DETAILED ACTION
Information Disclosure Statement
Applicant’s submission of Information Disclosure Statements on 9/6/2023 and 4/22/2024 have been received and considered.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 101
35 U.S.C. 101 reads as follows:
Whoever invents or discovers any new and useful process, machine, manufacture, or composition of matter, or any new and useful improvement thereof, may obtain a patent therefor, subject to the conditions and requirements of this title.
Claims 1-36 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 101 because the claimed invention is directed to abstract idea without significantly more.
2019 PEG Analysis
Step 1: Are the claims directed to a statutory category (e.g., a process, machine, etc.)
Claims 1-31 are directed to an apparatus. Claims 32-36 are directed to a process.
Step 2A (Prong 1): Does the claim recite an abstract idea, law of nature or natural phenomenon?
Yes, the claims recite an abstract idea. The following specific limitations in the claims under examination recite an abstract idea:
Control a position of a virtual microphone/camera in a virtual space in comparison to a sound source (e.g., claims 1-5, 12-18, and 25-36)
Setting a volume of sound/attenuating sound (e.g., claims 1, 14, 27, and 32)
Determining if sound objects in a game are hidden/obscured (e.g., claims 1, 6, 14, 19, 27, and 32)
The above listed identified limitations fall within at least one of the groupings of abstract ideas enumerated in the 2019 PEG:
Mental Processes: concepts preformed in the human mind (including on observation, evaluation, judgement, opinion).
Certain Methods of Organizing Human Activity: managing personal behavior or relationships or interactions or relationships of interaction between people (including social activities, teaching, and following rules or instructions.
The claims are primarily directed to rules for playing a video game, wherein the game rules align with a method of organizing human activity. More specifically, game rules corresponding with activities of “following rules or instructions”.
Step 2A (Prong 2): Does the claim recite additional elements that integrate the judicial exception into a practical application?
Overall, the following additional claim limitations appear to merely implement the abstract idea, add insignificant extra-solution activity to the judicial exception, or generally link the judicial exception to a particular environment or field of use, as outlined below:
Outputting game sounds (e.g., see at least claims 1, 14, 27, and 32, insignificant extra-solution activity);
Determination regions having different shapes/sizes, including a waterfall shape (e.g., see claim 6-9, 19-21, particular environment or field of use),
Step 2B: Does the claim recite additional elements that amount to significantly more than the judicial exception?
With regard to claims 1-36 the claims as a whole do not amount to significantly more than the exception itself. The above listed additional claim limitations display and process game data in a well-understood, routine, and conventional way. Further, the computer hardware of claim 1 (e.g., a processor and presentation assembly) are well-understood, routine, and conventional in the art.
In order to satisfy the Berkheimer factual determination of conventional elements in the art, U.S. Patent No. 7,819,742 to Chamberlain is cited for disclosing the conventional features of gaming devices including processors (e.g., see at least column 11, lines 14-16) and displays (e.g., see column 7, lines 12-25). Therefore, claims 1-36 are not patent eligible under 101.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
The following is a quotation of the appropriate paragraphs of 35 U.S.C. 102 that form the basis for the rejections under this section made in this Office action:
A person shall be entitled to a patent unless –
(a)(1) the claimed invention was patented, described in a printed publication, or in public use, on sale, or otherwise available to the public before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claim 1-5, 9, and 11-18, 22, and 24-36 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by U.S. Patent Application Publication No. 2018/0359591 to Bygrave.
PNG
media_image1.png
910
800
media_image1.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image2.png
1121
761
media_image2.png
Greyscale
With regard to claim 1, Bygrave discloses a computer-readable non-transitory storage medium having stored therein a game program causing a computer of an information processing apparatus (e.g., see at least Fig. 1 that shows a computing device 102 having a processor 104 and memory 106) to:
control a position of a virtual microphone in a virtual space (e.g., see Fig. 12 that shows a microphone/sound destination 124; see also paragraphs 90 and 92 for discussion of microphone/sound destination 124);
for a virtual first sound source placed in the virtual space and associated with a first sound (e.g., see at least Fig. 15, that shows a sound source 1506; see also paragraph 94 for discussion of a sound source 1506),
set a volume of the first sound such that the volume of the first sound is attenuated in accordance with a distance between a first determination region having a predetermined shape and the virtual microphone (e.g., see at least paragraph 58 that discusses “a distance attenuation formula” based on distance the sound source is from the listener that is “applied based on the behavior of sound dissipating over distance”),
perform a hiding determination as to the first sound source on the basis of a positional relationship between the virtual microphone (e.g., see Fig. 12, microphone 1124) and a second determination region having a shape different from that of the first determination region (e.g., see Fig. 15 that shows a first sound source 1506 and second determination region 1514 having a different shape, in the form of a different location; see also Fig. 3 for flow diagram of hiding determination, including location of virtual sound source at step 314), the shape of the second determination region satisfying at least that a part thereof is outside the first determination region or that a width thereof is smaller than that of the first determination region (e.g., see Fig. 15 that shows a first sound source 1506 and second determination region 1514 having a different shape, in the form of a different location), and
set the volume of the first sound such that the volume of the first sound is further attenuated when the first sound source is hidden, on the basis of a result of the hiding determination; and output the first sound on the basis of the set volume (e.g., see at least paragraphs 83 and 93 for discussion of attenuation of the sound source based on an obscured/hidden sound source);
[claim 2] wherein the distance between the first determination region and the virtual microphone is a distance between a point, closest to the virtual microphone, on the first determination region and the position of the virtual microphone (e.g., see Fig. 15 that shows a straight/closest path 1510);
[claim 3] wherein the game program causes the computer to: determine whether or not an obstacle object exists between a reference point based on the position of the virtual microphone and a point, closest to the reference point, on the second determination region in the virtual space (e.g., see Fig. 15 that shows two sound paths, one of which passes obstacles and one that is straight/closest); and
when it is determined that the obstacle object exists, determine that the first sound source is hidden (e.g., see at least Fig. 3 that shows a flow diagram that includes determining alternative sound paths, including wall obstacles; see also Fig. 15 shows object obstacles and methods of avoiding the obstacles);
[claim 4] wherein the game program causes the computer to:
determine whether or not an obstacle object exists between a reference point based on the position of the virtual microphone and a point, closest to the reference point, on the second determination region in the virtual space (e.g., see at least Fig. 3 that shows a flow diagram that includes determining alternative sound paths, including wall obstacles; see also Fig. 15 shows object obstacles and methods of avoiding the obstacles);
when it is determined that the obstacle object exists, further determine whether or not a path bypassing the obstacle object within a predetermined range exists between the virtual microphone and a point, closest to the virtual microphone, on the second determination region; when it is determined that the path exists, determine that the first sound source is hidden to a first degree (e.g., see Fig. 15 that shows two sound paths, one of which passes obstacles and one that is straight/closest);
when it is determined that the path does not exist, determine that the first sound source is hidden to a second degree higher than the first degree (e.g., see at least paragraphs 83 and 93 for discussion of attenuation of the sound source based on an obscured/hidden sound source); and
set the volume such that the volume is attenuated on the basis of the determined hiding degree (e.g., see at least paragraphs 83 and 93 for discussion of attenuation of the sound source based on an obscured/hidden sound source);
[claim 5] wherein the game program causes the computer to: when it is determined that the bypassing path does not exist, further determine whether or not a position of the reference point and the point closest to the reference point are positions indicating indoor spaces preset in the virtual space (e.g., see at least Fig. 15 that shows “indoor” spaces and determination of straight/closest path and alternative paths); and
when either one of the position of the reference point and the point closest to the reference point is the position indicating the indoor space, determine that the first sound source is hidden to a third degree higher than the second degree (e.g., see Fig. 15 that shows multiple obstacles/objects/walls that increase how hidden the source is);
[claim 9] wherein the game program further causes the computer to generate the second determination region on the basis of a shape of the first determination region (e.g. see Fig. 15 that shows a first determination region at 1506 and a second determination region 1514 that are related);
[claim 11] wherein the game program further causes the computer to: control a position of the virtual camera in the virtual space; and set the position of the virtual microphone to the position of the virtual camera in the virtual space (e.g., see Fig. 12 that shows a microphone/sound destination 1124 in combination with a camera, wherein camera image above microphone 1124 is representative of a virtual camera);
[claim 12] wherein the game program further causes the computer to: set a strength at which a first filter is applied to the first sound, on the basis of the distance between the first determination region and the virtual microphone (e.g., see at least paragraphs 24 and 55-58 that discuss weighting the valid paths); when the first sound source is hidden on the basis of the result of the hiding determination as to the first sound source based on the positional relationship between the second determination region and the virtual microphone (e.g. see Fig. 12, microphone sound destination 1124), further set the strength such that the first filter is applied more strongly, or set a strength at which a second filter is applied; and apply a filter to the first sound, and output the first sound on the basis of the volume (e.g., see at least paragraphs 24 and 55-58 that discuss weighting the valid paths, including weighting based on obstructions and distance to attenuate sound);
[claim 13] wherein the game program further causes the computer to: calculate a localization of the first sound on the basis of a positional relationship between the first determination region and the virtual microphone; and output the first sound on the basis of the set localization (e.g., see at least paragraph 47 that discusses that the sound source may be associated with “audio properties and/or data, including position, direction volume or intensity, and obstruction/occlusion values”).
With regard to claim 14, Bygrave also discloses a game system, which is similar in claim scope to the computer-readable non-transitory storage medium analyzed above for claim 1. The same analysis applied above for claim 1 also applies to claim 14. Likewise, dependent claims 15-18, 22, and 24-26 are anticipated by Bygrave based on the same analysis as set forth above for claims 2-5, 9, and 11-13, which are similar in claim scope.
With regard to claim 27, Bygrave also discloses a game apparatus, which is similar in claim scope to the computer-readable non-transitory storage medium analyzed above for claim 1. The same analysis applied above for claim 1 also applies to claim 27. Likewise, dependent claims 28-31 are anticipated by Bygrave based on the same analysis as set forth above for claims 2-5, which are similar in claim scope.
With regard to claim 32, Bygrave also discloses a game processing method, which is similar in claim scope to the computer-readable non-transitory storage medium analyzed above for claim 1. The same analysis applied above for claim 1 also applies to claim 32. Likewise, dependent claims 33-36 are anticipated by Bygrave based on the same analysis as set forth above for claims 2-5, which are similar in claim scope.
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.
Claims 6-8, 10, 19-21, and 23 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Bygrave in view of U.S. Patent Application Publication No. 2022/0377489 to Herre.
With regard to claim 6-8 and 10, Bygrave discloses an object corresponding to the first sound source is placed in the virtual space (e.g., see Fig. 15, sound source 1506 represents sound from a source, which could be object; see at least paragraph 47 that describes the types of objects that could be sound sources, including “ people, animals, objects, events, or the like within the virtual environment 208”), the first determination region is placed along the object corresponding to the first sound source (e.g., see at least Fig. 15 that shows sound source 1506 that is at the position of the object).
Bygrave fails to expressly disclose the first determination region has a three-dimensional shape having a plurality of surfaces, and the second determination region has a planar shape along one of the surfaces of the first determination region, wherein the sound source is a waterfall.
In the same field of endeavor, Herre teaches a 3-D sound source (e.g., see paragraphs 14-15 for discussion of a 3D environment and then creating a second spatially extended sound source that protrudes in front of the 3D sound source and is planar and smaller (e.g., see Fig. 2 for image of 3D object mapped onto a planar surface; see also paragraph 3 for discussion of waterfalls).
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the current invention to modify Bygrave with a planar second extended sound source as taught by Herre in order to use a known technique to improve similar devices (methods, or products) in the same way. In this case, extending a second source provides more manageable representation of complex sound structures shapes, including waterfalls (e.g., see Herre at paragraph 3)
Claims 19-21 and 23 are made obvious by Bygrave in view of Herre based on the same analysis as set forth above for claims 6-8 and 10, which are similar in claim scope.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
U.S. Patent Application Publication No. 2020/0296533 to Thall discusses 3D audio rendering using volumetric audio, including a partially obstructed river sound source (e.g., see at least Fig. 2)
U.S. Patent Application Publication No. 2020/0396537 to Solvang discusses a method of determining a position of a sound source using a sound-field microphone (e.g., see at least Fig. 3)
U.S. Patent Application Publication No. 2025/0317702 to De Bruijn discuses rendering volumetric audio sources including waterfalls (e.g., see at least Figs. 3A and 3B)
U.S. Patent Application Publication No. 2019/0356999 to Raghuvanshi discusses a directional propagation for sound modeling (e.g., see at least Figs. 1A and 1B)
U.S. Patent Application Publication No. 2017/0151501 to Kitamura discusses a system that measures distance for rendering a sound source (e.g., see at least Figs. 7 and 8)
U.S. Patent Application Publication No. 2022/0337968 to Jang discusses a system for rendering a sound source around an obstacle in a virtual environment (e.g., see Fig. 6)
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to JAMES S MCCLELLAN whose telephone number is (571)272-7167. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday (8:30AM-5:00PM).
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, Kang Hu can be reached at 571-270-1344. 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.
/James S. McClellan/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3715
Prosecution Insights