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 .
DETAILED ACTION
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to the pending claims have been considered but are moot because of the new ground of rejection below.
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 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) 1-7, 9, 11-13, 15-23 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Stafford (US 2019/0070506 A1) in view of Silverstein (US 2017/0328997 A1).
1. Stafford discloses a method for cloud-based video streaming (Fig. 9, 12), [0023], [0065] comprising:
in response to a wearable display receiving a video stream representing an application [0065], transmitting, by radar circuitry, a radar signal toward the wearable display (i.e. the sensor can be a radar or laser radar), [0048], [0082];
determining, from the radar signal, motion data of a user of the wearable display [0082]; and
generating one or more inputs interpretable by the application based on the motion data of the user of the wearable display (Fig. 9, 12), [0082].
Stafford does not expressly recite that the radar circuitry is “of an ecosystem device of an ecosystem” wherein “the ecosystem including a group of ecosystem devices each configured to provide a respective capability to users of the ecosystem distinct from the application.”
Silverstein discloses a smart home ecosystem (smart home environment 100) comprising a group of ecosystem devices (e.g., smart hub 180, smart hazard detector 104, smart thermostat 102, camera 118, and other smart devices; see Figs. 1–2, [0063], [0066], [0069], [0165], [0175]) each configured to provide a respective capability to users of the ecosystem distinct from any particular streaming/gaming application (general home automation, presence/motion detection, anomaly detection, security, environmental monitoring, etc.). These devices include radar circuitry (radar module with low-power radar transmitters and receivers, [0013], [0320], [0325], [0462]; radio(s) 940/950 configured for radar operations across various bands, [0175], [0177]) that transmits radar signals to determine location and/or movement of detected objects/users in the home environment ([0452], [0462]). The radar data is generated for general ecosystem use but can be shared/communicated via the smart home network.
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skilled in the art at the time the application was filed to modify Stafford’s radar-based (or radar-capable) tracking of the HMD user by incorporating the radar circuitry into an ecosystem device of a smart home ecosystem as taught by Silverstein. The motivation is to leverage existing, widely-deployed smart home infrastructure (hubs, sensors, displays) that already performs radar-based motion/position detection for unrelated ecosystem capabilities (lighting, HVAC, security, presence sensing) to provide supplementary or alternative motion inputs to the cloud-based gaming application. This avoids the need for dedicated gaming-console sensors, reduces cost, and enables seamless integration of home-wide tracking with VR/AR streaming, especially since Stafford already uses external sensors coupled to the console and contemplates radar variants.
2. Stafford and Silverstein disclose the method of claim 1, further comprising: modifying the video stream based on the one or more inputs; and sending the modified video stream to the wearable display, Stafford [0068], [0072], [0082], [0108].
3. Stafford and Silverstein disclose the method of claim 1, further comprising: generating, at the wearable display, sensor data associated with the user, wherein the one or more inputs are further determined based on the sensor data associated with the user (i.e. HMD also generate/processes its own sensor data form sensors 280/290), Stafford (110: Fig. 4), [0050].
4. Stafford and Silverstein disclose the method of claim 1, further comprising: receiving, at an input device, one or more interactions, wherein the one or more inputs are further determined based on input data representing the one or more interactions (i.e. game controller), Stafford [0090]-[0091], [0102].
5. Stafford and Silverstein disclose the method of claim 1, further comprising: sending the one or more inputs to a cloud-based server associated with the video stream, Stafford [0065], [0082].
6. Stafford and Silverstein disclose the method of claim 1, wherein the motion data indicates a position of the user of the wearable display, Stafford [0068]-[0070], [0082].
7. Stafford and Silverstein disclose the method of claim 1, wherein the motion data indicates a position of the wearable display, Stafford [0068]-[0070], [0082].
9. Stafford and Silverstein disclose the method of claim 1, wherein the ecosystem device comprises at least one of a smart hub, display, or sensor, Silverstein [0063], [0066], [0069], [0165], [0175].
11-13, 15-20, 23. Stafford and Silverstein disclose a method for cloud-based video streaming, comprising: in response to initiating a client session associated with an application, receiving, from a wearable display, sensor data associated with a user of the wearable display, and, from an ecosystem device of an ecosystem, radar data associated with radar signals transmitted toward the user of the wearable display, the ecosystem including a group of ecosystem devices each configured to provide a respective capability to users of the ecosystem distinct from the application; determining one or more inputs interpretable by the application based on the sensor data and the radar data; and in response to sending the one or more inputs to a cloud-based server associated with the client session, receiving a modified video stream based on the one or more inputs as similarly discussed above.
21. Stafford and Silverstein disclose a cloud-based system comprising: one or more cloud-based servers communicatively coupled to one or more client systems, each client system including: a wearable display including one or more processors; and one or more ecosystem devices, wherein at least one ecosystem device includes one or more processors and a memory coupled to the one or more processors and storing executable instructions configured to manipulate the one or more processors to perform the method of claim 1 as discussed above.
22. Stafford and Silverstein disclose a cloud-based system comprising: one or more cloud-based servers communicatively coupled to one or more smart ecosystems, each smart ecosystem including: a wearable display including one or more processors; and one or more ecosystem devices, wherein at least one ecosystem device includes one or more processors and a memory coupled to the one or more processors and storing executable instructions configured to manipulate the one or more processors to perform the method of claim 1 as discussed above.
Claim(s) 10, 14 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Stafford (US 2019/0070506 A1) and Silverstein (US 2017/0328997 A1) as applied above and further in view of Choi (US 2023/0068927 A1).
10, 14. Stafford and Silverstein disclose the invention above, but does not expressly disclose wherein the radar signal comprises an ultra-wideband radar signal; however, utilizing a ultra-wideband radar signal protocol is known in the art as evidenced by Choi [0264]. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to modify Stafford 's cloud-based VR system (which already uses RADAR for motion tracking) by incorporating Choi's UWB-specific radar implementation for motion determination. The motivation would be to enhance precision in motion tracking for immersive VR experiences, as UWB may provide more accuracy for location and orientation in AR/VR, which aligns with Stafford 's goal of real-time, low-bandwidth virtual interactions using ranging technologies. Substituting Stafford 's general RADAR with Choi’s UWB radar is a predictable use of known techniques for the same purpose (precise motion data in virtual environments), yielding expected results of improved responsiveness in cloud-streamed VR gaming without dedicated hardware.
Filing of New or Amended Claims
The examiner has the initial burden of presenting evidence or reasoning to explain why persons skilled in the art would not recognize in the original disclosure a description of the invention defined by the claims. See Wertheim, 541 F.2d at 263, 191 USPQ at 97 (“[T]he PTO has the initial burden of presenting evidence or reasons why persons skilled in the art would not recognize in the disclosure a description of the invention defined by the claims.”). However, when filing an amendment an applicant should show support in the original disclosure for new or amended claims. See MPEP § 714.02 and § 2163.06 (“Applicant should specifically point out the support for any amendments made to the disclosure.”). Please see MPEP 2163 (II) 3. (b)
Correspondence
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to SENG H LIM whose telephone number is (571)270-3301. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday (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, David L. Lewis can be reached at (571) 272-7673. 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.
/Seng H Lim/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3715
Prosecution Insights