DETAILED ACTION
Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status
The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 103 which forms the basis for all obviousness rejections set forth in this Office action:
A patent for a claimed invention may not be obtained, notwithstanding that the claimed invention is not identically disclosed as set forth in section 102, if the differences between the claimed invention and the prior art are such that the claimed invention as a whole would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which the claimed invention pertains. Patentability shall not be negated by the manner in which the invention was made.
Claim(s) 1-2, 8-9, 15-16 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over
Soyannwo et al (US 9874977 B1) in view of Clark et al (US 20190302255 A1).
Regarding Claim 1, Soyannwo et al teaches an electronic device, comprising: a display; and processing circuitry configured to: detect an input device (see Column 21, Claim 25. The method of claim 18, wherein the virtual input device is one of a virtual pointing device, a virtual trackpad, a virtual mouse, or a virtual slider bar.”);
receive an input that includes movement of the input device (see Column 15, line 7-22; “ In some implementations, the person 402 may define a physical object to act as a virtual input device. For example, the person 402 may use predefined hand gestures to identify a paper weight (e.g., by drawing circles with three fingers around the paper weight, by tapping on the paper weight, by tapping the paper weight on a surface, by pointing towards the paper weight, etc.). Once identified, the person 402 may define the paper weight to act as an appropriate virtual input device. For example, the person 402 may define the paper weight to act as a mouse using appropriate predefined hand gestures. Subsequently, moving the paper weight around in the scene 202 may be interpreted by the ARFN 102 as a movement of a mouse (i.e., the mouse cursor 902 may be moved corresponding to the movement of the paper weight). Thus, the paper weight may act as a virtual input device.”).
However, Soyannwo et al does not teach the electronic device, comprising: processing circuitry configured to: cause an audio speaker to generate sound in accordance with a determination that the movement of the input device satisfies one or more criteria,
wherein a characteristic of the sound is adjusted based on a characteristic of the movement of the input device.
Clark et al teaches the electronic device, comprising: processing circuitry configured to: cause an audio speaker to generate sound in accordance with a determination that the movement of the input device satisfies one or more criteria ( see Paragraph [0021] In some illustrative embodiments, the echoes, or “pings”, are sounds generated by the mechanisms of the illustrative embodiments that emulate an echo of a sound emitted from a virtual representation of the user in the virtual environment. For example, the echo or ping emulates the virtual avatar or virtual player of the user emitting a sound and that same sound being reflected back to the user from objects within the virtual environment such that the user is informed of the relative location, position, and distance of the objects. In such embodiments, the echoes or “pings” may have characteristics that are not modified from the virtual sound emitted by the virtual player other than to possibly modify the pitch/volume of the sound based on the target object's distance, materials, etc. In this way, the echoed sound is kept relatively constant in nature with the only differences in pitch/volume being based on a small set of characteristics of the target object. In this way, the mechanisms of the illustrative embodiments mimic or recreate the experience that a real person would have in the virtual environment if they employed echolocation to bounce a sound off a target object to thereby identify its location, position, and distance, and track the objects movement, if any.”),
wherein a characteristic of the sound is adjusted based on a characteristic of the movement of the input device (see Paragraph [0065] The echolocation devices (ELDs) 120, 122 may operate continuously, periodically, or in response to the occurrence of particular events which initiate the operation of the ELD 120, 122 on newly captured images of the virtual environment. For example, the ELD 120, 122 may receive, on a continuous basis or a periodic basis, graphical data from the graphics APIs of the associated client computing device 110, 114, such as via a data stream, or from screen scraping, which may be used to continuously generate echoes representing the identified objects in the virtual environment. In such a case, the ELDs 120, 122 may discern movements of objects within the virtual environment and may further represent the movement in characteristics of the echoes. For example, more frequent echoes may be generated as the object moves closer to the avatar, and less frequent echoes may be generated as the object moves away from the avatar. Alternatively, the pitch of the echoes for the object may be increased as the object moves closer to the avatar, and reduced as the object moves further away from the avatar, similar to a Doppler effect.”).
Thus, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art when the invention was made to incorporate the teachings of Clark et al into Soyannwo et al for providing the user the location of the virtual input device by audio speaker.
Regarding Claims 2, 9, 16, Clark et al teaches the electronic device wherein the characteristic of the sound includes pitch or a volume, and adjusting the characteristic of the sound based on the characteristic of movement includes increasing the pitch or the volume in accordance with an increase in speed of the movement. (See Paragraph 0021, “… In such embodiments, the echoes or “pings” may have characteristics that are not modified from the virtual sound emitted by the virtual player other than to possibly modify the pitch/volume of the sound based on the target object's distance, materials, etc. In this way, the echoed sound is kept relatively constant in nature with the only differences in pitch/volume being based on a small set of characteristics of the target object. In this way, the mechanisms of the illustrative embodiments mimic or recreate the experience that a real person would have in the virtual environment if they employed echolocation to bounce a sound off a target object to thereby identify its location, position, and distance, and track the objects movement, if any.”),
(see Paragraph [0065] The echolocation devices (ELDs) 120, 122 may operate continuously, periodically, or in response to the occurrence of particular events which initiate the operation of the ELD 120, 122 on newly captured images of the virtual environment. For example, the ELD 120, 122 may receive, on a continuous basis or a periodic basis, graphical data from the graphics APIs of the associated client computing device 110, 114, such as via a data stream, or from screen scraping, which may be used to continuously generate echoes representing the identified objects in the virtual environment. In such a case, the ELDs 120, 122 may discern movements of objects within the virtual environment and may further represent the movement in characteristics of the echoes. For example, more frequent echoes may be generated as the object moves closer to the avatar, and less frequent echoes may be generated as the object moves away from the avatar. Alternatively, the pitch of the echoes for the object may be increased as the object moves closer to the avatar, and reduced as the object moves further away from the avatar, similar to a Doppler effect.”).
Regarding Claim 8, the method Claim 8 is rejected for same reason as the apparatus Claim 1, since claim limitations are same in both claims.
Regarding Claim 15, the CRM Claim 15 is rejected for same reason as the apparatus Claim 1, since claim limitations are same in both claims (the CRM non-transitory computer readable storage medium is shown in Column 19, Claim 10).
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 3-7, 10-14, 17-20 are objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, but would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to claim(s) 1-20 have been considered but are moot because the new ground of rejection does not rely on any reference applied in the prior rejection of record for any teaching or matter specifically challenged in the argument.
Conclusion
Examiner cites particular columns and line numbers in the references as applied to the claims below for the convenience of the applicant. Although the specified citations are representative of the teachings in the art and are applied to the specific limitations within the individual claim, other passages and figures may apply as well. It is respectfully requested that, in preparing responses, the applicant fully consider the references in entirety as potentially teaching all or part of the claimed invention, as well as the context of the passage as taught by the prior art or disclosed by the examiner.
It is noted that any citation to specific pages, columns, figures, or lines in the prior art references any interpretation of the references should not be considered to be limiting in any way. A reference is relevant for all it contains and may be relied upon for all that it would have reasonably suggested to one having ordinary skill in the art. In re Heck, 699 F.2d 1331-33, 216 USPQ 1038-39 (Fed. Cir. 1983) (quoting In re Lemelson, 397 F.2d 1006, 1009, 158 USPQ 275, 277 (CCPA 1968)).
Examiner’s Note
Examiner has cited particular paragraphs/columns and line numbers or figures in the references as applied to the claims below for the convenience of the applicant. Although the specified citations are representative of the teachings in the art and are applied to the specific limitations within the individual claim, other passages and figures may apply as well. It is respectfully requested from the applicant, in preparing the responses, to fully consider the references in their entirety as potentially teaching all or part of the claimed invention, as well as the context of the passage as taught by the prior art or disclosed by the examiner.
Applicant is reminded that the Examiner is entitled to give the broadest reasonable interpretation to the language of the claims. Furthermore, the Examiner is not limited to Applicant’s definition which is not specifically set forth in the claims.
In the case of amending the claimed invention, Applicant is respectfully requested to indicate the portion(s) of the specification which dictate(s) the structure relied on for proper interpretation and also to verify and ascertain the metes and bounds of the claimed invention.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to VIJAY SHANKAR whose telephone number is (571)272-7682. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 9 am- 6 pm.
Examiner interviews are available via telephone, in-person, and video conferencing using a USPTO supplied web-based collaboration tool. To schedule an interview, applicant is encouraged to use the USPTO Automated Interview Request (AIR) at http://www.uspto.gov/interviewpractice.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Matthew Eason can be reached at 571-270-7230. 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.
VIJAY SHANKAR
Primary Examiner
Art Unit 2624
/VIJAY SHANKAR/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2624
Prosecution Insights