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 .
Continued Examination Under 37 CFR 1.114
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and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114.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 6/3/2026 has been entered.
Response to Amendment
Claims 1-16 are pending.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 6/3/2026 have been fully considered and addressed below:
Re the 35 USC 112 sixth interpretation of claim 16, the interpretation is withdrawn in view of applicant’s amendments to claim 16.
Furthermore, the objections to claims 14-16 are withdrawn in view of applicant’s amendments.
Applicant’s remaining arguments with respect to claim(s) 1-16 have been considered but are moot because they are directed towards the newly amended independent claims that change the scope of the claims as a whole and are open to new grounds of rejection/interpretation.
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 (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 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.
The factual inquiries for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized as follows:
1. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art.
2. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue.
3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art.
4. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness.
Claim(s) 1-4, 9-13 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over ISO (“ISO/IEC DIS 23090- 14 Scene Description for MPEG Media”) in view of Kiyama et al. (“ISO/IEC JTC 1SC 29/WG3 m5598”).
Re claim 1, ISO teaches a 3D scene updating method for presenting a set of target 3D scenes by a presentation engine, comprising:
determining that documents to be parsed for generating a set of target 3D
scenes, namely a shared reference document (see p. 43-44, 7.1-7.2, JSON-formatted scene description parsed) and a corresponding set of 3D scene update documents for generating the set of target 3D scenes, are available (see p. 43-44, 7.1-7.2, scene description update and scene graph representation modification, when all update commands have been processed or discarded, the scene description update shall be considered completed). To further clarify, see (see p. 43, section 7.1., The Presentation Engine parses a JSON-formatted scene description to build a scene graph in memory, as a first shared reference document).
Furthermore, ISO teaches a corresponding set of 3D scene update documents for generating the set of target 3D scenes, are available (see p. 44, 7.2, Scene Updates: Each update operation shall consist of a JSON Patch document…when all update commands have been processed or discard, the scene description update shall be considered completed…The Presentation Engine parses the scene description document and maintains a representation of the graph in memory. The Presentation Engine needs to know when a certain scene update has to be applied…The scene updates themselves will modify the graph representation in memory and may add new media to the scene). ISO teaches an initial scene description JSON-formatted scene description document and a corresponding set of 3d scene update document being available in order to update the scene description document.
wherein each target 3D scene among the set of target 3D scenes is described by a target 3D scene description document (see p. 43-44, section 7.1-7.2, resulting modified scene graph)
wherein the shared reference document describes at least some elements contained in the set of target 3D scene description documents (see p. 43-44, section 7.1-7.2, JSON-formatted scene description) and (see p. 43-44, section 7.1-7.2, JSON-formatted scene description document (the shared reference document) that describes the scene to build a scene graph in memory, as describing at least some elements that is later updated as describing at least some elements contained in the set of target 3d scene description documents, as The Presentation Engine needs to know when a certain scene update has to be applied).
wherein each 3D scene update document describes the updates applied to the shared reference document for generating the corresponding target 3D scene description document
(see Introduction and p. 44, section 7.2, scene description updates documents and update synch information). To clarify, (p. 44, 7.2, Scene Updates: Each update operation shall consist of a JSON Patch document…when all update commands have been processed or discard, the scene description update shall be considered completed…The Presentation Engine parses the scene description document and maintains a representation of the graph in memory. The Presentation Engine needs to know when a certain scene update has to be applied…The scene updates themselves will modify the graph representation in memory and may add new media to the scene).
Hence, ISO teaches wherein the 3d scene update commands describe the scene description updates to processed to be applied to the JSON-formatted scene description document (the shared reference document) to generate a corresponding target 3d scene description document (the modified graph representation document in memory after the application of updates from the 3d scene update document).
triggering the presentation engine to present a target 3D scene among the set of target 3D scenes (see p. 9, 4.2. Architecture and Fig. 1, fetching of scene description document and scene description updates may be triggered by the MAF, wherein presentation engine receives and parses screen description documents and following scene description updates) and (see p. 43, 7.2., wherein fetching updates by different factors).
parsing the shared reference document and the corresponding 3D scene update document; (see p. 44, and Fig. 6, parsing scene description). To clarify, ISO teaches parsing the shared reference document (p. 44, states the scene description document is parsed) and the corresponding 3D scene update document (the update document is parsed and when all update commands have been processed or discarded, the scene description update is considered complete).
generating the target 3D scene description document (see p. 43-45, modifying scene graph representation based on scene updates).
rendering the target 3D scene description document and updating the presenting scene as the target 3D scene (see p. 9, section 4.2., rendering a 3d scene to a viewer by a presentation engine).
ISO does not explicitly teach wherein the shared reference document is not independently renderable by the presentation engine.
However, Kiyama teaches teach wherein the shared reference document is not independently renderable by the presentation engine (see p. 2-4, 3.2. Proposal, wherein sample includes either one or both of two types of the updated information as a sub-sample, one is for the current scene description and the other is for the original scene description…client parses the scene description and confirms if there is the track which includes the JSON patch samples…client gets the sub-sample which includes the updated information for the original scene, and applies the update to the original scene description, gets the latest scene description and renders a 6DoF presentation”). Kiyama teaches wherein the shared reference document (original scene description) is not independently renderable by the presentation engine (rendered includes updated information for the original scene and applies the update to the original scene description, thus not independently renderable).
ISO and Kiyama teaches claim 1. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify ISO’s scene updating system to explicitly include wherein the shared reference document is not independently renderable by the presentation engine, as explicitly taught by Kiyama, as the references are in the analogous art of ISO scene updating systems. An advantage of the modification is that it achieves the result of using current a corresponding scene update description document with the original shared reference document.
Re claim 2, ISO and Kiyama teach claim 1. Furthermore, ISO teaches wherein the shared reference document is different from a 3d scene description document (see p. 43-44, wherein a received JSON formatted scene description is different from a resulting modified scene graph).
Re claim 3, ISO and Kiyama teach claim 1. Furthermore, ISO teaches wherein trigger the presentation engine to present a target 3d scene among the set of target 3d scenes comprises:
Triggering the presentation engine by at least one of the wall-clock time, presentation time, or interaction event (see 7.2. Scene updates, fetching of updates by triggered different factors including wallclock, presentation time, interaction event).
Re claim 4, ISO and Kiyama teach claim 1. Furthermore, ISO teaches defining the shared reference document and a corresponding set of 3d scene updates documents for generating the set of target 3d scenes (see p. 43-44, section 7.1-7.2, JSON-formatted scene description, see p. 9, section 4.2., rendering a 3d scene to a viewer by a presentation engine).
Re claim 9, ISO and Kiyama teach claim 1. Furthermore, ISO teaches wherein defining the shared reference document and a corresponding set of 3d scene update documents for generating the set of target 3d scenes further comprising:
Encapsulating the documents into one file to be parsing in the presentation engine (see p. 45, section 8.1, stored as samples of a track in ISOBMFF or as items).
Re claim 10, ISO and Kiyama teach claim 9. Furthermore, ISO teaches wherein the documents are encapsulated in an ISOBMFF file and the shared reference document as an item in the ISOBMFF file (see p. 45-47, section 8.1-8.3, stored as samples of a track in ISOBMFF or as items).
Re claim 11, ISO and Kiyama teach claim 9. Furthermore, ISO teaches wherein the documents are encapsulated in an ISOBMFF file, and the shared reference document and the corresponding 3d scene updated document are encapsulated as one item in the ISOBMFF file (see p. 45-47, section 8.1-8.3, stored as samples of a track in ISOBMFF or as items).
Re claim 12, ISO and Kiyama teach claim 9. Furthermore, ISO teaches wherein the documents are encapsulated in an ISOBMFF file and the shared reference document is encapsulated as a sample in a track of the ISOBMFF ((see p. 45-47, section 8.1-8.3, stored as samples of a track in ISOBMFF or as items).
Re claim 13, ISO and Kiyama teach claim 1. Furthermore, ISO teaches wherein the shared reference document is a JSON document, a 3D scene description document is a glTF document, a 3D scene update document is a JSON patch file or… (see p. 44, section 7.2, JSON, glTF, JSON patch document).
Claim(s) 5-7 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over ISO (“ISO/IEC DIS 23090- 14 Scene Description for MPEG Media”) in view of Kiyama et al. (“ISO/IEC JTC 1SC 29/WG3 m5598”) and Hui et al. (CN 111580851A).
Re claim 5, ISO and Kiyama teach claim 4.
ISO and Kiyama do not explicitly teach wherein defining the shared reference document and a corresponding set of 3d scene updates documents for generating the set of target 3d scenes comprising:
Generating a candidate shared reference document; computing a set of candidate 3d scene update documents for generating the set of target 3d scene documents, wherein each corresponding 3d scene update document is computed based on differences between the candidate shared reference document and one of the target 3d scene documents; calculating overall size of the candidate set of 3d scene update documents; if the overall size is smaller than a first given threshold, defining the candidate shared reference document as the shared reference document, a candidate set of 3d scene documents as the corresponding set of 3d scene documents for generating the set of target 3d scenes.
However, Hui teaches wherein defining the shared reference document and a corresponding set of 3d scene updates documents for generating the set of target 3d scenes comprising:
Generating a candidate shared reference document ; computing a set of candidate 3d scene update documents for generating the set of target 3d scene documents, wherein each corresponding 3d scene update document is computed based on differences between the candidate shared reference document and one of the target 3d scene documents; calculating overall size of the candidate set of 3d scene update documents; if the overall size is smaller than a first given threshold, defining the candidate shared reference document as the shared reference document, acandidate set of 3d scene documents as the corresponding set of 3d scene documents for generating the set of target 3d scenes
(see p. 1-2: Generally, the comparison between the old version of the data package and the new version of the data package can be used for updating, that is, the difference process is executed. The difference process is divided into traversing the files in the old and new version packages, decompressing the difference files in the new version package, merging the difference files in the new version package, generating patch packages, assembling the difference package, and then providing updates to terminal applications based on the difference package.
However, the above method uses single-threaded serial processing to obtain the differential packet in the server, which is time-consuming; and when the data packet is large, the time-consuming will be greatly improved, which affects the data update efficiency.
Summary of the invention
In view of this, the present application provides a data management method, which can effectively avoid the time-consuming and serious situation of updating data packets when a large data package is large, and improve the efficiency of data updating.
The first aspect of this application provides a data management method, which can be applied to a system or program containing a data management function in a terminal device, and specifically includes: acquiring a first data packet and a second data packet, the first data packet and The second data packet corresponds to a different version of the target application;
Traverse the participating files including the first data packet and the second data packet to determine a difference file, the difference file including the directory difference items or content in the first data packet and the second data packet Difference item
The participating files are divided into at least two difference files based on a difference condition, where the difference condition includes at least one of the following: a preset threshold, a file format, and a file size, and the preset threshold is used to indicate the difference The file contains the number of content difference items, the file format corresponds to the difference file, and the file size is used to indicate the size of the difference file;
Perform parallel differential calculation based on the differential file to obtain a patch package, the patch package used to instruct the terminal to update the target application.
Optionally, in some possible implementation manners of the present application, if the difference condition is a preset threshold R, the dividing the participating file into at least two difference files based on the difference condition includes:
Determine the content difference item, the directory difference item, or the same item in the difference file corresponding to the participating file. The participating file includes the N files included in the first data package and the second data package There are M files, N and M are positive integers;
Divide the content difference items based on the preset threshold R, where the preset threshold is R, R<N and R<M, and R is a positive integer;
Decompress the divided content difference items to write at least two difference files;
Write the divided directory difference items or the same items directly into the difference file).
ISO in view of Kiyama and Hui teaches claim 5. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify ISO and Kiyama’s scene updating system to explicitly include updating documents if an overall size is smaller than a given threshold, as taught by Hui, as the references are in the analogous art of package distribution.
An advantage of the modification is that it achieves the result of using a preset threshold and known file size for determining updates to a document for realizing a scene.
Re claim 6, ISO and Kiyama teach claim 4.
ISO and Kiyama do not explicitly teach wherein defining the shared reference document and a corresponding set of 3D scene updates documents for generating the set of target 3D scenes comprising: generating a candidate shared reference document; computing a set of candidate 3D scene update documents for generating the set of target 3D scene documents, wherein each corresponding 3d scene update document is computed based on differences between the candidate shared reference document and one of the target 3d scene documents; calculating size differences between any two of the candidate set of 3D scene update documents; if the overall size is smaller than a first given threshold, defining the candidate shared reference document as a shared reference document, a candidate set of 3D scene documents as the corresponding set of 3D scene documents for generating the set of target 3D scenes.
However, Hui teaches wherein defining the shared reference document and a corresponding set of 3D scene updates documents for generating the set of target 3D scenes comprising: generating a candidate shared reference document; computing a set of candidate 3D scene update documents for generating the set of target 3D scene documents, wherein each corresponding 3d scene update document is computed based on differences between the candidate shared reference document and one of the target 3d scene documents; calculating size differences between any two of the candidate set of 3D scene update documents; if the overall size is smaller than a first given threshold, defining the candidate shared reference document as a shared reference document, a candidate set of 3D scene documents as the corresponding set of 3D scene documents for generating the set of target 3D scenes (see p. 1-2: Generally, the comparison between the old version of the data package and the new version of the data package can be used for updating, that is, the difference process is executed. The difference process is divided into traversing the files in the old and new version packages, decompressing the difference files in the new version package, merging the difference files in the new version package, generating patch packages, assembling the difference package, and then providing updates to terminal applications based on the difference package.
However, the above method uses single-threaded serial processing to obtain the differential packet in the server, which is time-consuming; and when the data packet is large, the time-consuming will be greatly improved, which affects the data update efficiency.
Summary of the invention
In view of this, the present application provides a data management method, which can effectively avoid the time-consuming and serious situation of updating data packets when a large data package is large, and improve the efficiency of data updating.
The first aspect of this application provides a data management method, which can be applied to a system or program containing a data management function in a terminal device, and specifically includes: acquiring a first data packet and a second data packet, the first data packet and The second data packet corresponds to a different version of the target application;
Traverse the participating files including the first data packet and the second data packet to determine a difference file, the difference file including the directory difference items or content in the first data packet and the second data packet Difference item
The participating files are divided into at least two difference files based on a difference condition, where the difference condition includes at least one of the following: a preset threshold, a file format, and a file size, and the preset threshold is used to indicate the difference The file contains the number of content difference items, the file format corresponds to the difference file, and the file size is used to indicate the size of the difference file;
Perform parallel differential calculation based on the differential file to obtain a patch package, the patch package used to instruct the terminal to update the target application.
Optionally, in some possible implementation manners of the present application, if the difference condition is a preset threshold R, the dividing the participating file into at least two difference files based on the difference condition includes:
Determine the content difference item, the directory difference item, or the same item in the difference file corresponding to the participating file. The participating file includes the N files included in the first data package and the second data package There are M files, N and M are positive integers;
Divide the content difference items based on the preset threshold R, where the preset threshold is R, R<N and R<M, and R is a positive integer;
Decompress the divided content difference items to write at least two difference files;
Write the divided directory difference items or the same items directly into the difference file).
ISO in view of Kiyama and Hui teaches claim 6. For motivation, see claim 5.
Re claim 7, ISO and Kiyama teaches claim 4. ISO and Kiyama do not explicitly teach wherein defining the shared reference document and a corresponding set of 3D scene updates documents for generating the set of target 3D scenes comprising: generating a candidate shared reference document; computing a candidate plurality of 3D scene update documents for generating the plurality of target 3D scene documents, wherein each corresponding 3d scene update document is computed based on differences between the candidate shared reference document and one of the target 3d scene documents; determining at least one most popular target 3D scene description document among the set of target 3D scene documents; calculating size of the at least one candidate 3D scene update document for generating the at least one most popular target 3D scene description document; if all the sizes are smaller than a third given threshold, defining a candidate shared reference document as the shared reference document, the candidate set of 3D scene documents as the set 3D scene documents for generating the target 3D scene.
However, Hui teaches wherein defining the shared reference document and a corresponding set of 3D scene updates documents for generating the set of target 3D scenes comprising: generating a candidate shared reference document; computing a candidate plurality of 3D scene update documents for generating the plurality of target 3D scene documents, wherein each corresponding 3d scene update document is computed based on differences between the candidate shared reference document and one of the target 3d scene documents; determining at least one most popular target 3D scene description document among the set of target 3D scene documents; calculating size of the at least one candidate 3D scene update document for generating the at least one most popular target 3D scene description document; if all the sizes are smaller than a third given threshold, defining a candidate shared reference document as the shared reference document, the candidate set of 3D scene documents as the set 3D scene documents for generating the target 3D scene
(see p. 1-2: Generally, the comparison between the old version of the data package and the new version of the data package can be used for updating, that is, the difference process is executed. The difference process is divided into traversing the files in the old and new version packages, decompressing the difference files in the new version package, merging the difference files in the new version package, generating patch packages, assembling the difference package, and then providing updates to terminal applications based on the difference package.
However, the above method uses single-threaded serial processing to obtain the differential packet in the server, which is time-consuming; and when the data packet is large, the time-consuming will be greatly improved, which affects the data update efficiency.
Summary of the invention
In view of this, the present application provides a data management method, which can effectively avoid the time-consuming and serious situation of updating data packets when a large data package is large, and improve the efficiency of data updating.
The first aspect of this application provides a data management method, which can be applied to a system or program containing a data management function in a terminal device, and specifically includes: acquiring a first data packet and a second data packet, the first data packet and The second data packet corresponds to a different version of the target application;
Traverse the participating files including the first data packet and the second data packet to determine a difference file, the difference file including the directory difference items or content in the first data packet and the second data packet Difference item
The participating files are divided into at least two difference files based on a difference condition, where the difference condition includes at least one of the following: a preset threshold, a file format, and a file size, and the preset threshold is used to indicate the difference The file contains the number of content difference items, the file format corresponds to the difference file, and the file size is used to indicate the size of the difference file;
Perform parallel differential calculation based on the differential file to obtain a patch package, the patch package used to instruct the terminal to update the target application.
Optionally, in some possible implementation manners of the present application, if the difference condition is a preset threshold R, the dividing the participating file into at least two difference files based on the difference condition includes:
Determine the content difference item, the directory difference item, or the same item in the difference file corresponding to the participating file. The participating file includes the N files included in the first data package and the second data package There are M files, N and M are positive integers;
Divide the content difference items based on the preset threshold R, where the preset threshold is R, R<N and R<M, and R is a positive integer;
Decompress the divided content difference items to write at least two difference files;
Write the divided directory difference items or the same items directly into the difference file).
ISO in view of Kiyama and Hui teaches claim 7. For motivation, see claim 5.
Claim(s) 8 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over ISO (“ISO/IEC DIS 23090- 14 Scene Description for MPEG Media”) in view of Kiyama et al. (“ISO/IEC JTC 1SC 29/WG3 m5598”), Hui et al. (CN 111580851A), and Chen et al. (US 20180014041).
Re claim 8, ISO, Kiyama, and Hui teaches claim 7. ISO, Kiyama, and Hui do not explicitly teach wherein determining at least one most popular target 3D scene description document among the set of target 3D scene documents comprising: determining at least one target 3D scene description document describing a target 3D scene which appears most frequently among the set of target 3D scenes as the at least one most popular target 3D scene description documents or determining at least one target 3D scene description document describing a target 3D scene which is most likely to be triggered by interaction event as the at least one most popular target 3D scene description documents; or determining at least one target 3D scene description document describing a target 3D scene, among the set of target 3D scenes, which is most frequently triggered by interaction event as the at least one most popular target 3D scene description documents.
However, Chen teaches determining at least one target 3D scene description document describing a target 3D scene which appears most frequently among the set of target 3D scenes as the at least one most popular target 3D scene description documents or determining at least one target 3D scene description document describing a target 3D scene which is most likely to be triggered by interaction event as the at least one most popular target 3D scene description documents; or determining at least one target 3D scene description document describing a target 3D scene, among the set of target 3D scenes, which is most frequently triggered by interaction event as the at least one most popular target 3D scene description documents ([0149] In some embodiments, the key frame manifest is delivered in a sparse format where a reduced number of key frames selected from the entire manifest are provided. For example, certain key frames may be tagged as related to significant portions of the media (e.g., scene changes, movie plot points, etc.). In other examples, every Nth key frame is provided. In still other examples, the key frame associated with every Nth time interval (e.g., 2 minute chunks of media) are provided. Still other schemes may provide key frames that are most frequently requested, centered on last viewed scenes, historically preferred, selected or curated (via an intelligent algorithm, crowd sourcing, etc.).
ISO in view of Kiyama, Hui, and Chen teaches claim 8. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify ISO, Kiyama, and Hui’s scene updating system to explicitly determining a document that is more frequently triggered by interaction event as the most popular target, as taught by Hui, as the references are in the analogous art of package distribution. An advantage of the modification is that it achieves the result of determining which documents are most popular to provide for updating more frequently requested or historically preferred scenes.
Claim(s) 14-16 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over ISO (“ISO/IEC DIS 23090- 14 Scene Description for MPEG Media”) in view of Kiyama et al. (“ISO/IEC JTC 1SC 29/WG3 m5598”) and Lebaredian et al. (US 20210049827).
Claim 14 claims limitations in scope to method claim 1 as a first device with a processor. ISO in view of Kiyama teaches claim 1, herein incorporated by reference, and ISO also teaches at least a first processing device (see Fig. 1-2 processing of 3d content for presentation).
Iso and Kiyama do not explicitly teach that the shared reference document and the set of 3d scene update documents are defined by a second device.
However, Lebaredian the shared reference document and the set of 3d scene update documents are defined by a second device (see [0042], content management to store data representative of assets and metadata to define one or more 3d environments such as scenes and/or 3D world) and (see [0036-0037], [0070], each device of a plurality of devices including at least some of the components, features, functionality, etc.).
ISO, Kiyama, and Lebaredian teaches claim 14. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify ISO and Kiyama’s 3d scene updating and presentation engine to explicitly include shared reference document and set of 3d scene update documents defined by a second device, as taught by Lebaredian, as the references are in the analogous art of processing 3d content for presentation. An advantage of the modification is that it achieves the result of allowing for multiple devices to process data to improve the speed of processing data for presentation.
Claim 15 claims limitations similar in scope to claims 1 and 4. ISO and Kiyama teaches claim 1 and 4, herein incorporated by reference. ISO and Kiyama do not explicitly teach the limitation of a second device applicable for presenting a set of target 3d scenes by a first device because ISO and Kiyama do not explicitly teach a plurality of devices.
However, Lebaredian teaches a second device applicable for presenting a set of target 3d scenes by a first device (see [0042], content management to store data representative of assets and metadata to define one or more 3d environments such as scenes and/or 3D world) and (see [0036-0037], [0070], each device of a plurality of devices including at least some of the components, features, functionality, etc.).
ISO, Kiyama, and Lebaredian teaches claim 15. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify ISO and Kiyama’s 3d scene updating and presentation engine to explicitly include at least both a first and second device for processing of modules, as taught by Lebaredian, as the references are in the analogous art of processing 3d content for presentation. An advantage of the modification is that it achieves the result of allowing for multiple devices to process data to improve the speed of processing data for presentation.
Re claim 16, ISO in view of Kiyama and Lebaredian teaches claim 14. Furthermore, claim 16 claims limitations in scope to claims 15. ISO in view of Kiyama and Lebaredian teaches claim 15, herein incorporated by reference. For motivation to combine Lebaredian with ISO, see claim 15.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Peter Hoang whose telephone number is (571)270-1346. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 8:00 am - 5:00 pm PST.
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, Hajnik F. Daniel can be reached at (571) 272-7642. 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.
/PETER HOANG/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2616
Prosecution Insights