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 26 January 2026 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
Applicant asserts:
Regarding the rejection of Claim 1 under 35 U.S.C. § 103, it is respectfully submitted that Thall and Anderson fail to disclose "obtaining, based on a mapping between a first audio parameter control and the movement speed information of the virtual character indicated by the plurality of motion parameters according to a first warping function," "the first audio parameter control being configured to control characteristics of the friction sound based on the mapping between the first audio parameter control and the movement speed information of the virtual character," and "obtaining, based on a mapping between a second audio parameter control and (i) the deformation rate and (ii) the deformation region size of the object indicated by the plurality of motion parameters, a crumpling sound from a crumpling audio database according to a second warping function," as discussed during the interview. Accordingly, it is respectfully submitted that Claim 1 (and all associated dependent claims) patentably defines over Thall and Anderson.
Independent Claim 14, although differing in scope and/or statutory class, patentably defines over Thall and Anderson at least for reasons analogous to the reasons stated above for the patentability of Claim 1. Accordingly, it is respectfully submitted that Claim 14 (and all associated dependent claims) patentably defines over Thall and Anderson.
Examiner respectfully disagrees. After further consideration, Examiner finds that the combination of Thall in view of Anderson meet these limitations as mapped in the rejections that appear below. To summarize, Thall retrieves sounds from a memory, and this is based on how closely an object is, e.g. Thall provides an example where as a helicopter moves in closer, the sound script introduces an engine noise loop which is produced by another sound file stored in a memor; [0041]. Thall also details dynamic modification of reproduced sound based on proximity, movment, and occlusion, e.g. sound is produced by the object is rendered may be changed based on the proximity of the listener to the object; [0037]; and sound Script for dynamic, procedural modification of the audio signal processing (e.g., performed by an audio rendering module 755) over time; and finally, that river 210 is said to produce sound from the surface of the entire volume of the shape that represents it; [0026]).
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, 3 – 5, 14, and 16 – 18 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Thall et al. (hereinafter Thall, U.S. Patent Application Publication 2020/0296533) in view of Anderson et al. (hereinafter Anderson, U.S. Patent Application Publication 2010/0261526).
Regarding Claim 1, Thall discloses:
A method of simulating sound of an object that is generated by motion of a virtual character (e.g. simulating audio of various elements, a river, water, a helicopter [0041]; in a virtual environment [0039]; abstract), the method comprising:
determining a plurality of motion parameters associated with the motion (e.g. audio engine determines how to render sound as the object moves, rotates, changes orientation or is occluded; [0035]; note further repeatedly updating LOD metrics of the object and listener as they are moving; [0038]-[0039]; and see also parameters for sound synthesis; [0069], [0037]) from a simulated object mesh (e.g. shape of geometric volume or object, note for example simplified bounding volumes [“meshes”] 36-39; Fig. 3A, [0026]-[0030]), the plurality of motion parameters indicating movement speed information of the virtual character (e.g. velocity of the listener relative to the sound source; [0019]), a deformation rate of the object that is caused by the motion of the virtual character (e.g. complexity of the sound produce based on the level of detail of the object... synthesizing based on space and time; [0037]; metrics are thus used to iteratively modify the complexity (e.g., granularity) of sound rendering over time [0019]; alternatively consider scalars that emphasize or deemphasize natural attenuation characteristics over distance for a reverberant response; [0074], scaling technique for considering direct paths to the listener and reflected off; [0061];), and a deformation region size of the object that is caused by the motion of the virtual character (e.g. producing sound from the surface of the entire volume of the shape that represents it [0026]; note various object shapes depicted in Fig. 3A, 3B and paras [0026]-[0030]; scaling technique for considering direct paths to the listener and reflected off; [0061]; complexity of the sound produce based on the level of detail of the object... synthesizing based on space and time; [0037]);
obtaining, based on a mapping between a first audio parameter control and the movement speed information of the virtual character indicated by the plurality of motion parameters according to a first warping function, a first sound from a first audio database (e.g. relationships between the materials and their identifications may be stored in a database in memory such as a look up table; [0030]; an audio characteristic defining a sound of running water (e.g., one or more sound files stored in memory) [0032]; further note the example in [0041] where as the helicopter moves in closer to a listener, the sound script introduces an engine noise loop... produced by a sound file stored in memory; and that sound is produced by the object is rendered may be changed based on the proximity of the listener to the object [0037], or “warped” ), the first audio database including a plurality of sample first sounds (e.g. the portion of memory storing the river/running water sounds; further, note the script defining that a number of sound ”files”; [0068] and an audio file stored in a memory, may be a mix of sounds, may be synthesized, or it may be any combination thereof; [0048]) associated with the motion of the virtual character, and the first audio parameter control being configured to control characteristics of the first sound based on the mapping between the first audio parameter control and the movement speed information of the virtual character (e.g. the audio characteristic may dictate that the sound produced by the river 210 is running water. The running water sound may be produced by playing back a sound file loop; [0037] the produced sound may be generated from an audio file stored in a memory; [0048] further note the example in [0041] where as the helicopter moves in closer to a listener, the sound script introduces an engine noise loop... produced by a sound file stored in memory; and that sound is produced by the object is rendered may be changed based on the proximity of the listener to the object [0037], ); and
obtaining, based on a mapping between a second audio parameter control and (i) the deformation rate and (ii) the deformation region size of the object indicated by the plurality of motion parameters (e.g. that sound is produced by the object is rendered may be changed based on the proximity of the listener to the object; [0037]; further note sound Script for dynamic, procedural modification of the audio signal processing (e.g., performed by an audio rendering module 755) over time; and further that river 210 is said to produce sound from the surface of the entire volume of the shape that represents it; [0026]), a second sound from a second audio database according to a second warping function (e.g. another example of scripted audio level of detail... Script may play a sequence of amplitude-modulated noise bursts to simulate the spinning rotor blades at a particular frequency... sound file stored in memory; [0041] further note the example in [0041] where as the helicopter moves in closer to a listener, the sound script introduces an engine noise loop... produced by a sound file stored in memory; and that sound is produced by the object is rendered may be changed based on the proximity of the listener to the object [0037], or “warped), the second audio database including a plurality of sample second sounds associated with deformation of the object (e.g. the portion of memory storing the helicopter/blades/engine noise sounds; further, note the script defining that a number of sound ”files”; [0068] and an audio file stored in a memory, may be a mix of sounds, may be synthesized, or it may be any combination thereof; [0048]), and the second audio parameter control being configured to control characteristics of the second sound (e.g. As the helicopter moves in closer to a listener, the Sound Script may introduce an engine noise loop (e.g., produced by another sound file stored in a memory; [0041]) (based on the mapping between the second audio parameter control and (i) the deformation rate and (ii) the deformation region size of the object (e.g. that sound is produced by the object is rendered may be changed based on the proximity of the listener to the object; [0037]; further note sound Script for dynamic, procedural modification of the audio signal processing (e.g., performed by an audio rendering module 755) over time; and further that river 210 is said to produce sound from the surface of the entire volume of the shape that represents it; [0026]).
Thall fails to explicitly disclose:
the first sound and first audio database are a friction sound and friction audio database, and
the second sound and second sound database are a crumpling sound and crumpling audio database.
In a related field of endeavor (e.g. audio rendering in virtual gaming and/or computer applications) Anderson discloses a similar virtual world/environment with object interaction and sound representation [0065] allowing for a combined haptic, graphic and audiotry feedback to the user [0165].
Modifying Thall’s device to incorporate the features of Anderson further discloses:
the first sound and first audio database are a friction sound and friction audio database and the second sound and second sound database are a crumpling sound and crumpling audio database (e.g. Thall’s stored sound files and memories detailed above for the first/second sound/databases, now modified by Anderson, to include the similar object interaction to make sounds [0026], for example when moving a button adding a corresponding sound like an old rusty squeaky movement [“friction”] [0067] further note textures applied using “friction” [0079], for example grinding in the context of a snow boarder; [0148]; and/or buttons with varying sounds, including sanding wood, drilling a hole [“friction”], paper folding, crushing a tin can [“crumpling”]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was filed to apply the teachings of Anderson to the device of Thall. Both Thall and Anderson are directed to providing realistic immersion of a user in a virtual environment through the use of visual and auditory feedback, even going as far to detail similar features such as accounting for virtual objects and object movement to produce 3D sound. Application of the features of Anderson to Thall would have been predictable given the similarity between the two disclosures and would also further provide improvements of Thall’s human-computer interaction (see Anderson [0005]).
Regarding Claim 3¸in addition to the elements stated above regarding claim 1, the combination further discloses:
wherein the determining the plurality of motion parameters further comprises: extracting vertex information of a plurality of vertices of the simulated object mesh, the vertex information including vertex positions of the plurality of vertices and vertex normals of the plurality of vertices (e.g. Thall’s user and objects, which also are described with point sources for each vertex; [0022], and nomrals (normal vectors) to surfaces; [0031] now modified by Anderson [0090] user controlled event created by interacting with an event object, which can be broken down into components of vertices that indicate different events or actions and can be static or dynamic; further note in the Anderson’s snowboarder example accounting for rotation of the snow board with a direction “normal” to the surface the snowboard is sliding on [0141]).
Regarding Claim 4¸in addition to the elements stated above regarding claim 3, the combination further discloses:
wherein the extracting the vertex information further comprises:
based on the simulated object mesh being generated by a CPU-based simulator (e.g. Thall’s 3D sound rendering system includes a central processing unit CPU; [0071]), extracting the vertex positions and the vertex normals of the plurality of vertices from a CPU skinned mesh render (e.g. Thall’s device with vector use and LOD metric updating which considers the shape of geometric volume or object, note for example simplified bounding volumes [“meshes”] 36-39; Fig. 3A, [0026]-[0030]), now modified by Anderson’s determining vector acceleration and vector forces for position determination [0078]);
converting each of the vertex positions from local coordinates to world coordinates (e.g. direction of the force can be the direction the skier is aimed within a world coordinate system; Anderson [0126]); and
determining whether each of the vertex normals is normalized according to a preset standard (e.g. determining for rendering normal to surfaces; [0031] of Thall, also note Anderson’s snowboarder example accounting for rotation of the snow board with a direction “normal” to the surface the snowboard is sliding on [0141]).
Regarding Claim 5¸in addition to the elements stated above regarding claim 3, the combination further discloses:
wherein the extracting the vertex information further comprises:
based on the simulated object mesh being generated by a GPU-based simulator (e.g. Thall’s 3D sound rendering system includes a central processing unit CPU; [0071]), extracting the vertex positions and the vertex normals from level of detail (LOD) render data (e.g. Thall’s device with vector use, which accounts for when the orientation of the listener changes, LOD metrics are repeatedly updated; [0039] now modified by Anderson’s determining vector acceleration and vector forces for position determination [0078]).
Regarding Claim 14, claim 14 is directed to the apparatus claim corresponding to method claim 1 and is rejected under the same grounds set forth above.
Regarding Claim 16, claim 16 is directed to the apparatus claim corresponding to method claim 3 and is rejected under the same grounds set forth above.
Regarding Claim 17, claim 17 is directed to the apparatus claim corresponding to method claim 4 and is rejected under the same grounds set forth above.
Regarding Claim 18, claim 18 is directed to the apparatus claim corresponding to method claim 5 and is rejected under the same grounds set forth above.
Claim(s) 6 – 8, 19, and 20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Thall et al. (hereinafter Thall, U.S. Patent Application Publication 2020/0296533) in view of Anderson et al. (hereinafter Anderson, U.S. Patent Application Publication 2010/0261526).
Regarding Claim 6¸in addition to the elements stated above regarding claim 3, the combination further discloses:
the movement speed information includes a plurality of movement speeds (e.g. Thall: velocity of the listener relative to the sound source; [0019], velocity isn’t fixed and can be any value, thus at different times it will be different and a “plurality”).
The combination of Thall in view of Anderson fails to explicitly disclose:
the determining the plurality of motion parameters further comprises:
determining bone positions of a plurality of bones of the virtual character associated with the motion,
determining one or more closest vertices of the plurality of vertices associated with each of the bone positions, and
determining each of the plurality of movement speeds based on a respective bone position and the one or more closest vertices corresponding to the respective bone position.
In a related field of endeavor (e.g. simulation of an object and its visual/auditory elements in a virtual environment; see summary) Dirksen details elements of characters including verticies and movement of the bones; [0066]. Applying the teachings of Dirksen to the combination of Thall and Anderson further discloses:
the determining the plurality of motion parameters further comprises:
determining bone positions of a plurality of bones of the virtual character associated with the motion (e.g. object positioning and orientation as determined by Thrall and Anderson, now modified by Dirksen, particularly transforms defining 3D positions and orientations represented as skeletal joints or bones, each bone is associated with a set of vertices on the skin; [0066],[0082]);
determining one or more closest vertices of the plurality of vertices associated with each of the bone positions (e.g. character default model information includes vertex positions, mesh topology [0085], further note vertex offset distributions where a bias is observed toward the center of the bounding box compared to its bases; [0110]) and
determining each of the plurality of movement speeds based on a respective bone position and the one or more closest vertices corresponding to the respective bone position (e.g. Thall’s velocity determination now incorporating the vertices and bone application techniques detailed by Dirksen above).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was filed to apply the teachings of Dirksen to the combination of Thall and Anderson. Thall, Anderson, and Dirksen are directed to providing realistic immersion of a user in a virtual environment through the use of visual and auditory feedback, even going as far to detail similar features such as accounting for virtual objects and object movement to produce 3D sound. Combination would provide further information related to the deformation of an object and thus aid in decision making about simulated objects in real time (see Dirksen [0003]), while also providing truly immersive VR experiences (see Dirksen [0069]-[0070]).
Regarding Claim 7¸in addition to the elements stated above regarding claim 3, the combination fails to explicitly disclose:
wherein the determining the plurality of motion parameters further comprises:
calculating a mean curvature around each of the plurality of vertices; and
determining the deformation rate associated with the plurality of vertices based on the mean curvatures of the plurality of vertices.
In a related field of endeavor (e.g. simulation of an object and its visual/auditory elements in a virtual environment; see summary) Dirksen details elements of characters including verities and movement of the bones; [0066]. Applying the teachings of Dirksen to the combination of Thall and Anderson further discloses:
wherein the determining the plurality of motion parameters further comprises:
calculating a mean curvature around each of the plurality of vertices (e.g. Thall and Anderson now modified by Dirksen, particularly the use of parameterized approximate repetitions such as spline curves to represent the vertex offsets over time; [00112]); and
determining the deformation rate associated with the plurality of vertices based on the mean curvatures of the plurality of vertices (e.g. Thall and Anderson now modified by Dirksen, particularly the deformation determinations detailed in Dirksen’s [0083] and curve fitting of vertex offsets; [0086]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was filed to apply the teachings of Dirksen to the combination of Thall and Anderson. Thall, Anderson, and Dirksen are directed to providing realistic immersion of a user in a virtual environment through the use of visual and auditory feedback, even going as far to detail similar features such as accounting for virtual objects and object movement to produce 3D sound. Combination would provide further information related to the deformation of an object and thus aid in decision making about simulated objects in real time (see Dirksen [0003]), while also providing truly immersive VR experiences (see Dirksen [0069]-[0070]).
Regarding Claim 8¸in addition to the elements stated above regarding claim 8, the combination further discloses:
wherein the determining the plurality of motion parameters further comprises:
determining the deformation region size based on a total number of the plurality of the vertices used to calculate the mean curvatures (e.g. vertex positions and mesh topology of model information [0085], deformation determinations detailed in Dirksen’s [0083] and curve fitting of vertex offsets; [0086]).
Regarding Claim 19, claim 19 is directed to the apparatus claim corresponding to method claim 6 and is rejected under the same grounds set forth above.
Regarding Claim 20, claim 20 is directed to the apparatus claim corresponding to method claim 7 and is rejected under the same grounds set forth above.
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 Andrew C Flanders whose telephone number is (571)272-7516. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 8:30-5:00.
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.
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.
/ANDREW C FLANDERS/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2655
Prosecution Insights