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
This is in response to the amendments filed on 3/17/26. Claims 1 – 3, 7, 8, 10- 13, 16, 17, and 19 – 24 have been amended, claims 4 – 6, 9, and 25 – 33 have been cancelled. Claims 1 – 3, 7, 8, and 10 – 24 are now pending in the current application.
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 1 – 3, 7, 8, and 10 – 24 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 101 because the claimed invention is directed to non-statutory subject matter.
Step 1: It must be determined whether the invention falls in one of the four statutory categories of invention. Claims 1 – 3, 7, 8, and 10 – 24 are directed towards a method, (process), which is a statutory category of invention.
Step 2a:
Prong 1: It must be determined whether the invention is directed to judicially recognized exception. Claim 1 is analyzed below with limitations indicating recitations of an abstract idea.
1. A method for game interaction, comprising displaying a player character wearing initial clothing through a graphical user interface provided by an electronic terminal, wherein a content displayed by the graphical user interface comprises a game scene, the player character, and a non-player character located in the game scene and acting in the game scene according to a default action logic, wherein the non- player character wears clothing representing an identity attribute, and clothing corresponding to different identity attributes has different clothing styles; determining a disguisable target object in a current game scene where the player character is located, wherein the disguisable target object comprises at least one of: the non-player character wearing the clothing representing the identity attribute, or a virtual item that comprises the clothing representing the identity attribute; and in response to a preset operation instruction, controlling the player character to acquire target clothing, wherein the target clothing represents the identity attribute corresponding to the disguisable target object, and replacing the initial clothing of the player character with the target clothing to make the player character wear the same clothing as the clothing representing the identity attribute corresponding to the disguisable target object.
The abstract idea is defined by the underlined portions exemplary claim 1. Dependent claims 2, 3, 7, 8, and 10 – 24 further define the abstract idea or relate to the implementation of the abstract idea. The abstract idea is defined in at least the following grouping below:
Certain methods of organizing human activity (rules for conducting a game)
Mental processes (observation, evaluation, judgment)
The claims are directed towards an abstract idea of rules for conducting a game which falls into the category of organizing human activity, (See MPEP 2106/04(a)(2)(II)(C)). More specifically, the claimed invention recites a gaming system that executes a video game wherein players control a game character to progress through the game. Controlling a video game that allows a player to progress through the video game represents managing personal behavior. This also represents following rules/instructions that define how the game is conducted.
The claims are also directed towards a series of steps which can practically be performed by one or more human, which fall into the category of mental processes, (See MPEP 2106.04(a)(2)(III)). More specifically, the claimed invention is drawn towards a player controlling a game character to progress through the game to acquire disguisable clothing. The claims recite instructions for controlling a video game with these features. Here, a human can observe a game character acquire clothing and determine that initial clothing has been replaced by disguisable clothing. Therefore, since the claimed invention can practically be performed in the human mind, it represents an ineligible abstract mental process.
Prong 2: Does the Claim recite additional elements that integrate the exception in to a practical application of the exception?
The claims recite a generic terminal and an interface along with instructions that generate and present a video game to a player, wherein said player is instructed to control a game character to progress through the game, which is viewed as no more than instructions to implement a judicial exception.
These additional limitations do not represent an improvement to the functioning of a computer, or to any other technology or technical field, (MPEP 2106.05(a)). Nor do they apply the exception using a particular machine, (MPEP 2106.05(b)). Furthermore, they do not effect a transformation. (MPEP 2106.05(c)). Rather, these additional limitations amount to an instruction to “apply” the judicial exception using a computer as a tool to perform the abstract idea.
Step 2b: It must be determined whether the claimed invention recites additional elements that amount to significantly more than the judicial exception.
The claim language does recite an interface, an electronic terminal, and a game character that is associated with a player, however, viewed as a whole, these additional elements are indistinguishable from conventional computing elements known in the art. Therefore, the additional elements fail to supply additional elements that yield significantly more than the underlying abstract idea. Viewing the limitations as an ordered combination adds nothing that is not already present when looking at the elements taken individually. There is no indication that the combination of elements improves the functioning of a computer or improves any other technology.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
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 the appropriate paragraphs of 35 U.S.C. 102 that form the basis for the rejections under this section made in this Office action:
A person shall be entitled to a patent unless –
(a)(1) the claimed invention was patented, described in a printed publication, or in public use, on sale, or otherwise available to the public before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claims 1 – 32 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a) as being anticipated by the video game Mafia 3, hereinafter, Mafia.
Regarding claim 1, Mafia discloses a method for game interaction comprising displaying the player character wearing initial clothing through a graphical user interface provided by an electronic terminal, (0:00 – 0:20 of MAFIA), in the figure shown below.
Fig. 1
PNG
media_image1.png
712
725
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Mafia further discloses content displayed by the graphical user interface comprises a game scene, the player character, and a non-player character located in the game scene and acting in the game scene according to a default action logic, wherein the non-player character wears clothing representing an identity attribute and clothing corresponding to different identity attributes has different clothing styles, in the figure shown below.
Fig. 2
PNG
media_image2.png
815
1031
media_image2.png
Greyscale
Wherein the Examiner views the driver of the truck as being equivalent to a non-player character located in the game scene and acting in the game scene according to a default action logic, wherein the non-player character wears clothing representing an identity attribute and clothing corresponding to different identity attributes has different clothing styles. Mafia further discloses determining a disguisable target object in a current game scene wherein the player is located, wherein the disguisable target object comprises at least one of: the non-player character wearing the clothing representing the identity attribute, or a virtual item that comprises the clothing representing the identity attribute; and in response to a preset operation instruction, controlling the player character to acquire target clothing, wherein the target clothing represents an identity attribute corresponding to the disguisable target object, and replacing the initial clothing of the player character with the target clothing to make the player character wear the same clothing as the clothing representing the identity attribute corresponding to the disguisable target object, (4:00 – 4:30 of MAFIA), in the figure shown below.
Fig. 3
PNG
media_image3.png
801
995
media_image3.png
Greyscale
Regarding claim 2, Mafia discloses wherein determining the disguisable target object in the current game scene where the player character is located comprises: acquiring a current orientation of the player character in the game scene, and determining, according to the current orientation, a presentation field-of-view picture of the current game scene in the graphical user interface; and displaying the disguisable target object if it is detected that the disguisable target object exists in the presentation field-of-view picture, (4:00 – 4:30 of MAFIA).
Regarding claim 3, Mafia discloses wherein determining the disguisable target object in the current game scene where the player character is located comprises in response to an attack instruction for controlling the player character to attack the non-player character, determining a first target non-player character, and controlling the player character to attack the first target non-player character; and in response to the player character successfully attacking the first target non-player character, placing the first target non-player character in a downed state and determining the first target non-player character as the disguisable target object; wherein in response to the attack instruction for controlling the player character to attack the non-player character, determining the first target non-player character, and controlling the player character to attack the first target non-player character comprises: acquiring first position information between the player character and the first target non- player character in the game scene, wherein the first position information comprises a first relative distance and a first relative angle: in response to determining that the first relative distance is less than or equal to a preset distance threshold, and the first relative angle is less than or equal to a preset angle threshold, displaying an attack control in the graphical user interface: and controlling the player character to attack the first target non-player character in response to a touch operation for the attack control: wherein controlling the player character to attack the first target non-player character in response to the touch operation for the attack control comprises: in response to the touch operation for the attack control, controlling the player character to perform a first attack for the first target non-player character in response to determining that the player character is located in front of the first target non-player character; and controlling the player character to perform a second attack for the first target non-player character in response to determining that the player character is located behind the first target non-player character; and wherein an attack duration of the first attack is longer than an attack duration of the second attack, (14:16 – 14:30 of MAFIA), shown in the figure below.
Fig. 4
PNG
media_image4.png
825
889
media_image4.png
Greyscale
Regarding claim 7, Mafia discloses in response to a touch operation for the skill control, controlling the player character to copy the target clothing, wherein the target clothing represents the identity attribute corresponding to the disguisable target object, and replacing the initial clothing of the player character with the target clothing to make the player character wear the same clothing as the clothing representing the identity attribute clothing corresponding to the disguisable target object, (4:00 – 4:30 of MAFIA).
Regarding claims 8, 10, and 11, Mafia discloses acquiring a second positional relationship between the player character and the disguisable target object in the current game scene, wherein the second positional relationship comprises a second relative distance and a second relative angle; displaying in the graphical user interface a dress-up control for the disguisable target object if the second position information satisfies a first preset condition; and in response to a touch operation for the dress-up control, controlling the player character to acquire the target clothing, wherein the target clothing represents the identity attribute corresponding to the disguisable target object, and replacing the initial clothing of the player character with the target clothing to make the player character wear the same clothing as the identity attribute clothing corresponding to the disguisable target object, wherein the method further comprises: acquiring a current identity attribute corresponding to clothing currently worn by the player character, and a target identity attribute corresponding to the disguisable target object: and setting the dress-up control to an inoperable state in response to determining that the current identity attribute is the same as the target identity attribute. (4:00 – 4:30 of MAFIA), shown in the figure below.
Fig. 3
PNG
media_image3.png
801
995
media_image3.png
Greyscale
Regarding claims 12 – 17, Mafia discloses in response to detecting that the player character has completed dressing up, putting the initial clothing into a backpack corresponding to the player character, or removing the initial clothing from the player character and displaying in the current game scene a target virtual item corresponding to the initial clothing; and wherein the target virtual item is only visible to a user to whom the player character belongs, (0:00 – 0:20 of MAFIA).
Regarding claims 18 – 23, Mafia discloses controlling a non-player character whose threat value is greater than or equal to a preset threat threshold to change from the default action logic to a target logic, and controlling, according to the target logic, the non-player character to perform a target behavior for the player character, (14:20 – 15:00 of MAFIA).
Regarding claim 24, Mafia discloses wherein the content displayed by the graphical user interface further comprises a game map comprising different scene areas of the game scene, and the method further comprises: acquiring a current identity attribute corresponding to clothing currently worn by the player character, and an area identity of each scene area; and differentially displaying the scene areas in the game map according to the current identity attribute and the area identity, and wherein differentially displaying the scene areas in the game map according to the current identity attribute and the area identity comprises: querying from a preset passage level table a disguise passage level corresponding to each area identity by using the current identity attribute; and dividing, according to the disguise passage level, the scene areas in the game map into a regular passage area and an illegal passage area and setting the illegal passage area to a different display style from the regular passage area. (4:30 – 13:56 of MAFIA), shown in the figure below.
Fig. 5
PNG
media_image5.png
829
1453
media_image5.png
Greyscale
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 3/17/26 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive. With respect to the 101 rejection claims 1 – 33, Applicants argue that “claim 1 is not directed to an abstract idea”. More specifically, it is argued that “claim 1 does not recite any commercial transaction, legal agreement, contract, or economic interaction. Nor does claim 1 recite managing relationships between people. Instead, claim 1 is directed to operations performed within a computer-generated game environment, involving a player character, a non-player character, and virtual items rendered and controlled by an electronic terminal”. The Examiner respectfully disagrees. The claims are directed to a gaming system that executes a video game wherein players control a game character to progress through the game. Controlling a video game that allows a player to control a game character to progress through the video game represents managing personal behavior, which suggests that the invention is directed to organizing human activities, as discussed in Alice and Bilski v. Kappos. Applicants further argue that non-player control characters “does not fall within the enumerated categories of abstract ideas”, the Examiner agrees with this statement, however, the 101 rejection is directed towards player the controlled game character, not the non-player controlled game character.
Applicants further argue that the courts “has recognized that claims directed to controlling the behavior or state of virtual characters using computer-implemented techniques are not inherently abstract”, as discussed in McRo, and that “claim 1 should not be considered directed to an abstract idea”. The Examiner respectfully disagrees. As stated above, the 101 rejection is directed towards player the controlled game character, not the non-player controlled game character.
Applicants further argue that “claim 1 is integrated into a practical application”. More specifically it is argued that the operations of player and non-player characters in the computer-generated world constitutes a practical application. The Examiner respectfully disagrees. The controlling of game characters in a video game to progress through the game are merely instructions or steps which are viewed as no more than instructions to implement a judicial exception. The control of video game characters do not represent an improvement to the functioning of a computer, or to any other technology or technical field, (MPEP 2106.05(a)). Nor do they apply the exception using a particular machine, (MPEP 2106.05(b)).
Applicants further argue that “claim 1 recites significantly more than any alleged abstract idea”. More specifically it is argued that the office action assertion that the claim recites only routine and conventional computer implementation is unsupported. The Examiner respectfully disagrees. The Applicant’s specification acknowledges that generic devices are used to implement the claimed invention, (“The above-mentioned processor may be a general-purpose processor”, par. 0296 and “The computer can be a general purpose computer”, par. 0299). There is no indication that the combination of elements improve the functioning of a computer or improves any other technology. Their collective functions provide conventional computer implementation of an abstract process. For these reasons, the Examiner maintains that the claims are not patent-eligible under 35 USC 101.
Applicants further, with respect to the 102 rejection, “Mafia 3 is completely silent about the acquisition of the target clothing and the replacement of the initial clothing of the player character with the target clothing. In other words, Mafia 3 only involves the outcome, i.e., the player character has worn the clothing representing the identity attribute corresponding to the disguisable target object, but Mafia 3 does not involve how to make the player character wear the clothing representing the identity attribute corresponding to the disguisable target object”. The Examiner respectfully disagrees. Mafia discloses the game character wearing initial clothing while exiting a first vehicle shown in the figure below.
Fig. 1
PNG
media_image1.png
712
725
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Mafia then discloses said player character entering a second vehicle while still wearing the initial clothing in the figure shown below.
Fig. 2
PNG
media_image6.png
776
943
media_image6.png
Greyscale
Mafia then discloses the player character riding in the second vehicle wearing the disguisable clothing in the figure shown below.
Fig. 3
PNG
media_image2.png
815
1031
media_image2.png
Greyscale
The player character is then allowed to infiltrate an event after exiting the second vehicle while wearing the disguisable clothing in the figure shown below.
Fig. 4
PNG
media_image3.png
801
995
media_image3.png
Greyscale
The Examiner views the player character entering the second vehicle wearing initial clothing, and then riding and exiting the second vehicle wearing the disguisable clothing as being equivalent the acquisition of target clothing, (disguisable clothing) and the replacement of initial clothing with the target clothing. Therefore, the Examiner maintains the Mafia anticipates the present invention as claimed.
THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. 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.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ERIC M THOMAS whose telephone number is (571)272-1699. The examiner can normally be reached 9:00am - 5:00pm.
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.
/E.M.T/ Examiner, Art Unit 3715
/JUSTIN L MYHR/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3715
Prosecution Insights