the first locator and the second position of the second locator in a preset coordinate system, respectively, based on a first distance between the first locator and the locating device in a predetermined position in the virtual space and a second distance between the second locator and the locating device. (col 8 lines 40 – col 9 line 20)
It would be obvious to one of ordinary skills in the art at the time of the filing to modify invention by D2 with invention by E1 in order to set up the coordinate system and position the object in that coordinate system.
Regarding claim 4, 5 D2 teaches
4, 12, 17.(Currently Amended) The method of claim 3, wherein the locating device comprises a ultra wideband (UWB) receiver or a UWB chip, wherein both of the first locator and the second locator comprise a UWB transmitter, [0061]
But does not teach while E1 teaches
and wherein the determining the first position of the first locator and the second position of the second locator in the preset coordinate system comprises determining a first coordinate of the first locator and a second coordinate of the second locator in the preset coordinate system, respectively, based on a first transmission delay of a data communication between the first locator and the locating device and the second transmission delay of the data communication between the second locator and the locating device. (col 8 lines 40 – col 9 line 20 )
5, 13, 18.(Original) The method of claim 4, wherein a first vector between the first locator and the second locator is determined based on the first coordinate of the first locator and the second coordinate of the second locator in the preset coordinate system. (D2 fig. 6 implicit and E1 col 8 and col 9)
It would be obvious to one of ordinary skills in the art at the time of the filing to modify invention by D2 with invention by E1 in order to set up the coordinate system and position the object in that coordinate system.
6, 19. (Currently Amended) The method of claim 5, wherein the determining the specified virtual object comprises: determining a second vector between one of the first locator and the second locator and the virtual object in the virtual space; determining an angle between the second vector and the first vector; and determining the virtual object having the angle with the first vector being within a preset range as the specified virtual object.(D2 claim 9)
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 HELENA SERAYDARYAN whose telephone number is (571)270-0706. The examiner can normally be reached on M-T, 7:30-5pm.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Resha Desai can be reached on (571)270-7792. 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 the PAIR system, see http://pair-direct.uspto.gov. Should you have questions on access to the Private PAIR system, contact 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.
/HELENA H SERAYDARYAN/ Examiner, Art Unit 3648
/TIMOTHY A BRAINARD/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3648
Prosecution Insights