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 Objections
Claims 5, 12, AND 19 objected to because of the following informalities: Using claim 5, as an example, in line 3 the word “incompability” is used. However this is not a word in the English language. It is believed that Applicant meant to have used the word “incompatibility.” Appropriate correction is required.
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 15-20 rejected under 35 U.S.C. 101 because the claimed invention is directed to non-statutory subject matter. The claim(s) does/do not fall within at least one of the four categories of patent eligible subject matter because “A computer readable medium” reads on a signal which does not fit within one of the four statutory categories. One possible way to overcome this rejection would be to claim “A non-transitory computer readable medium…” provided that there is support for such an amendment within the original specification.
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.
This application currently names joint inventors. In considering patentability of the claims the examiner presumes that the subject matter of the various claims was commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the claimed invention(s) absent any evidence to the contrary. Applicant is advised of the obligation under 37 CFR 1.56 to point out the inventor and effective filing dates of each claim that was not commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the later invention in order for the examiner to consider the applicability of 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(C) for any potential 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) prior art against the later invention.
Claims 1-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over US Patent Application Publication No. 2020/0197811 to Eatedali in view of US Patent Application Publication No. 2024/0382854 to Pedersen.
With regard to claim 1, Eatedali disclose a method for anon-player character (NPC) for use in a video game, comprising: generating parameters that define characteristics of the NPC the characteristics include data that define visual features for the NPC, physical features for the NPC, and context features for at test video game for the NPC (0008; 0010; 0016; 0030; 0064-0070; 0084-0086; wherein various data is collected); providing the parameters to an artificial intelligence (AI) model trained for generating characters for use in games, the AI model is configured to output an interactive version of the NPC, the interactive version of the NPC includes interaction logic that defines a behavior mechanics for the NPC when activated (0008; 0010; 0016; 0030; 0064-0070; 0084-0086). Eatedali does not appear to explicitly disclose testing the NPC.
However, Pedersen teaches activating the interactive version of the NPC in the test video game (0029-0031 0084-0087 0102); introducing a quality assurance NPC into the test video game, the quality assurance NPC is programmed to interact with the interactive version of the NPC in the test video game and generate test metrics regarding the interaction (0029-0031 0084-0087 0102 0231 0235); and modifying the interactive version of the NPC responsive to the test metrics (0031; 0231; 0235; 0301).
With regard to claim 2, Eatedali discloses wherein the visual features include graphics of the NPC, the physical features include behavioral functionality of the NPC, and the context features include a context that is compatible with the NPC (0008; 0010; 0016; 0030; 0064-0070; 0084-0086).
With regard to claim 3, Pedersen teaches wherein the behavior mechanics include a response of the interactive version of the NPC to an inquiry from the quality assurance NPC (0084-0087; 0231; 0275-0276).
With regard to claim 4, Pedersen teaches wherein said activating the interactive version includes placing the interactive version of the NPC in a game context of the test video game, wherein said introducing the quality assurance NPC into the test video game includes placing the quality assurance NPC into the game context of the test video game, wherein the quality assurance NPC is configured to initiate the interaction with the interactive version of the NPC (0029-0031; 0084-0087; 0102; 0231; 0275-0276; 0301).
With regard to claim 5, Pedersen teaches wherein said modifying the interactive version of the NPC includes changing faulty graphics of the interactive version of the NPC, or faulty audio output from the interactive version of the NPC, or incompability of the interactive version of the NPC with a game environment, or faulty movement of the interactive version of the NPC, or a combination thereof (0031; 0231; 0235; 0301).
With regard to claim 6, Pedersen teaches further comprising generating a validation report indicating the faulty graphics, or the faulty audio output, or the incompatibility with the game environment, or the faulty movement, or the combination thereof (0031).
With regard to claim 7, Pedersen teaches including the NPC within the video game upon said modifying the interactive version of the NPC (0031; 0231; 0235).
Claims 8-20 are mirrored claims to claims 1-7 and are rejected in like manner.
It would have been obvious to combine the teachings of Pedersen with the disclosure of Eatedali in order to ensure that the created NPC would work properly within the game by first providing quality assurance to test to make sure there were no errors associated with the NPC (See Pedersen at 0275-0276).
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure can be found on the Notice of References Cited.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Jay Liddle whose telephone number is (571)270-1226. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 9-5.
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, Dmitry Suhol can be reached at 571-272-4430. 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.
/Jay Trent Liddle/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3715