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 .
Response to Amendment
Received 04/13/2026
Claim(s) 1-20 is/are pending.
Claim(s) 1, 2, 4-7, 12-14, and 15-20 has/have been amended.
The objections to the Abstract has been maintained in view of the amendments received on 04/13/2023.
The 35 USC § 101 rejection to claim(s) 20 have been withdrawn in view of the amendments received on 04/13/2023.
The 35 U.S.C § 103 rejection to claim(s) 1-20 have been fully considered in view of the amendments received on 04/13/2023 and are fully addressed in the prior art rejection below.
Response to Arguments
Received 04/13/2026
Regarding independent claim(s) 1, 16, and 20:
Applicant’s arguments (Remarks, Page 8: ¶ 3 to Page 10: ¶ 1), filed 04/13/2026, with respect to the rejection(s) of claim(s) 1, 16, and 20 under 35 U.S.C § 103 have been fully considered and are persuasive. Therefore, the rejection has been withdrawn, necessitated by Applicant's amendments. However, upon further consideration, a new ground(s) of rejection is made in view of Pelzer et al. (US Patent No. 11172320 B1), in view of Raghuvanshi (US PGPUB No. 20220377485 A1), and further in view of Raghuvanshi (US PGPUB No. 20150373475 A1).
Applicant’s arguments (Remarks, Page 10: ¶ 2), filed 04/13/2026, with respect to the rejection(s) of claim(s) 16 and 20 under 35 U.S.C § 103 have been fully considered and are persuasive due claim 16's and claim 20's similarity to claim 1. Therefore, the rejection has been withdrawn, necessitated by Applicant's amendments. However, upon further consideration, a new ground(s) of rejection is made in view of the prior art as mentioned above.
Regarding dependent claim(s) 2-15 and 17-19:
Applicant’s arguments (Remarks, Page 10: ¶ 2), filed 04/13/2026, with respect to the rejection(s) of claim(s) 2-15 and 17-19 under 35 U.S.C § 103 have been fully considered and are persuasive due the dependency upon claims 1, 16, and 20 respectively. Therefore, the rejection has been withdrawn, necessitated by Applicant's amendments. However, upon further consideration, a new ground(s) of rejection is made in view of the prior art as mentioned above.
Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP
Specification
Applicant is reminded of the proper language and format for an abstract of the disclosure.
The abstract should be in narrative form and generally limited to a single paragraph on a separate sheet within the range of 50 to 150 words in length. The abstract should describe the disclosure sufficiently to assist readers in deciding whether there is a need for consulting the full patent text for details.
The language should be clear and concise and should not repeat information given in the title. It should avoid using phrases which can be implied, such as, “The disclosure concerns,” “The disclosure defined by this invention,” “The disclosure describes,” etc. In addition, the form and legal phraseology often used in patent claims, such as “means” and “said,” should be avoided.
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.
Claim(s) 1-6, 14-18, and 20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Pelzer et al., US Patent No. 11172320 B1, hereinafter Pelzer, in view of Raghuvanshi, US PGPUB No. 20220377485 A1, hereinafter Raghuvanshi, and further in view of Raghuvanshi, US PGPUB No. 20150373475 A1, hereinafter Raghuvanshi-475.
Regarding claim 1, Pelzer discloses a computer-implemented method (Pelzer; a computer-implemented method [Col. 2, lines 19-28]) comprising:
obtaining an energy propagation variation field having energy propagation variation values indicating rates at which energy propagation changes as a function of location within a three-dimensional synthetic scene (Pelzer; the method [as addressed above] comprises obtaining an energy propagation variation field (corresponding to a domain/propagation generated by one or more wave equations) having energy propagation variation values (corresponding to ray tracing information) indicating rates at which energy propagation changes as a function of location within a 3D synthetic scene (i.e. 3D/volume model) [Col. 7, line 33 to Col. 8, line 29], as illustrated within Figs. 1 and 2; wherein, the wave equation is a 2nd-order linear PDE od a wave, further associated with determining a Room Impulse Response (RIR) [Id. above]; moreover, the simulated ray tracing is in relation with spatial-time-frequency energy probability density, which is function further associated with spatial impulse response (SIR) [Col. 2, line 29 to Col. 3, line 12]; in other words, acoustics simulation algorithm is/are utilized to generate all reflections of a room in calculating the average distance between all reflections and the volume of a room [Col. 6, lines 12-45 and Col. 6, line 58 to Col. 7, line 5]; wherein a room corresponds to a 3D/volume model [Col. 5, lines 14-43]);
selecting a plurality of sampling assignments within the three-dimensional synthetic scene based at least on the energy propagation variation field (Pelzer; the method [as addressed above] comprises selecting/determining a plurality of sampling assignments (i.e. groups, coherent groups) within the 3D synthetic scene (i.e. 3D/volume model) based at least on the energy propagation variation field (corresponding to the domain/propagation generated by wave equation(s)) [Col. 8, lines 30-62], as illustrated within Fig. 3);
deploying sampling probes within the three-dimensional synthetic scene according to the plurality of sampling assignments (Pelzer; the method [as addressed above] comprises deploying sampling probes (i.e. rays, sound/audio rays) within the 3D synthetic scene (i.e. 3D/volume model) according to the plurality of sampling assignments (i.e. groups, coherent groups) [Col. 8, lines 30-62], as illustrated within Fig. 3);
performing simulations of energy propagation within the three-dimensional synthetic scene using the deployed sampling probes (Pelzer; the method [as addressed above] comprises performing simulations of energy propagation within the 3D synthetic scene (i.e. 3D/volume model) using the deployed sampling probes (i.e. rays, sound/audio rays) [Col. 8, lines 30-62], as illustrated within Fig. 3; wherein, the rays are associated with partial propagation further associated with energy [Col. 8, line 12-31], such as acoustic energy [Col. 2, line 50 to Col. 3, line 12 and Col. 7, lines 6-31]);
obtaining results of the simulations (Pelzer; the method [as addressed above] comprises obtaining results of the simulations [Col. 8, lines 24-29]; moreover, improving performance of spatial impulse response [Col. 12, lines 20-31] and/or generating virtual sound sources [Col. 15, lines 27-48]; additionally, the ray tracing involves a completion event [Col. 10, line 49 to Col. 11, line 17 and Col. 15, lines 12-26] in relation with obtaining information [Col. 8, lines 12-29]); and
storing parameters corresponding to the results of the simulations (Pelzer; the method [as addressed above] comprises storing parameters corresponding to the results of the simulations [Col. 8, lines 12-29]), the parameters providing a basis for subsequent rendering of an energy signal within the three-dimensional synthetic scene (Pelzer; the parameters providing a basis for subsequent rendering of an energy signal within the 3D synthetic scene (i.e. 3D/volume model) [Col. 12, lines 7-35]; wherein, rays are able to be launched from multiple locations [Col. 3, lines 12-33]; additionally, improving spatial impulse response generation algorithm [Col. 14, lines 32 to Col. 15, line 11]).
Pelzer fails to explicitly disclose sampling probe locations; and
parameters corresponding to the results of the simulations.
However, Raghuvanshi teaches parameters corresponding to the results of the simulations (Raghuvanshi; parameterized acoustic component [¶ 0083-0084 and ¶ 0086] and storing thereof [¶ 0094]; moreover, parameterized acoustic component receives VR space data [¶ 0085]; additionally, probing [¶ 0022-0024]).
Pelzer and Raghuvanshi are considered to be analogous art because both pertain to generating and/or managing data in relation with providing three-dimensional modeling of a scene, wherein one or more computerized units are utilized in order to produce a data rendering effect/simulation.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing of the claimed invention was made to modify Pelzer, to incorporate parameters corresponding to the results of the simulations (as taught by Raghuvanshi), in order to provide an improved virtual scene rendering with reduced computational intensity/complexity (Raghuvanshi; [¶ 0001 and ¶ 0017-0019]).
Pelzer as modified by Raghuvanshi fails to disclose sampling probe locations.
However, Raghuvanshi-475 teaches selecting a plurality of sample probe locations within the three-dimensional synthetic scene based at least on the energy propagation variation field (Raghuvanshi-475; selecting a plurality of sample probe locations within the 3D synthetic scene based at least on the energy propagation variation field [¶ 0069-0071], as illustrated within Fig. 6; wherein, simulating responses of a virtual environment to pulses emitted from probe source locations defined throughout the virtual environment [¶ 0043-0044]; additionally, simulated pressure field [¶ 0045-0046 and ¶ 0076-0077]); and
deploying sampling probes within the three-dimensional synthetic scene at the plurality of sampling probe locations (Raghuvanshi-475; deploying sampling probes within the 3D synthetic scene at the plurality of sampling probe locations [¶ 0070 and ¶ 0100]; moreover, “… sampling controls (e.g., cell size, voxel size, maximum simulation frequency, probe source spacing and location selection parameters, and simulation run time)” [¶ 0065 and ¶ 0067]).
Pelzer in view of Raghuvanshi and Raghuvanshi-475 are considered to be analogous art because they pertain to generating and/or managing data in relation with providing three-dimensional modeling of a scene, wherein one or more computerized units are utilized in order to produce a data rendering effect/simulation.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing of the claimed invention was made to modify Pelzer as modified by Raghuvanshi, to incorporate selecting a plurality of sample probe locations within the three-dimensional synthetic scene based at least on the energy propagation variation field; and deploying sampling probes within the three-dimensional synthetic scene at the plurality of sampling probe locations (as taught by Raghuvanshi-475), in order to provide increased realism within a virtual simulated environment (Raghuvanshi-475; [¶ 0001-0003 and ¶ 0026]).
Regarding claim 2, Pelzer in view of Raghuvanshi and Raghuvanshi-475 further discloses the method of claim 1, further comprising:
obtaining an importance weighting field having importance weights indicating the relative importance of sampling as a function of location within the three-dimensional synthetic scene (Pelzer; obtaining an importance weighting field (corresponding to probability density function) having importance weights (corresponding to probability density) indicating the relative importance of sampling [Col. 13, line 65 to Col. 14, line 31] as a function of location within the 3D synthetic scene (i.e. 3D/volume model) [Col. 14, line 32 to Col. 15, line 11]; moreover, probability density function (PDF) [Col. 7, line 55 to Col. 8, line 2 and Col. 12, lines 38 to Col. 13, line 15]; wherein, the term “importance” is subjective without a scale and/or a determination means); and
selecting the plurality of sampling assignments based at least on the importance weighting field (Pelzer; selecting the plurality of sampling assignments (i.e. groups) based at least on the importance weighting field [Col. 7, line 42 to Col. 8, line 11]).
Raghuvanshi-475 further teaches selecting a plurality of sample probe locations based at least on the importance weighting field (Raghuvanshi-475; selecting a plurality of sample probe locations [¶ 0069-0071] based at least on the importance weighting field [¶ 0068]; additionally, simulated pressure field [¶ 0045-0046 and ¶ 0076-0077]).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing of the claimed invention was made to modify Pelzer as modified by Raghuvanshi and Raghuvanshi-475, to incorporate selecting a plurality of sample probe locations based at least on the importance weighting field (as taught by Raghuvanshi-475), in order to provide increased realism within a virtual simulated environment (Raghuvanshi-475; [¶ 0001-0003 and ¶ 0026]).
Regarding claim 3, Pelzer in view of Raghuvanshi and Raghuvanshi-475 further discloses the method of claim 2, the importance weighting field conveying a relative probability of a user being located at a particular location within the three-dimensional synthetic scene (Raghuvanshi; the importance weighting field (corresponding to probability density function) [as addressed within the parent claim(s)] conveying a relative probability (corresponding to relative density) of a user/listener being located at a particular location within the 3D synthetic scene [¶ 0033-0035]; moreover, probed listener location [¶ 0032]).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing of the claimed invention was made to modify Pelzer as modified by Raghuvanshi and Raghuvanshi-475, to incorporate the importance weighting field conveying a relative probability of a user being located at a particular location within the three-dimensional synthetic scene (as taught by Raghuvanshi), in order to provide an improved virtual scene rendering with reduced computational intensity/complexity (Raghuvanshi; [¶ 0001 and ¶ 0017-0019]).
Regarding claim 4, Pelzer in view of Raghuvanshi and Raghuvanshi-475 further discloses the method of claim 2, further comprising:
assigned to each respective sampling probe (Pelzer; the sampling assignments (i.e. groups) comprising sampling probe (i.e. ray) locations and points assigned to each respective sampling probe (i.e. ray) [Col. 8, lines 30-62 and Col. 9, lines 11-16]; wherein, the calculation for ray tracing involves a launch direction in relation with threading [Col. 8, line 63 to Col. 9, line 5], as illustrated within Fig. 3; and wherein, ray information incorporates a starting point, ending point, and travel direction [Col. 8, lines 12-23]; additionally, rays are launch from multiple locations [Col. 12, lines 8-35]).
Raghuvanshi-475 further teaches assigning points within the three-dimensional synthetic scene to each respective sampling probe (Raghuvanshi-475; assigning points within the 3D synthetic scene to each respective sampling probe [¶ 0065 and 0069-0071]; wherein, a calculated pressure field in relation with probe source locations [¶ 0076-0077]).
Regarding claim 5, Pelzer in view of Raghuvanshi and Raghuvanshi-475 further discloses the method of claim 4, wherein the sampling assignments are selected based at least on an aggregated importance-weighted distance function calculated using the energy propagation variation field and the importance weighting field (Pelzer; the sampling assignments (i.e. groups) are selected based at least on an aggregated importance-weighted distance function (corresponding to impulse response and/or reflection density) calculated using the energy propagation variation field (corresponding to the domain/propagation generated by wave equation(s)) and the importance weighting field (corresponding to probability density function) [Col. 12, lines 8-35 and Col. 12, line 44 to Col. 13, line 19]; additionally, calculating the reflection density [Col. 13, lines 20-45] in relation with determining sampling positions [Col. 13, line 65 to Col. 14, line 31]; wherein, the term “importance” is subjective without a scale and/or a determination means).
Raghuvanshi-475 further teaches the sampling probe location are selected (Raghuvanshi-475; the sample probe locations are selecting [¶ 0069-0071]; additionally, weighting field [¶ 0068]; and, simulated pressure field [¶ 0045-0046 and ¶ 0076-0077]).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing of the claimed invention was made to modify Pelzer as modified by Raghuvanshi and Raghuvanshi-475, to incorporate the sampling probe location are selected (as taught by Raghuvanshi-475), in order to provide increased realism within a virtual simulated environment (Raghuvanshi-475; [¶ 0001-0003 and ¶ 0026]).
Regarding claim 6, Pelzer in view of Raghuvanshi and Raghuvanshi-475 further teaches the method of claim 5, wherein points are assigned in the three-dimensional synthetic scene by determining respective cells surrounding respective sampling probe locations (Raghuvanshi-475; points are assigned in the 3D synthetic scene by determining respective cells/boxes surrounding respective sampling probe locations [¶ 0100-0102]), the assigned points for each sampling probe location occurring within a corresponding cell (Raghuvanshi-475; the assigned points for each sampling probe location occurring within a corresponding cell/box [¶ 0100-0102]).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing of the claimed invention was made to modify Pelzer as modified by Raghuvanshi and Raghuvanshi-475, to incorporate wherein points are assigned in the three-dimensional synthetic scene by determining respective cells surrounding respective sampling probe locations, the assigned points for each sampling probe location occurring within a corresponding cell (as taught by Raghuvanshi-475), in order to provide increased realism within a virtual simulated environment (Raghuvanshi-475; [¶ 0001-0003 and ¶ 0026]).
Regarding claim 14, Pelzer in view of Raghuvanshi and Raghuvanshi-475 further discloses the method of claim 2, further comprising:
receiving at least two different target sampling spacing distances for at least two different areas of the three-dimensional synthetic scene (Pelzer; receiving at least two different target sampling spacing distances [Col. 8, lines 30-53] for at least two different areas of the 3D synthetic scene (i.e. 3D/volume model) [Col. 12, lines 8-35]; moreover, rays are launched at different angles, as illustrated within Fig. 3, and from different locations [Id. above]); and
selecting respective sampling assignments for the at least two different areas with different sampling densities according to the at least two different target sampling spacing distances (Pelzer; selecting/determining respective sampling assignments (i.e. groups) for the at least two different areas [Col. 12, lines 8-35] with different sampling densities according to the at least two different target sampling spacing distances [Col. 13, lines 20-31 and Col. 14, lines 32-51]).
Raghuvanshi-475 further teaches selecting respective sampling probe locations (Raghuvanshi-475; the sample probe locations are selecting [¶ 0069-0071]; additionally, simulated pressure field [¶ 0045-0046 and ¶ 0076-0077]).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing of the claimed invention was made to modify Pelzer as modified by Raghuvanshi and Raghuvanshi-475, to incorporate selecting respective sampling probe locations selected (as taught by Raghuvanshi-475), in order to provide increased realism within a virtual simulated environment (Raghuvanshi-475; [¶ 0001-0003 and ¶ 0026]).
Regarding claim 15, Pelzer in view of Raghuvanshi and Raghuvanshi-475 further discloses the method of claim 1, wherein the energy propagation variation field includes scalar values characterizing the energy propagation (Pelzer; the energy propagation variation field (corresponding to the domain/propagation generated by wave equation(s)) [as addressed within the parent claim(s)] includes scalar values characterizing the energy propagation [Col. 7, line 55 to Col. 8, line 2 and Col. 11, line 52 to Col. 12, line 7]).
Raghuvanshi further teaches matrices characterizing the energy propagation anisotropically (Raghuvanshi; matrices (of indicators) characterizing the energy propagation anisotropically [¶ 0033-0034 and ¶ 0036], as illustrated within Fig. 3).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing of the claimed invention was made to modify Pelzer as modified by Raghuvanshi and Raghuvanshi-475, to incorporate matrices characterizing the energy propagation anisotropically (as taught by Raghuvanshi), in order to provide an improved virtual scene rendering with reduced computational intensity/complexity (Raghuvanshi; [¶ 0001 and ¶ 0017-0019]).
Regarding claim 16, Pelzer discloses a system (Pelzer; a system [Col. 2, lines 19-28 and Col. 18, line 36 to Col. 19, line 48]), comprising:
a processor (Pelzer; the system [as addressed above] comprising a processor [Col. 18, line 36 to Col. 19, line 48]); and
storage storing computer-readable instructions which, when executed by the processor, cause the system (Pelzer; the system [as addressed above] comprising storage storing computer-readable instructions which cause the system to perform when executed by the processor [Col. 18, line 36 to Col. 19, line 48]) to:
receive an input signal having a source location in a three-dimensional synthetic scene (Pelzer; the system [as addressed above] to receive an input signal having a source location in a 3D synthetic scene (i.e. 3D/volume model) [Col. 8, lines 30-62], as illustrated within Fig. 3; wherein, a room corresponds to a 3D/volume model [Col. 5, lines 14-43]);
access parameters that convey characteristics of energy propagation within in the three-dimensional synthetic scene (Pelzer; the system [as addressed above] to access parameters that convey characteristics of energy propagation within in the 3D synthetic scene (i.e. 3D/volume model) [Col. 7, line 33 to Col. 8, line 29], as illustrated within Figs. 1 and 2]; wherein, acoustics simulation algorithm is/are utilized to generate all reflections of a room in calculating the average distance between all reflections and the volume of a room [Col. 6, lines 12-45 and Col. 6, line 58 to Col. 7, line 5]), the parameters having been obtained by simulating energy propagation at sampled locations in the three-dimensional synthetic scene (Pelzer; the parameters having been obtained by simulating energy propagation at sampled locations in the 3D synthetic scene [Col. 7, line 33 to Col. 8, line 29], as illustrated within Figs. 1 and 2]), the sampled locations being located based at least on an energy propagation variation field and an importance field (Pelzer; the sampled locations being located based at least on an energy propagation variation field [Col. 8, lines 30-62] and an importance field (corresponding to probability density function) [Col. 13, line 65 to Col. 14, line 31], as illustrated within Fig. 3; wherein, the rays are associated with partial propagation further associated with energy [Col. 8, line 12-31], such as acoustic energy [Col. 2, line 50 to Col. 3, line 12 and Col. 7, lines 6-31]; moreover, probability density function (PDF) [Col. 7, line 55 to Col. 8, line 2 and Col. 12, lines 38 to Col. 13, line 15]; wherein, the term “importance” is subjective without a scale and/or a determination means); and
render an energy signal at a receiver location based at least on the parameters (Pelzer; render an energy signal at a receiver location based at least on the parameters [Col. 3, lines 12-33 and Col. 12, lines 7-35]; moreover, spatial impulse response generation algorithm [Col. 14, lines 32 to Col. 15, line 11]).
Pelzer fails to explicitly disclose parameters having been obtained by simulating energy propagation at sampling probe locations.
However, Raghuvanshi teaches parameters having been obtained by simulating energy propagation (Raghuvanshi; parameterized acoustic component having been obtained by simulating energy propagation [¶ 0083-0086]; additionally, probing [¶ 0022-0024]).
Pelzer and Raghuvanshi are considered to be analogous art because both pertain to generating and/or managing data in relation with providing three-dimensional modeling of a scene, wherein one or more computerized units are utilized in order to produce a data rendering effect/simulation.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing of the claimed invention was made to modify Pelzer, to incorporate parameters having been obtained by simulating energy propagation (as taught by Raghuvanshi), in order to provide an improved virtual scene rendering with reduced computational intensity/complexity (Raghuvanshi; [¶ 0001 and ¶ 0017-0019]).
Pelzer as modified by Raghuvanshi fails to disclose simulating energy propagation at sampling probe locations.
Raghuvanshi-475 further teaches parameters having been obtained by simulating energy propagation at sampling probe locations (Raghuvanshi-475; parameters having been obtained by simulating energy propagation at sampling probe locations [¶ 0043-0045]; moreover, detecting characteristics [¶ 0047 and ¶ 0065-0067]; and moreover, impulse response or response of the environment to a pulse [¶ 0076-0077]; wherein, extracting parameter fields [¶ 0079-0080], as illustrated within Fig. 8, and receiving parameters [¶ 0068]).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing of the claimed invention was made to modify Pelzer as modified by Raghuvanshi and Raghuvanshi-475, to incorporate parameters having been obtained by simulating energy propagation at sampling probe locations (as taught by Raghuvanshi-475), in order to provide increased realism within a virtual simulated environment (Raghuvanshi-475; [¶ 0001-0003 and ¶ 0026]).
Regarding claim 17, Pelzer in view of Raghuvanshi and Raghuvanshi-475 further discloses the system of claim 16, wherein the computer-readable instructions, when executed by the processor, cause the system (Pelzer; the computer-readable instructions cause the system perform when executed by the processor [as addressed within parent claim(s)]) to:
perform interpolation of the parameters based on distances from individual sampled locations to the receiver location (Pelzer; the system [as addressed above] perform interpolation of the parameters based on distances from individual sampled locations to the receiver location [Col. 6, lines 12-27 and Col. 7, lines 42 to Col. 8, lines 23]).
Raghuvanshi-475 further teaches perform interpolation of the parameters based at least on distances from individual sampling probe locations to the receiver location (Raghuvanshi-475; performing interpolation of the parameters based at least on distances from individual sampling probe locations to the receiver location [¶ 0067-0068]; moreover, insert probe locations into a spatial data structure [¶ 0100-0102]).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing of the claimed invention was made to modify Pelzer as modified by Raghuvanshi and Raghuvanshi-475, to incorporate perform interpolation of the parameters based at least on distances from individual sampling probe locations to the receiver location (as taught by Raghuvanshi-475), in order to provide increased realism within a virtual simulated environment (Raghuvanshi-475; [¶ 0001-0003 and ¶ 0026]).
Regarding claim 18, Pelzer in view of Raghuvanshi and Raghuvanshi-475 further discloses the system of claim 17, wherein the energy signal is a sound signal (Pelzer; the energy signal is a sound signal [Col. 5, line 60 to Col. 6, lines 27]; moreover, acoustically-effective room [Col. 7, lines 6-31]), and the parameters convey loudness of initial sound arriving at the sampled locations from other locations in the three-dimensional synthetic scene (Pelzer; the parameters convey loudness of initial sound arriving at the sampled locations from other locations in the 3D synthetic scene (i.e. 3D/volume model) [Col. 6, lines 58 to Col. 7, line 5 and Col. 15, lines 21-48]).
Raghuvanshi-475 further teaches sampling probe locations (Raghuvanshi-475; sampling probe locations [¶ 0043-0045] in relation with parameters convey loudness [¶ 0047, ¶ 0066, and ¶ 0080]; moreover, impulse response within an environment [¶ 0075-0077]).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing of the claimed invention was made to modify Pelzer as modified by Raghuvanshi and Raghuvanshi-475, to incorporate sampling probe locations (as taught by Raghuvanshi-475), in order to provide increased realism within a virtual simulated environment (Raghuvanshi-475; [¶ 0001-0003 and ¶ 0026]).
Regarding claim 20, the rejection of claim 20 is addressed within the rejection of claim 1, due to the similarities claim 20 and claim 1 share, therefore refer to the rejection of claim 1 regarding the rejection of claim 20. Although, claim 20 and claim 1 may not be identical, they are considerably comparable or substantially equivalent given their overlapping subject matter. Thus, it is reasonable to reject claim 20 based on the teachings and rational in relation with the prior art within the rejection of claim 1. However, the subject matter/limitations not addressed by claim 1 is/are addressed below.
Pelzer discloses a computer-readable storage medium storing executable instructions which, when executed by a processor, cause the processor to perform acts (Pelzer; a CRSM storing executable instructions which, when executed by a processor, cause the processor to perform acts [Col. 18, line 53 to Col. 19, line 48]).
(further refer to the rejection of 1)
Claim(s) 19 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Pelzer in view of Raghuvanshi and Raghuvanshi-475 as applied to claim(s) 17 above, and further in view of Sun et al., US PGPUB No. 20200312009, hereinafter Sun.
Regarding claim 19, Pelzer in view of Raghuvanshi and Raghuvanshi-475 further discloses the system of claim 17, wherein the energy signal is a light signal (Pelzer; the energy signal is a light/ray signal [Col. 6, lines 12-27]).
Pelzer in view of Raghuvanshi and Raghuvanshi-475 fails to disclose the rendering comprises rendering an image with lighting based on the parameters.
However, Sun teaches the rendering comprises rendering an image with lighting based at least on the parameters (Sun; the rendering comprises rendering an image with lighting based on the parameters [¶ 0018-0019 and ¶ 0024]; moreover, an image of the scene is rendered based on the set of sampled light paths [¶ 0053]).
Pelzer in view of Raghuvanshi and Raghuvanshi-475 and Sun are considered to be analogous art because they pertain to generating and/or managing data in relation with providing three-dimensional modeling of a scene, wherein one or more computerized units are utilized in order to produce a data rendering effect/simulation.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing of the claimed invention was made to modify Pelzer as modified by Raghuvanshi and Raghuvanshi-475, to incorporate the rendering comprises rendering an image with lighting based at least on the parameters (as taught by Sun), in order to provide an improved optimized rendering of a scene while reducing computational complexity (Sun; [¶ 0002 and ¶ 0004-0005]).
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 7-13 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.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. Refer to PTO-892, Notice of Reference Cited for a listing of analogous art.
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 Charles Lloyd Beard whose telephone number is (571)272-5735. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday, 8:00 AM - 5: 00 PM, alternate Fridays EST.
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, Tammy Goddard can be reached at (571) 272-7773. 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.
CHARLES LLOYD. BEARD
Primary Examiner
Art Unit 2611
/CHARLES L BEARD/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2611
Prosecution Insights