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 § 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.
Claim(s) 1-5 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Wright et al. (US Patent Application No. 2016/0378294) in view of Peleg et al. (US Patent Application Publication No. 2022/0198136).
Regarding claim 1, Wright discloses a computer-implemented method for utilizing a multi-modal cursor and for switching modes of the multi-modal cursor, the method comprising [see abstract and para. 0002; display, to a user of the head mounted display device, a virtual cursor on the display so as to appear at a location in a three dimensional environment, determine whether motion of a hand of the user in the images is trackable, and in response to at least determining that motion of the hand is trackable, modify a visual appearance of the virtual cursor to indicate that motion of the hand is trackable, and in response to at least determining that motion of the hand is not trackable, modify the visual appearance of the virtual cursor to indicate that motion of the hand is not trackable]: presenting a user interface with one or more display blocks, each of the one or more display blocks including selectable content [see para 0024 and figures 2-4; the head mounted display device determine whether motion of hand of the user is trackable. For example, the user's hand at positions are within the field of view of the optical sensor system. Accordingly, motion of the user's hand moving from position to position over time is trackable by the head mounted display device. However, as position outside of the field of view of the optical sensor system, motion of the user's hand moving from position to position over time not be trackable by the head mounted display device. The user's hand is determined to be trackable by the head mounted display when the head mounted display can monitor the hand for gesture input]; presenting a cursor prompt for a multi-modal cursor within the user interface, the multi-modal cursor being associated with (i) a first cursor mode comprising a non- contextual functionality mode and (ii) a second cursor mode comprising a contextual functionality-enabling mode [see para. 0038-0039 and figures 6-8; determining a context based on a captured series of images, the method include detecting a recognized object in the three dimensional environment. Proceeding to substep, the method include determining a gaze direction of the user of the head mounted display device. The recognized object may be either a virtual object or a real object having positions in the three dimensional environment. The recognized object is detected by the optical sensor system of the head mounted display device]; however, Wright fails to explicitly teach presenting both a traditional cursor mode icon and an artificial intelligence (Al) cursor mode icon within the user interface; and determining which mode of the multi-modal cursor to activate and utilize in response to user input selecting either the traditional cursor mode icon or, alternatively, the Al cursor mode icon, wherein user selection of the traditional cursor mode icon causes an activation of the first cursor mode and user selection of the Al cursor mode icon causes activation of the second cursor mode.
Peleg discloses presenting both a traditional cursor mode icon and an artificial intelligence (Al) cursor mode icon within the user interface; and determining which mode of the multi-modal cursor to activate and utilize in response to user input selecting either the traditional cursor mode icon [see para. 0066 and figures 3a-3c; a user can summon a field in the writing assistant (e.g., by initiating typing in workspace, positioning a cursor relative to workspace, hovering a cursor over a designated area associated with the GUI, selecting a menu item associated with the writing assistant, clicking on a virtual button to initiate the writing assistant, or any other suitable technique for initiating the writing assistant application). Similar to the example above, the writing assistant function relative to text the user enters directly into workspace and/or may function in response to text entered by the user into input field, a user can enter text input into field. Text input, provided in field, for example, may include one or more words, phrases, sentence fragments, sentences, clauses etc. with which the user may use to convey ideas, information, and/or to indicate context, etc] or, alternatively, the Al cursor mode icon, wherein user selection of the traditional cursor mode icon causes an activation of the first cursor mode and user selection of the Al cursor mode icon causes activation of the second cursor mode [see para. 0088; That is, if a user enters a text element into a workspace that the writing assistant determines improved, the writing assistant may alert the user by highlighting the entered text or by any other suitable technique. In some cases, the writing assistant may automatically generate one or more alternative text output options for the user to consider. In other cases, the user may be required to confirm an interest in viewing alternative text output options for entered text by, for example, selecting a GUI interface element, etc. The writing assistant's analysis of entered text elements may be triggered by any suitable action, such as entry by the user of a period or other sentence-ending punctuation, entry of a carriage return, etc. Additionally, a user may select a GUI icon, menu entry, etc. to initiate review of drafted text by the writing assistant. Such a GUI icon include any suitable type of virtual button, etc. Menu entries selected, for example, from a drop-down menu (e.g., a Review tab). The automatic analysis of preexisting text elements by the writing assistant may also be initiated by the user manually highlighting certain text elements, which may trigger the analysis by the writing assistant and the generation of text output options. In some cases, the user may initiate review of a text element by the writing assistant by highlighting a certain text element and then clicking on or otherwise selecting one or more GUI control elements, icons, buttons, or menu items].
It would have been obvious to one of an ordinary skill in the art, having the teachings of Wright and Peleg before the affective filing date of the claimed invention to modify, contextual cursor display system of Wright to include system analyzing electronic document text, as taught by Peleg. One would have been motivated to make such a combination in order to present icons for switching between contextual and non-contextual mode with known GUI cursor switching mode.
Regarding claim 2, Peleg discloses wherein the traditional cursor mode icon and the artificial intelligence (Al) cursor mode icon are presented simultaneously within the user interface [see para. 0093-0094; the writing assistant may generate text output options not as substitutes for text that already appears in a document, but rather as linking or bridging text. For example, a user may place a curser, for example, at a location in a document where the user would like the writing assistant to generate and insert text. In some cases, the user may place the cursor in the middle of a sentence. In other cases, the user may place the cursor between paragraphs, at the beginning of the document text, at the end of the document text, etc. In response, the writing assistant may generate one or more text output options for insertion at the cursor location. In such cases, rather than basing the text output options on highlighted text or user-entered text in a user input field, for example, the writing assistant may generate an original text output based on text that may precede or follow the cursor].
Regarding claim 3, Wright discloses wherein the method further includes detecting a user selection of the traditional cursor mode icon and determining to continue presenting the cursor prompt in a first format associated with the first cursor mode without changing a presentation of the cursor prompt from the first format to a second format associated with the second cursor mode [see para 0015 and figures 2-4; the head mounted display device use stereoscopy to visually place a virtual object at a desired depth by displaying separate images of the virtual object to both of the user's eyes. Using this stereoscopy technique, the head mounted display device control the displayed images of the virtual objects, such that the user will perceive that the virtual objects exist at a desired depth and location in the viewed physical environment. In one example, the virtual object may be a virtual cursor that is displayed to the user, such that the virtual cursor appears to the user to be located at a desired location in the virtual three dimensional environment. In the augmented reality configuration, the virtual object may be a holographic cursor that is displayed to the user, such that the holographic cursor appears to the user to be located at a desired location in the real world physical environment].
Regarding claim 4, Peleg discloses wherein the method further includes detecting a user selection of the Al cursor mode icon and determining to change a presentation of the cursor prompt from a first format associated with the first cursor mode to a presentation of the cursor prompt in a second format associated with the second cursor mode [see para 0144-0145 and figures 4A-4D; the writing assistant can receive a user selection of a text output option and automatically insert the selected text output option into the document text in place of at least a portion of the first drafted text element. If there are two or more text output options, then the writing assistant can use the selected text output option to further refine and update the text output options (e.g., based on user selection of a GUI control associated with a text output option refinement process). Various controls may be used to initiate and/or control the presently disclosed writing assistant system. For example, as discussed in the sections above, one or more GUIs associated with the writing assistant may include virtual buttons (e.g., icons, etc.), menus (e.g., drop down menus), among other virtual control elements that a user can interact with to control various aspects of the writing assistant. For example, a virtual control button may be included to initiate operation of the writing assistant].
Regarding claim 5, Wright discloses wherein the second format of the cursor prompt associated with the second cursor mode comprises a second shape that is different than one or more first shapes of the cursor prompt associated with the first cursor mode [see para 0026 and figure 2; the visual appearance of the holographic cursor may be modified to appear as holographic cursor which has a different visual appearance than holographic cursor. In this example, the visual appearance of holographic cursor is a filled circle. Accordingly, as the user moves the hand from position to position over time, the user is shown holographic cursor having visual appearance and is thus provided with the feedback that motion of the user's hand is not currently trackable and modifies the visual appearance of the holographic cursor to appear as a filled or unfilled circle, any suitable visual modification is possible, the visual appearance of the holographic cursor may be modified by changing a color, changing a shape, adding or removing an icon, or changing a size of the holographic cursor].
Allowable Subject Matter
Claim 6-20 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.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure (See PTO-892).
US 20250245030 A1 to Cyjon et al. discloses intent-based interactions in software platforms where cursor hover actions over data will engage an AI probe mode.
US 20190018497 A1 to Holz discloses the processor-executable mode-control module analyzes a path of movement to determine an intent of a user to change modes of operation by determining whether velocity, acceleration, and range of motion of movement along the path of movement crosses threshold to overcome a hysteresis associated with the first mode of operation, where the hysteresis is determined using a physics-based model of the first mode of operation. The processor-executable mode-control module interprets user gestures in accordance with a second mode of operation upon determining the intent of the user to change modes of operation
A reference to specific paragraphs, columns, pages, or figures in a cited prior art reference is not limited to preferred embodiments or any specific examples. It is well settled that a prior art reference, in its entirety, must be considered for all that it expressly teaches and fairly suggests to one having ordinary skill in the art. Stated differently, a prior art disclosure reading on a limitation of Applicant's claim cannot be ignored on the ground that other embodiments disclosed were instead cited. Therefore, the Examiner's citation to a specific portion of a single prior art reference is not intended to exclusively dictate, but rather, to demonstrate an exemplary disclosure commensurate with the specific limitations being addressed. In re Heck, 699 F.2d 1331, 1332-33,216 USPQ 1038, 1039 (Fed. Cir. 1983) (quoting In re Lemelson, 397 F.2d 1006,1009, 158 USPQ 275, 277 (CCPA 1968)). In re: Upsher-Smith Labs. v. Pamlab, LLC, 412 F.3d 1319, 1323, 75 USPQ2d 1213, 1215 (Fed. Cir. 2005); In re Fritch, 972 F.2d 1260, 1264, 23 USPQ2d 1780, 1782 (Fed. Cir. 1992); Merck & Co. v. Biocraft Labs., Inc., 874 F.2d 804, 807, 10 USPQ2d 1843, 1846 (Fed. Cir. 1989); In re Fracalossi, 681 F.2d 792,794 n.1,215 USPQ 569, 570 n.1 (CCPA 1982); In re Lamberti, 545 F.2d 747, 750, 192 USPQ 278, 280 (CCPA 1976); In re Bozek, 416 F.2d 1385, 1390, 163 USPQ 545, 549 (CCPA 1969).
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to CAO H NGUYEN whose telephone number is (571)272-4053. The examiner can normally be reached on Mon-Fri 9am-5pm.
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, Matthew Ell can be reached on 571-270-3264. 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 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.
/CAO H NGUYEN/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2171