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 filed RCE/Amendments
Applicant’s Amendments/Remarks filed on 07/02/2026 have been received and made of record. A request for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, including the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e), was filed in this application after final rejection. Since this application is eligible for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114. Applicant's submission filed on 07/02/2026 has been entered.
Independent claims 1, 17, and 20 have been amended.
Claims 6-7, 15, and 18-19 remained objected.
Claims 1-20 remained pending.
Please refer to the action below.
Examiner Notes
The claims in this application are given their broadest reasonable interpretation using the plain meaning of the claim language in light of the specification as it would be understood by one of ordinary skill in the art. However, the claimed subject matter, not the specification, is the measure of the invention.
Response to Remarks/Arguments
Applicants’ arguments of 07/02/2026, corresponding to pages 8-9 pertaining to the prior arts of record and currently to the newly added claim limitations of the amended independent claims 1, 17, and 20 citing “Claim(s) 1, 17, and 20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as obvious over Yao et al (CN 110457673, cited in NPL), view of Iwasaki et al. (JP 2010218181, Al). Claim(s) 1, 17, and 20 is/are further rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as obvious over Kelly et al (US 20230343011, Al), view of Iwasaki et al. Claim(s) 1, 17, and 20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as obvious over Ghosh et al (US 2023/007746, Al), view of Iwasaki et al.
Claim(s) 1-5, 9-10, 17, 20 is/are further rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as obvious over Ghosh et al, view of Guy et al. Claim(s) 8 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as obvious over Ghosh et al (US 2023/007746, Al), and further in view of Kelly.
Applicant respectfully disagrees with the rejections and reasoning in the Office Action. Applicant submits that Yao, Iwasaki, Kelly, Ghosh, Guy fail to disclose features of amended claim 1 reciting, in part: "obtaining, based on the intent, at least one source from among a plurality of personal and public resources of images and score information corresponding to images from the at least one source;" "determining at least one image from the at least one source based on the score
information;" Independent claims 17 and 20 recite subject matter analogous to that of claim 1 in a different format. Accordingly, for at least the reasons set forth above with respect to claim 1, the cited references likewise fail to teach or suggest the limitations of claims 17 and 20. Reconsideration is respectfully requested. Applicant submits that dependent claims are patentable at least for the same reasons discussed above with respect to independent amended claims 1, 17, and 20. Accordingly, Applicant respectfully requests reconsideration and withdrawal of the rejections of dependent claims. Reconsideration is respectfully requested”; have been considered, however, these newly added claimed amendments and remarks are moot in light of the new ground of rejections.
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) 1-5, 9-10, 17, 20 is/are further rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being obvious over Ghosh (previously cited), in view of Heling et al. (DE 20201710514, A1).
Regarding claim 1, Ghosh teaches a computer-implemented method of Figs. 3-8 and para. 0026 comprising:
receiving audio data via a sensor of a computing device (Fig. 5 further illustrates in a case received audio data via a sensor 340 of the computing device);
converting the audio data to a text and extracting a portion of the text (para. 0026 and Fig. 5 further cites converted audio data to a text and fed text data to a trained neural network-based language model, as the fed or ingested text may obviously comprise one or more recognized extracted portion of said text);
inputting the portion of the text to a language model to predict an intent of displaying an image relevant to the text, the intent of displaying the image is based on a participant or conversation (received and analyzed inputs 510/800 of further Figs. 5 and 8 and of at least para. 0027 as supported by further para. 0055-0061 to determine prepared outputs by at least processing natural language inputs comprising at least text input data and gazed input data further fed to a neural network-based language model configured to detect and predict prepared output with an implied general intent of displaying output visual aid images relevant to the text and gazed data, said intent of displaying the sign language images is based on a participant or conversation with a hearing loss participant);
determining at least one visual image based on at least one of the type of the visual images, the source of the visual images, the content of the visual images, or the confidence score for each of the visual images (analyzed further in Fig. 5 and para. 0025-0028 and 0049 at least one processed and determined at least one visual sign/expression images based on the type of the visual images, the source of the visual images, and the content of the visual images); and causing display of the at least one image corresponding to the text on a display of the computing device (provide output and display of further Fig. 5 and para. 0025-0028 and 0049 of at least one visual image on a display of the computing device).
However, Ghosh is silent regarding wherein specifically obtaining, based on the intent, at least one source from among a plurality of personal and public resources of images and score information corresponding to the images from the at least one source; determining at least one image from the at least one source based on the score information; and causing display of the said at least one image corresponding to the text on a display of the computing device.
Heling teaches at least in Figs. 3-6 a search engine system configured to receive user utterance input in the form of audio and/or text input being provided to a natural language processing system to asses at least a user intent of displaying in a case an image relevant to the "My Photos" text input 126, said intent of displaying the photo image is based on a participant or conversation, the system as cited in the disclosure and Figs. 3-6 further obtains, based on the intent, at least one source according to a case the user expressing a search restriction of a specific source from among a plurality of personal and public resources 154 of images and score information corresponding to the images from the at least one source determined by the ranking machine 128, the intent of displaying the image is based on a participant or conversation; where the system further in the disclosure and Figs. 3-6 further determining at least one image from the at least one source based on the score information based on the at least one source of the images and ultimately causing display of the at least one image corresponding to the text on a display of the computing device. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the teachings of Ghosh in in view of Heling to include wherein said obtaining, based on the intent, at least one source from among a plurality of personal and public resources of images and score information corresponding to the images from the at least one source; determining at least one image from the at least one source based on the score information; and causing display of the said at least one image corresponding to the text on a display of the computing device, as discussed above, as Ghosh in in view of Heling are in the same field of endeavor of employing methods and systems for providing or retrieving visual or display content to supplement verbal or non-verbal queries for at least displaying based on user intent the desired displayed user images; Heling’s combination of obtaining images from the at least one source based on the score information in addition to identified predicted display image intents further complements the provided predicted display visual content of Ghosh, in the sense that said combination of Heling when combined with the deep learning model and the predict visual display intent system of Ghosh further enables the system of Ghosh not only to predict a displayed intent but to also configure to access and obtain a source of the intent displayed image from one or more image database source to retrieve as best intended the intended visual images according to the score information corresponding to the images from said at least one source, whereby said participants may continue supplemented ongoing conversation seamlessly according to further known methods to yield predictable results since known work in one field of endeavor may prompt variations of it for use in either the same field or a different one based on design incentives or other market forces if the variations are predictable to one of ordinary skill in the art as said combination is thus the adaptation of an old idea or invention using newer technology that is either commonly available and understood in the art thereby a variation on already known art (See MPEP 2143, KSR Exemplary Rationale F).
Regarding claim 2 (according to the method of claim 1), Ghosh further teaches wherein the computing device is a head mounted smart glasses (the at least one or more smart glasses 300 of further Figs. 3).
Regarding claim 3 (according to the method of claim 1), Ghosh further teaches wherein the computing device is a smart display configured for video conferencing (smart glasses 300 of further para. 0045, 0025 and Fig. 5 further comprises an artificial intelligence system connected to at least a network system and a display device further adapted for receiving/display data from various sources and further including obviously for video conferencing via said cited network system).
Regarding claim 4 (according to the method of claim 2), Ghosh further teaches wherein further comprising a smart phone in communication with the head mounted smart glasses and the neural network-based language model being disposed on the smart phone (Figs. 2-5 and para. 0018-0020 and 0067 further configured with systems and methods further comprising an external device/source of further para. 0067 or another user of further Fig. 5 which may embody said smart phone in communication with the head mounted smart glasses 300 and in a case the external device/environment or smart phone may obviously embodying said neural network-based language model being disposed on the smart phone).
Regarding claim 5 (according to the method of claim 1), Ghosh further teaches wherein further comprising an external computing device in communication with the computing device and the neural network-based language model being disposed on the external computing device (Fig. 5 and para. 0067 further illustrates an embodiment where an external computing source/device may be in communication with the computing device 300 and said neural network-based language model being understoodly in a case disposed on the external computing device of at least para. 0067).
Regarding claim 9 (according to claim 1), Ghosh further teaches wherein the type of the visual images comprises at least one of a photo stored on the computing device, an emoji, an image, a video, a map, a personal photo from an album or a contact, a three dimensional (3D) model, a clip art, a poster, a visual representation of a Uniform Resource Locator (URL) for a website, a list, an equation, or an article (the processed output of the smart glasses of further Fig. 5 and para. 0042 further comprises an output type of the visual images comprises at least one of an emoji, an image, a video).
Regarding claim 10 (according to claim 1), Ghosh further implies wherein the portion of the text comprises at least a number of words from an end of the text greater than a threshold (the smart glasses of further Figs. 2-5 further configured to output caption data and/or sign languages from converted text data comprises obviously portion of the text further comprising obviously at least a number of words from an end of the text greater than a threshold).
Regarding claim 17, Ghosh teaches a computing device 300 of Figs. 3-8 and para. 0026 comprising:
at least one processor (the one or more processors of further para. 0026 and 0065-0066); and
a memory (the one or memory of further para. 0065-0066) storing instructions that, when executed by the at least one processor, configures the at least one processor to: receive audio data via a sensor of the computing device (Fig. 5 further illustrates in a case received audio data via a sensor 340 of the computing device);
convert the audio data to a text and extract a portion of the text (para. 0026 and Fig. 5 further cites converted audio data to a text and fed text data to a trained neural network-based language model, as the fed or ingested text may obviously comprise one or more recognized extracted portion of said text);
input the portion of the text to a language model to predict an intent of displaying an image relevant to the text, the intent of displaying the image is based on a participant or conversation (received and analyzed inputs 510/800 of further Figs. 5 and 8 and of at least para. 0027 as supported by further para. 0055-0061 to determine prepared outputs by at least processing natural language inputs comprising at least text input data and gazed input data further fed to a neural network-based language model configured to detect and predict prepared output with an implied general intent of displaying output visual aid images relevant to the text and gazed data, said intent of displaying the sign language images is based on a participant or conversation with a hearing loss participant);
determine at least one visual image based on the type of the visual images, the source of the visual images, the content of the visual images, or the confidence score for each of the visual images (analyzed further in Fig. 5 and para. 0025-0028 at least one processed and determined at least one visual sign/expression images based on the type of the visual images, the source of the visual images, and the content of the visual images); and
cause display of the at least one image corresponding to the text on a display of the computing device (provide output and display of further Fig. 5 and para. 0025-0028 and 0049 of at least one visual image on a display of the computing device).
However, Ghosh is silent regarding wherein specifically obtaining, based on the intent, at least one source from among a plurality of personal and public resources of images and score information corresponding to the images from the at least one source; determining at least one image from the at least one source based on the score information; and causing display of the said at least one image corresponding to the text on a display of the computing device.
Heling teaches at least in Figs. 3-6 a search engine system configured to receive user utterance input in the form of audio and/or text input being provided to a natural language processing system to asses at least a user intent of displaying in a case an image relevant to the "My Photos" text input 126, said intent of displaying the photo image is based on a participant or conversation, the system as cited in the disclosure and Figs. 3-6 further obtains, based on the intent, at least one source according to a case the user expressing a search restriction of a specific source from among a plurality of personal and public resources 154 of images and score information corresponding to the images from the at least one source determined by the ranking machine 128, the intent of displaying the image is based on a participant or conversation; where the system further in the disclosure and Figs. 3-6 further determining at least one image from the at least one source based on the score information based on the at least one source of the images and ultimately causing display of the at least one image corresponding to the text on a display of the computing device. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the teachings of Ghosh in in view of Heling to include wherein said obtain, based on the intent, at least one source from among a plurality of personal and public resources of images and score information corresponding to the images from the at least one source; determine at least one image from the at least one source based on the score information; and cause display of the said at least one image corresponding to the text on a display of the computing device, as discussed above, as Ghosh in in view of Heling are in the same field of endeavor of employing methods and systems for providing or retrieving visual or display content to supplement verbal or non-verbal queries for at least displaying based on user intent the desired displayed user images; Heling’s combination of obtaining images from the at least one source based on the score information in addition to identified predicted display image intents further complements the provided predicted display visual content of Ghosh, in the sense that said combination of Heling when combined with the deep learning model and the predict visual display intent system of Ghosh further enables the system of Ghosh not only to predict a displayed intent but to also configure to access and obtain a source of the intent displayed image from one or more image database source to retrieve as best intended the intended visual images according to the score information corresponding to the images from said at least one source, whereby said participants may continue supplemented ongoing conversation seamlessly according to further known methods to yield predictable results since known work in one field of endeavor may prompt variations of it for use in either the same field or a different one based on design incentives or other market forces if the variations are predictable to one of ordinary skill in the art as said combination is thus the adaptation of an old idea or invention using newer technology that is either commonly available and understood in the art thereby a variation on already known art (See MPEP 2143, KSR Exemplary Rationale F).
Regarding claim 20, Ghosh teaches a computer-implemented method for providing visual captions (the smart glasses of further Figs. 2-5 further configured to output or provide caption data and/or sign languages from converted text data), the method comprising:
receiving audio data via a sensor of a computing device (Fig. 5 further illustrates in a case received audio data via a sensor 340 of the computing device);
converting the audio data to a text and extracting a portion of the text (para. 0026 and Fig. 5 further cites converted audio data to a text and fed text data to a trained neural network-based language model, as the fed or ingested text may obviously comprise one or more recognized extracted portion of said text);
inputting the portion of the text to a language model to predict an intent of displaying an image relevant to the text, the intent of displaying the image is based on a participant or conversation (received and analyzed inputs 510/800 of further Figs. 5 and 8 and of at least para. 0027 as supported by further para. 0055-0061 to determine prepared outputs by at least processing natural language inputs comprising at least text input data and gazed input data further fed to a neural network-based language model configured to detect and predict prepared output with an implied general intent of displaying output visual aid images relevant to the text and gazed data, said intent of displaying the sign language images is based on a participant or conversation with a hearing loss participant);
determining at least one visual image by inputting at least one of the type of the visual images, the source of the visual images, the content of the visual images, and the confidence score for each of the visual images to another ML model (analyzed further in Fig. 5 and para. 0025-0028 at least one processed and determined at least one visual sign/expression images based on the type of the visual images, the source of the visual images, and the content of the visual images); and
causing display of the at least one image corresponding to the text on a display of the computing device (provide output and display of further Fig. 5 and para. 0025-0028 and 0049 of at least one visual image on a display of the computing device).
However, Ghosh is silent regarding wherein specifically obtaining, based on the intent, at least one source from among a plurality of personal and public resources of images and score information corresponding to the images from the at least one source; determining at least one image from the at least one source based on the score information; and causing display of the said at least one image corresponding to the text on a display of the computing device.
Heling teaches at least in Figs. 3-6 a search engine system configured to receive user utterance input in the form of audio and/or text input being provided to a natural language processing system to asses at least a user intent of displaying in a case an image relevant to the "My Photos" text input 126, said intent of displaying the photo image is based on a participant or conversation, the system as cited in the disclosure and Figs. 3-6 further obtains, based on the intent, at least one source according to a case the user expressing a search restriction of a specific source from among a plurality of personal and public resources 154 of images and score information corresponding to the images from the at least one source determined by the ranking machine 128, the intent of displaying the image is based on a participant or conversation; where the system further in the disclosure and Figs. 3-6 further determining at least one image from the at least one source based on the score information based on the at least one source of the images and ultimately causing display of the at least one image corresponding to the text on a display of the computing device. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the teachings of Ghosh in in view of Heling to include wherein said obtaining, based on the intent, at least one source from among a plurality of personal and public resources of images and score information corresponding to the images from the at least one source; determining at least one image from the at least one source based on the score information; and causing display of the said at least one image corresponding to the text on a display of the computing device, as discussed above, as Ghosh in in view of Heling are in the same field of endeavor of employing methods and systems for providing or retrieving visual or display content to supplement verbal or non-verbal queries for at least displaying based on user intent the desired displayed user images; Heling’s combination of obtaining images from the at least one source based on the score information in addition to identified predicted display image intents further complements the provided predicted display visual content of Ghosh, in the sense that said combination of Heling when combined with the deep learning model and the predict visual display intent system of Ghosh further enables the system of Ghosh not only to predict a displayed intent but to also configure to access and obtain a source of the intent displayed image from one or more image database source to retrieve as best intended the intended visual images according to the score information corresponding to the images from said at least one source, whereby said participants may continue supplemented ongoing conversation seamlessly according to further known methods to yield predictable results since known work in one field of endeavor may prompt variations of it for use in either the same field or a different one based on design incentives or other market forces if the variations are predictable to one of ordinary skill in the art as said combination is thus the adaptation of an old idea or invention using newer technology that is either commonly available and understood in the art thereby a variation on already known art (See MPEP 2143, KSR Exemplary Rationale F).
Claim(s) 8 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as obvious over Ghosh in view of Heling, and further in view of Kelly (previously cited).
Regarding claim 8 (according to claim 1), Ghosh in view of Heling are silent regarding wherein the confidence score for each of the visual images is between 0 and 1, and the method further comprises: omitting the outputting of a visual image, in response to the respective confidence score of the visual image not meeting a threshold confidence score of 0.5.
Kelly further teaches in at least para. 0075 the trained learning model configured to output caption visual images from ingested or fed text data corresponding to a confidence score for each of the output or predicted visual images is between 0 and 1, and said method and/or the output confidence result further allow the system to obviously in a case omitting the outputting of a visual image, in response to the respective confidence score of the visual image not meeting a threshold confidence score of 0.5. It would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the teachings of Ghosh in view of Heling, and further in view of Kelly to include wherein confidence score for each of the visual images is between 0 and 1, and the method further comprises: omitting the outputting of a visual image, in response to the respective confidence score of the visual image not meeting a threshold confidence score of 0.5, as discussed above, as Ghosh in view of Heling, and further in view of Kelly are in the same of endeavor of translating realtime caption and sign language data from inputted text data between at least two communicating users, Kelly further complements the smart glasses realtime translating text to caption/sign language data of Ghosh in view of Heling with supplemented predicted visual image content and types presented via a user interface device according to a calculated confidence score correlating to the predicted visual images which when supplemented to the smart glasses output data further allow the system to in a case omitting those visual images not meeting a certain threshold according to further known methods to yield predictable results since known work in one field of endeavor may prompt variations of it for use in either the same field or a different one based on design incentives or other market forces if the variations are predictable to one of ordinary skill in the art as said combination is thus the adaptation of an old idea or invention using newer technology that is either commonly available and understood in the art thereby a variation on already known art (See MPEP 2143, KSR Exemplary Rationale F).
Claim(s) 11-14 and 16 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as obvious over Ghosh in view of Heling, and further in view of Fashimpaur et al (US 11726578, previously cited).
Regarding claim 11 (according to claim 1), Ghosh in view of Heling are silent regarding wherein the outputting of the at least one visual image comprises outputting the at least one visual image as a scrollable list proximate to a side of the display of the computing device.
Fashimpaur teaches at least Figs. 1 and 3 a head mount device including the smart glasses device wherein the outputting of said device further comprises at least one visual image comprises outputting the at least one visual image of further Fig. 5 and the disclosure as a scrollable list proximate to a side of the display of the computing device. It would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the teachings of Ghosh in view of Heling, and further in view of Fashimpaur to include wherein outputting of the at least one visual image comprises outputting the at least one visual image as a scrollable list proximate to a side of the display of the computing device, as discussed above, as Ghosh in view of Heling, and further in view of Fashimpaur are in the same of endeavor of displaying via at least a head mounted display translated realtime text to caption and sign language data between at least two communicating users, Fashimpaur further complements the smart glasses realtime translating text to caption/sign language data of Ghosh in view of Heling with a supplemented scrollable list display proximate to a side of the display of the head mounted display which when added or supplemented to the smart glasses of Ghosh in view of Heling further allow the system to scroll display contents with further convenience either vertically or horizontally through at least gesture means or the like to yield predictable results since known work in one field of endeavor may prompt variations of it for use in either the same field or a different one based on design incentives or other market forces if the variations are predictable to one of ordinary skill in the art as said combination is thus the adaptation of an old idea or invention using newer technology that is either commonly available and understood in the art thereby a variation on already known art (See MPEP 2143, KSR Exemplary Rationale F).
Regarding claim 12 (according to claim 11), Ghosh in view of Heling are silent regarding wherein further comprising outputting the at least one visual image as a vertical scrollable list.
Fashimpaur further teaches at least in the disclosure and Fig. 5 where the smart glasses and/or the head mount device further comprising the displayed scrollable list further comprising said outputting at least one visual image as a vertical scrollable list. It would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the teachings of Ghosh in view of Heling, and further in view of Fashimpaur to include wherein outputting the at least one visual image as a vertical scrollable list, as discussed above, as Ghosh in view of Heling, and further in view of Fashimpaur are in the same of endeavor of displaying via at least a head mounted display translated realtime text to caption and sign language data between at least two communicating users, Fashimpaur further complements the smart glasses realtime translating text to caption/sign language data of Ghosh in view of Heling with a supplemented scrollable list display proximate to a side of the display of the head mounted display which when added or supplemented to the smart glasses of Ghosh in view of Heling further allow the system to scroll display contents with further convenience either vertically or horizontally through at least gesture means or the like to yield predictable results since known work in one field of endeavor may prompt variations of it for use in either the same field or a different one based on design incentives or other market forces if the variations are predictable to one of ordinary skill in the art as said combination is thus the adaptation of an old idea or invention using newer technology that is either commonly available and understood in the art thereby a variation on already known art (See MPEP 2143, KSR Exemplary Rationale F).
Regarding claim 13 (according to claim 11), Ghosh in view of Heling are silent regarding wherein further comprising outputting the at least one visual image as a horizontal scrollable list, in response to the at least one visual image being an emoji.
Fashimpaur further teaches at least in the disclosure and Fig. 5 where the smart glasses and/or the head mount device further comprising the displayed scrollable list further comprising said outputting at least one visual image as a horizontal scrollable list, in response to the at least one visual image being obviously an emoji. It would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the teachings of Ghosh in view of Heling, and further in view of Fashimpaur to include wherein further comprising outputting the at least one visual image as a horizontal scrollable list, in response to the at least one visual image being an emoji, as discussed above, as Ghosh in view of Heling, and further in view of Fashimpaur are in the same of endeavor of displaying via at least a head mounted display translated realtime text to caption and sign language data between at least two communicating users, Fashimpaur further complements the smart glasses realtime translating text to caption/sign language data of Ghosh in view of Heling with a supplemented scrollable list display proximate to a side of the display of the head mounted display which when added or supplemented to the smart glasses of Ghosh in view of Heling further allow the system to scroll display contents with further convenience either vertically or horizontally through at least gesture means or the like to yield predictable results since known work in one field of endeavor may prompt variations of it for use in either the same field or a different one based on design incentives or other market forces if the variations are predictable to one of ordinary skill in the art as said combination is thus the adaptation of an old idea or invention using newer technology that is either commonly available and understood in the art thereby a variation on already known art (See MPEP 2143, KSR Exemplary Rationale F).
Regarding claim 14 (according to claim 11), Ghosh in view of Heling are silent regarding wherein further comprising publicly displaying an image from the scrollable list, in response to an input being received form a user of the computing device.
Fashimpaur further teaches at least in the disclosure and Fig. 5 where the smart glasses and/or the head mount device further comprising the displayed screen which further comprising publicly displaying an image from the scrollable list according to known design, in response to an input being received form a user of the computing device. It would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the teachings of Ghosh in view of Heling, and further in view of Fashimpaur to include wherein further comprising publicly displaying an image from the scrollable list, in response to an input being received form a user of the computing device, as discussed above, as Ghosh in view of Heling, and further in view of Fashimpaur are in the same of endeavor of displaying via at least a head mounted display translated realtime text to caption and sign language data between at least two communicating users, Fashimpaur further complements the smart glasses realtime translating text to caption/sign language data of Ghosh in view of Heling with a supplemented scrollable list display proximate to a side of the display of the head mounted display which when added or supplemented to the smart glasses of Ghosh in view of Heling further allow the system to scroll display contents with further convenience either vertically or horizontally through at least gesture means as said scrollable list display configuration screen may be in a case allow the screen to as understood in the art be visually publicly displayable or the like according to known means and/or design choices to yield predictable results since known work in one field of endeavor may prompt variations of it for use in either the same field or a different one based on design incentives or other market forces if the variations are predictable to one of ordinary skill in the art as said combination is thus the adaptation of an old idea or invention using newer technology that is either commonly available and understood in the art thereby a variation on already known art (See MPEP 2143, KSR Exemplary Rationale F).
Regarding claim 16 (according to claim 11), Ghosh in view of Heling are silent regarding wherein: the scrollable list is displayed on the computing device and not visible to another computing device in communication with the computing device; and the scrollable list is displayed on the another computing device, in response to an input being received from a user of the computing device.
Fashimpaur further teaches at least in the disclosure and Fig. 5 where the smart glasses and/or the head mount device further comprising the displayed screen displaying the scrollable list screen which may according to a predetermined understood design not visible to another computing device in communication with the computing device and said scrollable list may be obviously displayed on the another computing device, in response to an input being received from a user of the computing device. It would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the teachings of Ghosh in view of Heling, and further in view of Fashimpaur to include wherein scrollable list is displayed on the computing device and not visible to another computing device in communication with the computing device; and the scrollable list is displayed on the another computing device, in response to an input being received from a user of the computing device, as discussed above, as Ghosh in view of Heling, and further in view of Fashimpaur are in the same of endeavor of displaying via at least a head mounted display translated realtime text to caption and sign language data between at least two communicating users, Fashimpaur further complements the smart glasses realtime translating text to caption/sign language data of Ghosh in view of Heling with a supplemented scrollable list display proximate to a side of the display of the head mounted display which when added or supplemented to the smart glasses of Ghosh in view of Heling further allow the system to scroll display contents with further convenience either vertically or horizontally through at least gesture means as said scrollable list display configuration screen may be in a case allow the screen to as understood in the art be visually publicly displayable or the like according to known means and/or design choices to yield predictable results since known work in one field of endeavor may prompt variations of it for use in either the same field or a different one based on design incentives or other market forces if the variations are predictable to one of ordinary skill in the art as said combination is thus the adaptation of an old idea or invention using newer technology that is either commonly available and understood in the art thereby a variation on already known art (See MPEP 2143, KSR Exemplary Rationale F).
Claims Standings
Claims 6-7, 15, and 18-19 remained objected over the prior arts of record, 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, and/or if properly incorporated in the indepddent claims including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to MARCELLUS AUGUSTIN whose telephone number is (571)270-3384. The examiner can normally be reached 9 AM- 5 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, BENNY TIEU can be reached at 571-272-7490. 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.
/MARCELLUS J AUGUSTIN/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2682 07/14/2026
Prosecution Insights