DETAILED ACTION
Claims 1-6, 14-15 and 17-26 are pending in the current application.
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 Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 1/21/26 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
Applicant argues that the cited prior art does not disclose (Argument 1; Remarks pg. 12 lines 21-23) that Wu do not mention an effect editing instance (Argument 2; Remarks pg. 12 lines 21-23) that Wu does not mention an interactive process related to effect package or running data, and (Argument 3; Remarks pg. 15 lines 14-17) a kind of procedural information of a running instance which can contain the behavioral records of the running instance and can be output in real time for users to observe intuitively and locate specific logical anomalies as indicated by running data
With respect to applicant’s arguments examiner respectfully disagrees. In response to applicant's argument 1 arguments against the references individually, one cannot show nonobviousness by attacking references individually where the rejections are based on combinations of references. See In re Keller, 642 F.2d 413, 208 USPQ 871 (CCPA 1981); In re Merck & Co., 800 F.2d 1091, 231 USPQ 375 (Fed. Cir. 1986). While the teachings of Wu [0074] lines 1-32 do not specifically recite an effect editing instance it does disclose the communication between the management environment and service environment where information/feedback of the monitored object in the service environment is provided/reported back to the management environment the is able to modify/edit the configuration information for the object in response, viewed as showing the management environment as a type of editing instance and while the specifics of the objects being configured/edited in Wu are not specifically stated for an effect the teachings of Smet [0017] lines 1-7, [0020] lines 1-9, [0041] lines 1-10 and [0046] lines 1-7 are recited to show the specifics of configuring and editing an effect that includes payload and patch editor interfaces and AR effect design tool that provide editing/update interfaces for effects thus showing an effect editing instance and thus together shows an effect editing instance as claimed.
As to argument 2, in response to applicant's arguments against the references individually, one cannot show nonobviousness by attacking references individually where the rejections are based on combinations of references. See In re Keller, 642 F.2d 413, 208 USPQ 871 (CCPA 1981); In re Merck & Co., 800 F.2d 1091, 231 USPQ 375 (Fed. Cir. 1986). As the teachings of Wu alone are not recited for all the specifics of the effect package but the combination of Wu and Smet are recited to disclose the interactive process related to the effect package and running data as claimed. It is viewed that since the claims recite the effect package for an effect comprises a monitoring list including at least one data object of the effect then Wu’s teaching [0009] lines 1-3, [0050] lines 1-10, [0074] lines 1-23 and [0163] line 1– [0164] line 5 showing being able to define configuration information/package for a plurality of objects to be monitored viewed as a monitored list of at least one object/data object where the configuration information includes identify information of the multiple monitored object to be monitored and identifier of the objects and relationship information of the object and the like where the monitored information for the monitored object includes being able to monitor and report runtime/execution information associated with the monitored object viewed as showing a type of running data for the monitored object, can be viewed as disclosing a package/configuration comprises a monitoring list including at least one data object as the specifics of the data object being unobservable running data of an effect where the effect is not specifically limited is not specifically claimed nor is it specifically claimed to trace the execution path of the effect operation logic through the operation data, thus in light of the teachings of an effect with effect package/configuration information seen in the teachings of Smet [0017] lines 1-7, [0020] lines 3-9 and [0046] lines 1-7 which shows the specifics of an effect package/configuration for a specific effect object with the package including monitoring/tracking specific information and as the specifics of what type effect is not claimed thus viewed as including the visual effect objects seen in Smet and together with Wu teachings of including in configuration information specifics of objects to be monitored and the monitoring of the object being able to monitor and report data associated with the execution/running of the object are viewed together as showing the specifics of the claimed effect package and running data.
As to argument 3, in response to applicant's argument that the references fail to show certain features of the invention, it is noted that the features upon which applicant relies (i.e., a kind of procedural information of a running instance which can contain the behavioral records of the running instance and can be output in real time for users to observe intuitively and locate specific logical anomalies) are not recited in the rejected claim(s). Although the claims are interpreted in light of the specification, limitations from the specification are not read into the claims. See In re Van Geuns, 988 F.2d 1181, 26 USPQ2d 1057 (Fed. Cir. 1993). All the claims recite is the outputting the running data corresponding to each data object in the monitoring list which the teachings of Deshmukh Col. 7 lines 6-23 teachings as it shows the specifics of being able to output the collected/determined runtime/running data associated with the application/code being monitored/analyzed and thus in light of the teaching of Wu above showing the specifics of being able to determine execution/running data for each data object indicated to be monitored and the teachings of Smet being able to output/display and monitor information the associated effect object would together show outputting the running data corresponding to each data object in the monitoring list as currently claimed.
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.
Claims 1-2, 14-15, 17 and 22 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Wu et al. (Pub. No. US 2018/0210801 A1), in view of Smet et al. (Pub. No. US 2022/0207833 A1) and further in view of Deshmukh et al. (Patent No. US 9,552,277 B2).
As to claims 1 and 15 Wu discloses a method for outputting running data of effect, wherein the method is implemented by an effect editing instance, and the method comprises: generating a package, wherein the package comprises a monitoring list including at least one data object (Wu [0009] lines 1-3, [0050] lines 1-10, [0074] lines 1-32 and [0163] line 1– [0164] line 5; which shows being able to communicate between the management environment and service environment where information/feedback of the monitored object in the service environment is provided/reported back to the management environment the is able to modify/edit the configuration information for the object in response, viewed as showing the management environment as a type of editing instance and being able to generate specific configuration information that is to be sent to a primary monitor for the objects to be monitored where the configuration information can include multiple objects thus viewed as a list for monitoring at least one data object, and thus viewed as generate a data package that comprises a monitoring list including at least one data object of the target monitored object);
transmitting the effect package to a running instance (Wu [0072] lines 6-22 and [0074] lines 1-26; which shows being able to deliver/transmit the configuration package information to the service environment where application is run, viewed as a type of running instance);
receiving running data corresponding to each data object in the monitoring list transmitted from the running instance (Wu [0009] lines 1-3, [0023] lines 1-37, [0050] lines 1-10 and [0074] lines 1-32; which shows for the monitored objects determined from the configuration information received being able to determine associated execution/running information for each of the monitored object thus viewed as determined from the running instance the running information and where the information is reported as feedback from the running/service environment/instance to the management environment).
Wu does not specifically disclose the specifics of the method is implemented by an effect editing instance, and the method comprises: generating an effect package for an effect, wherein the effect package comprises a monitoring list including at least one data object of the effect.
However, Smet discloses the method is implemented by an effect editing instance, and the method comprises: generating an effect package for an effect, wherein the effect package comprises a monitoring list including at least one data object of the effect (Smet [0017] lines 1-7, [0020] lines 3-9 and [0046] lines 1-7; which shows the specifics of an effect editing instance in its payload and patch editor interfaces and AR effect design tool and through these tools and interfaces being able to generate an effect package for a specific effect as part of the AR design/editor instance that can be for specific objects and display/output and edit/modified that output in real time associated with the object, where the specifics of the edit package/configuration information for an object including a monitoring list of objects associated with monitoring action/effect is seen specifically disclosed in the teachings of Wu above and thus together would be viewed as showing generating an effect package for a target effect, wherein the effect package comprises a monitoring list including at least one data object of the target effect ).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to incorporate the teachings of Smet showing the specifics of generation of an effect package associated with object into the generation and deployment of package for object monitoring of Wu for the purpose of increasing control over monitored objects by being able to include more detailed configuration information for the monitored object and thus having increase adaptability for the object being configured, as taught by Smet [0003] lines 1-17 and [0020] lines 3-9.
Wu as modified by Smet do not specifically disclose outputting the running data corresponding to each data object in the monitoring list.
However, Deshmukh discloses outputting the running data corresponding to each data object in the monitoring list (Deshmukh Col. 7 lines 6-23; which shows the specifics of being able to output the collected/determined runtime/running data associated with the application being monitored/analyzed and thus in light of the teaching of Wu above showing the specifics of being able to determine execution/running data for each data object indicated to be monitored and the teachings of Smet being able to output/display the associated effect and object would together show outputting the running data corresponding to each data object in the monitoring list).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to incorporate the teachings of Deshmukh showing the specifics of outputting in an editing scene runtime data information into the determining and providing associated execution information with executing objects of Wu as modified by Smet for the purpose of providing additional details to an editing window to show more detail information about the runtime that can be used in editing object information and thus can be used to increase user desired operation, as taught by Deshmukh Col. 7 lines 6-23.
As to claims 2 and 22, Wu discloses further comprising: receiving an editing operation input by a user for the effect package for the effect (Wu [0074] lines 1-23; which shows that the container configuration information/package that is delivered can be updated/edited by user input and thus receiving an editing operation input by a user for the package, where the specifics of the package/configuration being an effect package for a specific effect is seen specifically disclosed in Smet above);
editing the effect package for the effect corresponding to the effect edit instance based on the editing operation, and transmitting an editing command to the running instance according to the editing operation, wherein the editing command is used for instructing the running instance to edit the effect package for the effect corresponding to the running instance according to the editing operation (Wu [0009] lines 1-3, [0050] lines 1-10, [0072] lines 6-22 and [0074] lines 1-32; which shows that the configuration information/package is updated/edited/modified in response to the received user input where the configuration deliverer after it updates the configuration information can deliver/send the updated configuration information/package to the service environment where the container are that provide a service for a running application and thus by transmitting the updated/edited container configuration information acts as an editing command to be user to update/edit the container configuration information for the running instance as the service environment monitors the monitored object according to the received configuration information, where the specifics of the effect package for a specific effect object are seen specifically and the specifics of an editing instance for the effect are disclosed in Smet above);
receiving updated data transmitted from the running instance, wherein the updated data comprises running data corresponding to each data object in the monitoring list acquired by the running instance running an updated effect package, and the updated effect package is an effect package obtained by the running instance editing the effect package for the effect according to the editing operation (Wu [0009] lines 1-3, [0050] lines 1-10 and [0074] lines 1-32; which shows for the monitored objects determined from the configuration information received being able to determine associated execution/running information for each of the monitored object thus viewed as determined from the running instance the running information and where the information is reported as feedback from the running/service environment/instance to the management environment and as this reported data is based on the updated/edited configuration information that has been received, then it is viewed that the data received back is for the updated package information).
Wu as modified by Smet do not specifically disclose outputting the updated data.
However, Deshmukh discloses outputting the updated data (Deshmukh Col. 7 lines 6-23; which shows the specifics of being able to output the collected/determined runtime/running data associated with the application being monitored/analyzed and thus in light of the teaching of Wu above showing the specifics of being able to update the delivered configuration information for the monitored object and determine execution/running data for each data object indicated to be monitored and the teachings of Smet being able to output/display the associated effect and object would together show outputting the updated running data corresponding to each data object in the monitoring list associated with the updated delivered package data).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to incorporate the teachings of Deshmukh showing the specifics of outputting in an editing scene runtime data information into the determining and providing associated execution information with executing objects of Wu as modified by Smet for the purpose of providing additional details to an editing window to show more detail information about the runtime that can be used in editing object information and thus can be used to increase user desired operation, as taught by Deshmukh Col. 7 lines 6-23.
As to claim 14, Wu discloses an electronic device comprising: a memory and a processor, wherein the memory is used for storing a computer program; the processor, when executing the computer program, causes the electronic device to implement the method for outputting running data of effect of any one of program, causes the electronic device to implement (Wu [0283] lines 3-8 and [0288] lines 14-17);
The remaining limitations of the claim are comparable to claim 1 above and rejected under the same reasoning.
As to claim 17, it is comparable to claim 2 above and rejected under the same reasoning.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 3, 18 and 23 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 and address associated 112 rejection.
Claims 4-6, 19-21 and 24-26 are objected to as of being dependent upon the above objected claims 3, 18 and 23 that depend upon a rejected base claim.
The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter: None of the prior art of record discloses the specifics of the way an effect package for the target effect is generated such that it loads a resource file for the target effect, displays at least two logical nodes in response to a single node adding operation input by a user, where the effect logic is acquired for the target effect in response to a user performing a connect operation for node ports of the at least two logical nodes and generating a monitoring list for object to be monitored in a running instance based on user input where the monitoring list, resource file, and effect logic are then package together to generate the effect package. While prior art such as Wu discloses being able to generate packages for monitoring object information in a running/executing environment and prior art Smet discloses generating a basic effect package the specifics way in which the effect package is generated such that it loads a resource file for the target effect, displays at least two logical nodes in response to a single node adding operation input by a user, where the effect logic is acquired for the target effect in response to a user performing a connect operation for node ports of the at least two logical nodes and generating a monitoring list for object to be monitored in a running instance based on user input where the monitoring list, resource file, and effect logic are then package together to generate the effect package is not seen in the prior art and viewed as allowable subject matter.
Conclusion
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 BRADFORD F WHEATON whose telephone number is (571)270-1779. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 8:00-5:00 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, Chat Do can be reached at 571-272-3721. 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.
/BRADFORD F WHEATON/Examiner, Art Unit 2193
Prosecution Insights