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 filed 3/17 & 7/10/2025
As per 7/10/2025, the current amendments are no longer considered to be non-compliant.
As per 3/17/2025, the double patenting rejection is still pending. The applicant’s arguments regarding Holzer and Jaubert are persuasive.
35 USC § 112 6th
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(f):
(f) Element in Claim for a Combination. – An element in a claim for a combination may be expressed as a means or step for performing a specified function without the recital of structure, material, or acts in support thereof, and such claim shall be construed to cover the corresponding structure, material, or acts described in the specification and equivalents thereof.
The following is a quotation of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph:
An element in a claim for a combination may be expressed as a means or step for performing a specified function without the recital of structure, material, or acts in support thereof, and such claim shall be construed to cover the corresponding structure, material, or acts described in the specification and equivalents thereof.
Use of the word “means” (or “step for”) in a claim with functional language creates a rebuttable presumption that the claim element is to be treated in accordance with 35 U.S.C. 112(f) (pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph). The presumption that 35 U.S.C. 112(f) (pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph) is invoked is rebutted when the function is recited with sufficient structure, material, or acts within the claim itself to entirely perform the recited function.
Absence of the word “means” (or “step for”) in a claim creates a rebuttable presumption that the claim element is not to be treated in accordance with 35 U.S.C. 112(f) (pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph). The presumption that 35 U.S.C. 112(f) (pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph) is not invoked is rebutted when the claim element recites function but fails to recite sufficiently definite structure, material or acts to perform that function.
Claim elements in this application that use the word “means” (or “step for”) are presumed to invoke 35 U.S.C. 112(f) except as otherwise indicated in an Office action. Similarly, claim elements that do not use the word “means” (or “step for”) are presumed not to invoke 35 U.S.C. 112(f) except as otherwise indicated in an Office action.
CLAIM INTERPRETATION
The claim limitations for claim 20, is considered to be specialized, and is considered to be specialized under the rationale that they would not be considered a standard function on any computing system, but are rather specific to the instant application.
The examiner notes the claim limitations meets each of the prongs of the 3-prong analysis detailed in MPEP 2181 (I).
Prong 1: The claimed “means” , “step”, or substitute for “means” that is a generic placeholder for performing claimed function. The instances of such means type languages are detailed below in a claim number, line and quoted word format to aid in understanding what is considered to be means type language:
Claim 20, line 2 “a means for converting data”, line 3, “a means for enhancing”, line 4, “a means for positioning”, line 5, “a means for making available”, line 7, “a means for applying”.
Prong 2: Functional language such as, “for”, “configured to”, or “so that” is present in the claim language.
Prong 3: No “means” or “step” type language is present modified by sufficient structure, materials or acts for performing the claimed function.
The examiner further notes the specification possess an adequate algorithm.
The examiner further notes the structure, ¶24, “A computer system can be implemented as an engine, as part of an engine or through multiple engines. As used in this paper, an engine includes one or more processors or a portion thereof. A portion of one or more processors can include some portion of hardware less than all of the hardware comprising any given one or more processors, such as a subset of registers, the portion of the processor dedicated to one or more threads of a multi-threaded processor, a time slice during which the processor is wholly or partially dedicated to carrying out part of the engine’s functionality, or the like. As such, a first engine and a second engine can have one or more dedicated processors or a first engine and a second engine can share one or more processors with one another or other engines. Depending upon implementation-specific or other considerations, an engine can be centralized or its functionality distributed. An engine can include hardware, firmware, or software embodied in a CRM for execution by the processor. The processor transforms data into new data using implemented data structures and methods, such as is described with reference to the figures in this paper. ” that is a specialized computer for the specialized functions.
The examiner notes that whether 35 U.S.C § 112(f) or 35 U.S.C. § 112 6th is invoked or not is controlled by the claim language, not by applicant’s intent or mere statements to the contrary.
An appropriate response to avoid interpretation under 35 U.S.C § 112(f) or 35 U.S.C. § 112 6th would be to amend the claim limitation to clearly recite a definite structure, material or act that entirely performs the recited function; or to present a sufficient showing that the claim limitation recites a structure, material or act that entirely performs the recited function.
An appropriate response to obtain interpretation under 35 U.S.C § 112(f) or 35 U.S.C. § 112 would be to amend the claim limitation to remove the structure, material or act that performs the recited function; or to present a sufficient showing that the claim limitation does not recite any structure, material or act that entirely performs the recited function.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of 35 U.S.C. 112(a):
(a) IN GENERAL.—The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor or joint inventor of carrying out the invention.
The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112:
The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor of carrying out his invention.
Claims 1 – 20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(a) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), first paragraph, as failing to comply with the written description requirement. The claim(s) contains subject matter which was not described in the specification in such a way as to reasonably convey to one skilled in the relevant art that the inventor or a joint inventor, or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the inventor(s), at the time the application was filed, had possession of the claimed invention.
The claims as a whole seemed to be directed towards new matter. As is, the examiner notes, for the sake of simplicity and clarity, the examiner will go limitation-by-limitation to clarify the issues:
Claim 1:
converting
The specification doesn’t support this.
The specification states, ¶56, “The AVR creation engine 304 converts data into an AVR object.” This however, doesn’t actually support this amendment. Rather, this portion of the specification, is pointing to Fig. 3, element 304 and the previous element to 304 is 302. Element 302 is RW data, which stands for Real World Data. The portion of the paragraph does not support the amended as presented, as this portion is referencing Real World Data, not “data” as claimed. The specification states, ¶56,” The AVR objects (or components thereof) are stored in the AVR object datastore 306.” This, also doesn’t support the amendment. This is pointing to Fig. 3 element 306. Element 306 represents Augmented Virtual Reality Object(s) datastore. This does not mean one or more objects as claimed. The actual support is what is strike through or amended out of the claim as shown above.
enhancing [[the]] one or more [[AVR]] objects to include at least one of processed data visualization and multiuser controls;
The specification doesn’t support this.
The specification, states, “In the example of FIG. 5, the flowchart 500 continues to module 504 with enhancing the AVR object to include processed data visualization and multiuser controls.” This however, doesn’t actually support this amendment.
positioning the enhanced one or more [[AVR]] objects in a virtual space[[-time]];
The specification doesn’t support this.
Paragraph 0059, states, “In the example of FIG. 5, the flowchart 500 continues to module 506 with positioning the enhanced AVR object in a virtual space-time”
Paragraph 0065, recites the usage of Virtual Space, “Uses of transparent AVR objects include interactive objects that hover over other objects or objects that take up virtual space, but that are not visible (though they may be audible).” This however, doesn’t actually support this amendment. The actual support is what is amended out of the claim as shown above.
making available, as augmented virtual reality (AVR} media, a scene tree including the virtual space[[-time]] in which the enhanced one or more [[AVR]] objects are positioned;
The specification doesn’t support this.
Paragraph 0060 states, “In the example of FIG. 5, the flowchart 500 continues to module 508 with making a scene tree including the virtual space-time in which the enhanced AVR object is positioned available as AVR media.” This however, doesn’t actually support this amendment.
applying a skyscape to a boundary of the virtual space, the skyscape including features that do not change as an audience member of the AVR media moves toward or away from the boundary of the virtual space.
The specification doesn’t support this.
Paragraph 0052, “A skyscape includes features that do not change size as an audience member moves toward a boundary of the spherical virtual space-time, which improves a sense of mastery over the virtual environment for audience members because of the similarity between the skyscape and the celestial map human beings see practically every day.” This however, doesn’t actually support this amendment.
Meaning claim 1 only has support for real world data, one or more augmented virtual reality (AVR) objects, AVR objects, virtual space-time, not data, one or more objects, objects or virtual space.
Claim 2:
classifying the data into one of raw data, symbolic data, and media data;
The specification doesn’t support this.
¶74, “FIG. 7 depicts a flowchart 700 of an example of a method for AVR object creation. The flowchart 700 starts at module 702 with classifying a data item as raw, symbolic, or media.” This however, doesn’t actually support this amendment.
when the data is raw data, spatializing an element included in the raw data, the spatialized elements being converted into the one or more objects;
The specification doesn’t support this.
¶75, “If it is determined the data is raw data (704—Raw Data), then the flowchart 700 continues to module 706 with spatializing elements. Raw data can be sorted, grouped, ordered, and otherwise manipulated for data visualization purposes.” This however, doesn’t actually support this amendment.
when the data is symbolic data, formatting the symbolic data, the formatted symbolic data being converted into the one or more objects; and
The specification doesn’t support this.
¶78,” Returning to decision point 704, if it is determined the data is symbolic data (704—Symbol), then the flowchart 700 continues to module 712 with AVR formatting symbols. AVR formatting of symbols can include, for example, converting the symbols to a signed distance field font.” This however, doesn’t actually support this amendment.
when the data is media data, formatting the media data, the formatted media data being converted into the one or more objects.
The specification doesn’t support this.
¶79, “Returning to decision point 704, if it is determined the data is media (704—Media), then the flowchart 700 continues to module 716 with AVR formatting media. AVR formatting of media can include, for example, using a vector imaging format such as SVG to convert images or frames of video to 3D.” This however, doesn’t actually support this amendment.
Claim 2, recites features that are not supported. There is not support for the level of broadness the claims are attempting. The specification only supports:
The method of claim 1, further comprising: classifying the real world data into one of raw data, symbolic data, and media data; when the real world data is raw data, spatializing an element included in the raw data, the spatialized elements being converted into the one or more AVR objects; when the real world data is symbolic data, formatting the symbolic data, the formatted symbolic data being converted into the one or more AVR objects; and when the real world data is media data, formatting the media data, the formatted media data being converted into the one or more AVR objects.
Meaning claim 2 only has support for real world data and AVR objects, not data and objects.
Claim 3:
3. (New) The method of claim 1, wherein the enhancing the one or more objects comprises animating at least one of the one or more objects.
The specification doesn’t support this.
¶56, “The AVR object enhancement engine 308 enhances the AVR objects by adding animation, interactivity, or the like.” This however, doesn’t actually support this amendment.
Meaning claim 3 only has support for AVR objects, not objects.
Claim 4:
4. (New) The method of claim 1, wherein the enhancing the one or more objects comprises adding audio to at least one of the one or more objects.
The specification doesn’t support this.
¶47, “. Enhancements can include adding AVR data visualization features, AVR interactivity, AVR dynamic personalization, animation features, and audio features, to name several.” This however, doesn’t actually support this amendment.
Meaning claim 4 only has support for AVR objects, not objects.
Claim 5:
5. (New) The method of claim 1, wherein the enhancing the one or more objects comprises modifying a belt panel associated with the AVR media.
The specification doesn’t support this.
¶80,” FIG. 8 depicts a diagram 800 of an example of an AVR object enhancement system. The diagram 800 includes an AVR object datastore 802; an AVR element datastore 804, which includes an AVR button element 806, an AVR dialog element 808, an AVR timeline element 810, an AVR gaze guide element 812, an AVR cursor element 814, an AVR aether element 816, an AVR avatar element 818, and other elements; an AVR object animation engine 820, an AVR object audio engine 822, an AVR object interactivity engine 824, an AVR belt panel engine 826, and a mixed reality (MR) transition engine 828. The AVR element datastore 704, AVR animation engine 820, AVR audio engine 822, AVR object interactivity engine 824, AVR belt panel engine 826, and MR transition engine 828 are coupled to the AVR object datastore 802.” This however, doesn’t actually support this amendment.
Meaning claim 5 only has support for AVR objects, not objects.
Claim 6:
6. (New) The method of claim 1, wherein the enhancing the one or more objects comprises adding a mixed reality (MR) transition functionality to the AVR media.
The specification doesn’t support this.
¶96, “In the example of FIG. 8, the MR transition engine 828 is intended to represent specifically-purposed hardware that adds MR transition functionality to an object or collection of objects. In a specific implementation, MR transition includes blurring out the real world to focus on processed data visualization within an AVR media.” This however, doesn’t actually support this amendment.
Meaning claim 6 only has support for AVR objects, not objects.
Claim 7:
7. (New) The method of claim 1, wherein the enhancing the one or more objects comprises adding interactivity to at least one of the one or more objects, the interactivity including at least one of an AVR button, an AVR dialog, and an AVR timeline.
The specification doesn’t support this.
¶80, “FIG. 8 depicts a diagram 800 of an example of an AVR object enhancement system. The diagram 800 includes an AVR object datastore 802; an AVR element datastore 804, which includes an AVR button element 806, an AVR dialog element 808, an AVR timeline element 810, an AVR gaze guide element 812, an AVR cursor element 814, an AVR aether element 816, an AVR avatar element 818, and other elements; an AVR object animation engine 820, an AVR object audio engine 822, an AVR object interactivity engine 824, an AVR belt panel engine 826, and a mixed reality (MR) transition engine 828.” This however, doesn’t actually support this amendment.
Meaning claim 7 only has support for AVR objects, not objects.
Claim 8:
8. (New) The method of claim 1, wherein a plurality of the enhanced objects are positioned in the virtual space, the method further comprising causing the plurality of the enhanced objects to move synchronously when the AVR media is presented.
The specification doesn’t support this.
¶123, “In a specific implementation, the AVR object positioning engine 912 is configured to cause a plurality of AVR objects (e.g., an AVR parent object and one or more child AVR objects) to move synchronously and/or together when one of the AVR objects is moved during the positioning of the AVR objects” This however, doesn’t actually support this amendment.
Meaning claim 8 only has support for the enhanced AVR objects, not the enhanced objects.
Claim 9-10 are considered to have new subject matter under the rationale they depend upon claims that have new subject matter as well.
Claim 11-20 recite similar limitations to that as claims 1-8 and 10 and thus are rejected under similar rationale as detailed above.
Double Patenting
The nonstatutory double patenting rejection is based on a judicially created doctrine grounded in public policy (a policy reflected in the statute) so as to prevent the unjustified or improper timewise extension of the “right to exclude” granted by a patent and to prevent possible harassment by multiple assignees. A nonstatutory double patenting rejection is appropriate where the conflicting claims are not identical, but at least one examined application claim is not patentably distinct from the reference claim(s) because the examined application claim is either anticipated by, or would have been obvious over, the reference claim(s). See, e.g., In re Berg, 140 F.3d 1428, 46 USPQ2d 1226 (Fed. Cir. 1998); In re Goodman, 11 F.3d 1046, 29 USPQ2d 2010 (Fed. Cir. 1993); In re Longi, 759 F.2d 887, 225 USPQ 645 (Fed. Cir. 1985); In re Van Ornum, 686 F.2d 937, 214 USPQ 761 (CCPA 1982); In re Vogel, 422 F.2d 438, 164 USPQ 619 (CCPA 1970); In re Thorington, 418 F.2d 528, 163 USPQ 644 (CCPA 1969).
A timely filed terminal disclaimer in compliance with 37 CFR 1.321(c) or 1.321(d) may be used to overcome an actual or provisional rejection based on nonstatutory double patenting provided the reference application or patent either is shown to be commonly owned with the examined application, or claims an invention made as a result of activities undertaken within the scope of a joint research agreement. See MPEP § 717.02 for applications subject to examination under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA as explained in MPEP § 2159. See MPEP § 2146 et seq. for applications not subject to examination under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA . A terminal disclaimer must be signed in compliance with 37 CFR 1.321(b).
The filing of a terminal disclaimer by itself is not a complete reply to a nonstatutory double patenting (NSDP) rejection. A complete reply requires that the terminal disclaimer be accompanied by a reply requesting reconsideration of the prior Office action. Even where the NSDP rejection is provisional the reply must be complete. See MPEP § 804, subsection I.B.1. For a reply to a non-final Office action, see 37 CFR 1.111(a). For a reply to final Office action, see 37 CFR 1.113(c). A request for reconsideration while not provided for in 37 CFR 1.113(c) may be filed after final for consideration. See MPEP §§ 706.07(e) and 714.13.
The USPTO Internet website contains terminal disclaimer forms which may be used. Please visit www.uspto.gov/patent/patents-forms. The actual filing date of the application in which the form is filed determines what form (e.g., PTO/SB/25, PTO/SB/26, PTO/AIA /25, or PTO/AIA /26) should be used. A web-based eTerminal Disclaimer may be filled out completely online using web-screens. An eTerminal Disclaimer that meets all requirements is auto-processed and approved immediately upon submission. For more information about eTerminal Disclaimers, refer to www.uspto.gov/patents/apply/applying-online/eterminal-disclaimer.
Claims 1-20 are rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claim 1-20 are of U.S. Patent No. 11,900,548. Although the claims at issue are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other because they’re broader in every way.
Instant Application
Patent
1. (Currently Amended) A method comprising:
1. (Previously Presented) A method comprising:
converting real world data into one or more augmented virtual reality (AVR) objects;
converting real world data into one or more augmented virtual reality (AVR) objects;
enhancing [[the]] one or more [[AVR]] objects to include at least one of processed data visualization and multiuser controls;
enhancing the one or more AVR objects to include at least one of processed data visualization and multiuser controls;
positioning the enhanced one or more [[AVR]] objects in a virtual space[[-time]];
positioning the enhanced one or more AVR objects in a virtual space-time;
making available, as augmented virtual reality (AVR} media, a scene tree including the virtual space[[-time]] in which the enhanced one or more [[AVR]] objects are positioned;
making available, as AVR media, a scene tree including the virtual space-time in which the enhanced one or more AVR objects are positioned;
applying a skyscape to a boundary of the virtual space, the skyscape including features that do not change as an audience member of the AVR media moves toward or away from the boundary of the virtual space.
applying a skyscape to a boundary of the virtual space-time, the skyscape including features that do not change as an audience member of the AVR media moves toward or away from the boundary of the virtual space-time.
Instant Application
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
Patent
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
Instant Application
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
Patent
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
Claims 1-20 are rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claims 1-20 of U.S. Patent No. 11,145,134. Although the claims at issue are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other because they’re broader in every way.
Instant Application
Patent
1. (Currently Amended) A method comprising:
1. (Currently Amended) A method comprising:
converting real world data into one or more augmented virtual reality (AVR) objects;
converting real world data into one or more augmented virtual reality (AVR) objects;
enhancing [[the]] one or more [[AVR]] objects to include at least one of processed data visualization and multiuser controls;
enhancing the one or more AVR objects to include at least one of processed data visualization and multiuser controls;
positioning the enhanced one or more [[AVR]] objects in a virtual space[[-time]];
positioning the enhanced one or more AVR objects in a virtual space-time;
making available, as augmented virtual reality (AVR} media, a scene tree including the virtual space[[-time]] in which the enhanced one or more [[AVR]] objects are positioned;
making available, as AVR media, a scene tree including the virtual space-time in which the enhanced one or more AVR objects are positioned;
applying a skyscape to a boundary of the virtual space, the skyscape including features that do not change as an audience member of the AVR media moves toward or away from the boundary of the virtual space.
applying a skyscape to a boundary of the virtual space-time, the skyscape including features that do not change as an audience member of the AVR media moves toward or away from the boundary of the virtual space-time; andapplying an aetherscape to a space within the boundary of the virtual space-time, wherein the aetherscape is visible as a grid of elements of diminishing size as the grid stretches away from a virtual camera location.
Instant Application
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
Patent
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
Instant Application
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
Patent
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
Claims 1-20 rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claims 1-20 of U.S. Patent No. 10,657,725. Although the claims at issue are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other because they’re broader in every way.
Instant Application
Patent
1. (Currently Amended) A method comprising:
1. (Currently Amended) A method comprising:
converting real world data into one or more augmented virtual reality (AVR) objects;
converting real world data into one or more augmented virtual reality (AVR) objects;
enhancing [[the]] one or more [[AVR]] objects to include at least one of processed data visualization and multiuser controls;
enhancing the one or more AVR objects to include at least one of processed data visualization and multiuser controls;
positioning the enhanced one or more [[AVR]] objects in a virtual space[[-time]];
positioning the enhanced one or more AVR objects in a virtual space-time;
making available, as augmented virtual reality (AVR} media, a scene tree including the virtual space[[-time]] in which the enhanced one or more [[AVR]] objects are positioned;
making available, as AVR media, a scene tree including the virtual space-time in which the enhanced one or more AVR objects are positioned, wherein:
applying a skyscape to a boundary of the virtual space, the skyscape including features that do not change as an audience member of the AVR media moves toward or away from the boundary of the virtual space.
applying a skyscape to a boundary of the virtual space-time, the skyscape including features that do not change as an audience member of the AVR media moves toward or away from the boundary of the virtual space-time.
Instant Application
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
Patent
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
Instant Application
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
Patent
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
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 ROBERT J CRADDOCK whose telephone number is (571)270-7502. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday 10:00 AM - 6 PM EST.
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, Devona E Faulk can be reached at 571-272-7515. 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.
/ROBERT J CRADDOCK/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2618