DETAILED ACTION
Contents
Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status 2
Response to Amendment 2
Claim Interpretation 3
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112 3
Double Patenting 3
Terminal Disclaimer 3
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103 3
Conclusion 11
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 .
This action is responsive to applicant’s claim set received on 8/28/23. Claims 1-20 are currently pending.
Response to Amendment
This action is responsive to applicant’s amendment and remarks received on 2/3/26. Claims 1-3, 5-16, 18-22 are currently pending.
Claim Interpretation
In light of applicant’s amendment of claim 16, the previous statement is revoked.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
In light of applicant’s amendment of claim 16, the previous rejection is withdrawn.
Double Patenting
In light of the terminal disclaimer filed on 2/3/26, the previous double patenting rejection is withdrawn.
Terminal Disclaimer
The terminal disclaimer filed on 2/3/26 disclaiming the terminal portion of any patent granted on this application which would extend beyond the expiration date of US PATENT #: 9,996,940 has been reviewed and is accepted. The terminal disclaimer has been recorded.
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 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 claimedinvention is not identically disclosed as set forth in section 102 of this title, 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 1-3, 5-16, 18-20 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Li et al (US 9,398,262 B2) in view of Li et al (US 2016/0006987). Li et al (US 2016/0006987) will be referred to as Li 2 from hereon.
Regarding claim 1, Li teaches a method comprising: using a transceiver of a source device to (see col. 2, lines 6, lines 30-67): transmit an avatar to a destination device (see col. 1, lines 50-67, col. 2, lines 1-20), transmitting the transmit expression information to the destination device (see col. 1, lines 50-67, col. 2, lines 1-20, col. 5, lines 50-67, col. 8, lines 1-20): wherein the source device is configured to capture an image of the face of the person (see col. 2, lines 30-67, col. 7, lines 1-40, col. 8, lines 1-20) and calculate the expression information based on the image (see col. 4, lines 20-col. 5, lines 67), wherein the expression information approximates an expression on the face of the person as captured in the image (see col. 5, lines 1-67), wherein the destination device is configured to animate the avatar on a display component of the destination device using the expression information (see col. 2, lines 1-50, col. 3, lines 1-30, col. 6, lines 1-30, col. 8, lines 1-40); receive, from the destination device, a second avatar (see col. 6, lines 1-30), wherein the second avatar is generated based on a face of a second person (see col. 4, lines 1-20), and receive, from the destination device, second expression information that approximates an expression on the face of the second person (see col. 6, lines 1-30, col. 8, lines 1-30), wherein the source device is configured to animate the second avatar on a display component of the source device using the second expression information (see col. 6, lines 1-30). Li does not teach wherein the source device is configured to generate the avatar based on a face of a person, wherein the avatar approximates the face of the person; wherein the second avatar approximates the face of the second person. Li does not teach expressly wherein the source device is configured to generate the avatar based on a face of a person, wherein the avatar approximates the face of the person; wherein the second avatar approximates the face of the second person.
Li 2, in the same field of endeavor, teaches wherein the source device is configured to generate the avatar based on a face of a person (see 0017, 0019, 0041, 0071-0072), wherein the avatar approximates the face of the person (see 0070-0072); wherein the second avatar approximates the face of the second person (see 0070-0073).
It would have been obvious (before the effective filing date of the claimed invention) or (at the time the invention was made) to one of ordinary skill in the art to modify Li to utilize the cited limitations as suggested by Li 2. The suggestion/motivation for doing so would have been to enable relatively quick animation response that is accurate and vivid (see 0015). Furthermore, the prior art collectively includes each element claimed (though not all in the same reference), and one of ordinary skill in the art could have combined the elements in the manner explained above using known engineering design, interface and/or programming techniques, without changing a “fundamental” operating principle of Li, while the teaching of Li 2 continues to perform the same function as originally taught prior to being combined, in order to produce the repeatable and predictable result. It is for at least the aforementioned reasons that the examiner has reached a conclusion of obviousness with respect to the claim in question.
Regarding claims 2-3, 5-15, Li discloses avatar is a photo-realistic avatar used to simulate a presence of the person during a video call with a user of the destination device (see col. 3, lines 1-15; col. 6, lines 56-67);
destination device is performed at most one time during the video call, and wherein transmitting the expression information from the source device to the destination device is performed more than once during the video call (see col. 8,lines 1-35);
transmitting the expression information and the transmitting the second expression information are performed substantially simultaneously (see col. 6, lines 1-67);
animating the avatar on the display component of the destination device using the expression information includes animating the avatar in a virtual reality environment (see col. 3, lines 35-67);
calculating the expression information, the transmitting the expression information, and the animating the avatar are performed substantially in real-time with the capturing the second image of the face of the person (see col. 2, lines 55-67);
using an audio input component of the source device to capture audio information; and using the transceiver of the source device to transmit audio information to the destination device; and wherein the destination device is configured to output the audio information (see col. 2, lines 55-67);
capturing the audio information, the transmitting the audio information, and the outputting the audio information are performed substantially in real-time with the capturing the second image of the face of the person (see col. 7, lines 10-45);
expression information comprises facial landmark indicators (see col. 4, lines 45-67);
a motion vector of facial landmark indicators (see col. 5, lines 31-67);
generate a third avatar that approximates the face of the person; receive a user input indicating a facial avatar to use; and select the avatar based on the user input, wherein selecting the avatar is performed prior to transmitting the avatar to the destination device (see col. 5, lines 11-30);
avatar is a photo-realistic avatar, and wherein the second avatar is a generic avatar (see col. 3, lines 1-15);
real-time image of the face of the person is not transmitted from the source device to the destination device (see abstract);
receive a user input to modify a visual aspect of the avatar; and modify a visual aspect of the avatar based on the received user input, wherein the receiving the user input and the modifying the visual aspect of the avatar are performed prior to the transmitting the avatar to the destination device (see col. 5, lines 10-30).
Regarding claim 16, Li teaches a system comprising: one or more source devices (see col. 2, lines 1-40),
wherein at least one source device of the one or more source devices comprises a first processor and a first display component (see col. 2, lines 30-67, coll. 4, lines 1-25, col. 8, lines 40-67), wherein the at least one source device is configured to capture the image of the face of the person (see col. 1, lines 50- col. 2, lines 20, col. 7, lines 1-50, col. 8, lines 1-30); and calculate expression information based on the image of the face of the person (see col. 4, lines 20-67 col. 5, lines 1-67), wherein the expression information approximates an expression on the face of the person as captured in the image (see col. 5, lines 1-67); and the destination device comprising a second processor and a second display component (see col. 2, lines 1-67), wherein the second processor is configured to: animate the avatar on the second display component using the expression information (see col. 2, lines 1-30, col. 3, lines 1-30, col. 6, lines 1-30, col. 8, lines 1-50), and generate, based on a face of a second person, a second avatar and a second expression information (see col. 4, lines 1-30, col. 4, lines 1-67, col. 5, lines 1-67), and the second expression information approximates an expression on the face of the second person (see col. 4, lines 1-30, col. 5, lines 1-67), wherein the first processor of the at least one source device is further configured to: animate the second avatar on the first display component using the second expression information (see col. 6, lines 1-30). Li does not teach wherein the first processor is configured to: generate an avatar based on an image of a face of a person, wherein the avatar approximates the image of the face of the person; wherein the at least one source device is further configured to transmit the avatar to a destination device; wherein the at least one source device is configured to transmit, subsequent to transmitting the avatar, the expression information to a destination device; wherein the second avatar approximates the face of the second person.
Li 2, in the same field of endeavor, teaches wherein the first processor is configured to: generate an avatar based on an image of a face of a person (see 0017, 0019, 0070-0072), wherein the avatar approximates the image of the face of the person (see 0070); wherein the at least one source device is further configured to transmit the avatar to a destination device (see 0087-0088); wherein the at least one source device is configured to transmit, subsequent to transmitting the avatar, the expression information to a destination device (see 0087-0091); wherein the second avatar approximates the face of the second person (see 0070-0073).
It would have been obvious (before the effective filing date of the claimed invention) or (at the time the invention was made) to one of ordinary skill in the art to modify Li to utilize the cited limitations as suggested by Li 2. The suggestion/motivation for doing so would have been to enable relatively quick animation response that is accurate and vivid (see 0015). Furthermore, the prior art collectively includes each element claimed (though not all in the same reference), and one of ordinary skill in the art could have combined the elements in the manner explained above using known engineering design, interface and/or programming techniques, without changing a “fundamental” operating principle of Li, while the teaching of Li 2 continues to perform the same function as originally taught prior to being combined, in order to produce the repeatable and predictable result. It is for at least the aforementioned reasons that the examiner has reached a conclusion of obviousness with respect to the claim in question.
Regarding claims 17-20, Li discloses capture audio information using an audio input component; and transmit the audio information to the destination device; and wherein the destination device is further configured to: output the audio information (see col. 2, lines 55-67);
capture the image of the face of the person, capture the audio information, and transmit the audio information substantially in real-time with the destination device outputting the audio information (see col. 7, lines 10-45);
facial landmark indicators (see col. 4, lines 64-col. 5, lines 12).
Claim 21 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Li et al (US 9,398,262 B2) in view of Li et al (US 2016/0006987), and further in view of Goossens (US 2014/0143693 A1). Li et al (US 2016/0006987) will be referred to as Li 2 from hereon.
Regarding claim 21, Li with Li 2 teaches all elements as mentioned above in claim 16. Li with Li 2 does not teach expressly an indication of a detected geographic location of the person using the at least one source device.
Goossens, in the same field of endeavor, teaches an indication of a detected geographic location of the person using the at least one source device (see abstract, 0005-0006, 12, 24, 10, 138, 47, 64).
It would have been obvious (before the effective filing date of the claimed invention) or (at the time the invention was made) to one of ordinary skill in the art to modify Li with Li 2 to utilize the cited limitations as suggested by Goossens. The suggestion/motivation for doing so would have been to enable creativity and fun in self-expression (see 0027). Furthermore, the prior art collectively includes each element claimed (though not all in the same reference), and one of ordinary skill in the art could have combined the elements in the manner explained above using known engineering design, interface and/or programming techniques, without changing a “fundamental” operating principle of Li with Li 2, while the teaching of Goossens continues to perform the same function as originally taught prior to being combined, in order to produce the repeatable and predictable result. It is for at least the aforementioned reasons that the examiner has reached a conclusion of obviousness with respect to the claim in question.
Claim 22 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Li et al (US 9,398,262 B2) in view of Li et al (US 2016/0006987), and further in view of Tong (US 2016/0328876 A1). Li et al (US 2016/0006987) will be referred to as Li 2 from hereon.
Regarding claim 22, Li with Li 2 teaches all elements as mentioned above in claim 16. Li with Li 2 does not teach expressly animating the second avatar further uses body language of the second person.
Tong, in the same field of endeavor, teaches animating the second avatar further uses body language of the second person (see 0011-0014, 0008, 0009-0012, 0016).
It would have been obvious (before the effective filing date of the claimed invention) or (at the time the invention was made) to one of ordinary skill in the art to modify Li with Li 2 to utilize the cited limitations as suggested by Tong. The suggestion/motivation for doing so would have been to simulate human expression of the user (see 0001). Furthermore, the prior art collectively includes each element claimed (though not all in the same reference), and one of ordinary skill in the art could have combined the elements in the manner explained above using known engineering design, interface and/or programming techniques, without changing a “fundamental” operating principle of Li with Li 2, while the teaching of Tong continues to perform the same function as originally taught prior to being combined, in order to produce the repeatable and predictable result. It is for at least the aforementioned reasons that the examiner has reached a conclusion of obviousness with respect to the claim in question.
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 EDWARD PARK. The examiner’s contact information is as follows:
Telephone: (571)270-1576 | Fax: 571.270.2576 | Edward.Park@uspto.gov
For email communications, please notate MPEP 502.03, which outlines procedures pertaining to communications via the internet and authorization. A sample authorization form is cited within MPEP 502.03, section II.
The examiner can normally be reached on M-F 9-6 CST.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Andrew Moyer, can be reached on (571) 272-9523. 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.
/EDWARD PARK/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2675
Prosecution Insights