Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status
The present application is being examined under the pre-AIA first to invent provisions.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to the rejection(s) of claim(s) 1-20 under 35 U.S.C. § 103 have been fully considered and are persuasive. However, upon further consideration, Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. Applicants’ arguments are rendered moot in view of the
present Office Action.
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.
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) 1-3,7, 11-13, 17, and 19 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Black (US 10099122) and further in view of Zuhars (US 20200100848).
Consider Claim 1, Black discloses a system, comprising: an optical sensor configured to detect an object in an area (Figure 4, element 412 is a sensor and Column 9, Lines 60-61, where element 418 captures data), wherein the object is a portable device configured to be worn by a user (Figure 4, element 400 where object is a wearable HMD); and a controller configured to: receive first data indicative of a first location of the object from the optical sensor (Figure 7, element 702 and Column 13, Lines 30-37, second HMD uses optical sensor to capture image data of first HMD in physical environment); receive second data indicative of a second location of the optical sensor (Figure 7, element 706 where second data is generated of second HMD (which includes the optical sensor on HMD); compute position data based on the first location and the second location (Figure 7, element 708); and wherein the object is configured to output one or more effects based on the position data (Figure 5, element 714, Column 14, Lines 29-31, where first HMD presents proximity indication with an alert using modalities, and Column 6, Lines 40-41, where modalities include audible or visual presentations) but does not disclose transmitting the position data to the object via an optical signal.
However, Zuhars discloses a controller configured to transmit the position data to the object via an optical signal (Claim 1, Lines 7-8, where positional data is transmitted to device).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before theeffective filing date of applicant’s claimed invention to have incorporated the teachingsof Zuhars into Black to accurately detect position of objects in a system.
Consider Claim 2, Black discloses the system of claim 1, wherein the optical sensor is configured to detect light from the object (Column 9, Lines 61-63, where element 418 captures data in visible spectrum or IR).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before theeffective filing date of applicant’s claimed invention to have incorporated the teachingsof Zuhars into Black to accurately detect position of objects in a system.
Consider Claim 3, Black discloses the system of claim 2, wherein the light comprises infrared light reflected from the object (Figure 4, element 418 and Column 10, Lines 23-24, where element 412 reflects light in IR spectrum).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before theeffective filing date of applicant’s claimed invention to have incorporated the teachingsof Zuhars into Black to accurately detect position of objects in a system.
Consider Claim 7, Black discloses the system of claim 2, wherein the light comprises visible light reflected from the object (Column 9, Lines 61-62, where element 418 captures data in visible spectrum or IR).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before theeffective filing date of applicant’s claimed invention to have incorporated the teachingsof Zuhars into Black to accurately detect position of objects in a system.
Consider Claim 11, Black does not disclose the limitations of this claim.
However, Zuhars discloses the system of claim 1, wherein the controller is configured to transmit the position data to an additional object via an additional optical signal (Paragraph 0047, where data transmitted to object could include position data).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before theeffective filing date of applicant’s claimed invention to have incorporated the teachingsof Zuhars into Black to accurately detect position of objects in a system.
Consider Claim 12, Black discloses the system of claim 1, comprising the object, wherein the portable device comprises a head-mounted display that is configured to be worn by the user (Figure 4, element 400 is worn by a user) and display imagery based on the position data (Figure 5, element 714, Column 14, Lines 29-31, where first HMD presents proximity indication with an alert using modalities, and Column 6, Lines 40-41, where modalities include visual (image) presentations), wherein the head-mounted display is configured to display the imagery overlaid onto an environment of the area (Column 8, Lines 3-15, where mapping of VR content relies on position of person wearing VR headset).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before theeffective filing date of applicant’s claimed invention to have incorporated the teachingsof Zuhars into Black to accurately detect position of objects in a system.
Consider Claim 13, Black discloses the system of claim 1, wherein the controller is integrated with the optical sensor or the object (Column 9, Lines 64-67, where HMD element 400 has processor that generate position data from data sensed by sensors).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before theeffective filing date of applicant’s claimed invention to have incorporated the teachingsof Zuhars into Black to accurately detect position of objects in a system.
Consider Claim 17, Black discloses a method, comprising: receiving, at one or more processors, location data from an optical sensor configured to detect light from an object in an area (Figure 4, element 412 is a sensor and Column 9, Lines 60-61, where element 418 captures data and Column 13, Lines 32-36, where second HMD includes optical sensor with signal processor to generate data), wherein the object is a portable device comprising a display (Figure 4, element 400 where object is a wearable HMD); computing, via the one or more processors, position data indicative of a relative position between the object and the area based on the location data (Figure 7, element 708 and Column 13, Lines 57-59, where processing is done by second HMD); and cause the object to output, via the display, one or more effects based on the position data (Figure 5, element 714, Column 14, Lines 29-31, where first HMD presents proximity indication with an alert using modalities, and Column 6, Lines 40-41, where modalities include audible or visual presentations) but does not disclose sending, via an optical transmitter, the position data to the object.
However, Zuhars discloses sending, via an optical transmitter, the position data to the object (Claim 1, Lines 7-8, where positional data is transmitted to surgical device via transmitting LED).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before theeffective filing date of applicant’s claimed invention to have incorporated the teachingsof Zuhars into Black to accurately detect position of objects in a system.
Consider Claim 19, Black discloses the method of claim 17, comprising projecting displaying, via the display of the object via one or more displays associated with the object, imagery based on the position data. (Figure 5, element 714, Column 14, Lines 29-31, where first HMD presents proximity indication with an alert using modalities, and Column 6, Lines 40-41, where modalities include visual (image) presentations).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before theeffective filing date of applicant’s claimed invention to have incorporated the teachingsof Zuhars into Black to accurately detect position of objects in a system.
Claims 4-5 and 8 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Black in view of Zuhars and further in view of Breisacher (US 11510740).
Consider Claim 4, Black and Zuhars do not disclose the limitations of this claim.
However, Breisacher discloses the system of claim 3, wherein the optical sensor comprises a light emitter configured to emit illumination infrared light that is reflected from the object as the infrared light (Column 7, Lines 10-14, where IR LEDs can be emitted and reflected back from the trackers).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before theeffective filing date of applicant’s claimed invention to have incorporated the teachingsof Breisacher into Black and Zuhars to improve position detection of objects in a system.
Consider Claim 5, Black and Zuhars do not disclose the limitations of this claim.
However, Breisacher discloses the system of claim 4, wherein the light emitter comprises one or more infrared light-emitting diodes (LEDs) (Column 7, Lines 10-14, where IR LEDs can be emitted and reflected back from the trackers),
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before theeffective filing date of applicant’s claimed invention to have incorporated the teachingsof Breisacher into Black and Zuhars to improve position detection of objects in a system.
Consider Claim 8, Breisacher discloses the system of claim 2, wherein the light comprises infrared light emitted from a light emitter of the object (Column 6, Lines 63-67 and Column 7, Lines 1-2, where element 44 can include an IR LED that can be picked up by sensor element 40).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before theeffective filing date of applicant’s claimed invention to have incorporated the teachingsof Breisacher into Black and Zuhars to improve position detection of objects in a system.
Consider Claim 18, Black does not disclose do not disclose the limitations of this claim.
However, Zuhars discloses sending, via the optical transmitter, the additional position data to the additional object and the object (Claim 1, Lines 7-8, where positional data is transmitted to surgical device via transmitting LED) but does not disclose comprising: receiving, at the one or more processors, additional location data from the optical sensor configured to detect additional light from an additional object; computing, via the one or more processors, additional position data indicative of a first additional relative position between the additional object and the area based on the additional location data.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before theeffective filing date of applicant’s claimed invention to have incorporated the teachingsof Zuhars into Black to accurately detect position of objects in a system.
However, Breisacher discloses the method of claim 17, comprising: receiving, at the one or more processors (Figure 1, element 52), additional location data from the optical sensor configured to detect additional light from an additional object (Column 10, Lines 54-56 where element where element 52 receives initial data relating to object to be tracked element 46); computing, via the one or more processors, additional position data indicative of a first additional relative position between the additional object and the area based on the additional location data Column 10, Lines 55-57 where element 52 can generate data on element 46)
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before theeffective filing date of applicant’s claimed invention to have incorporated the teachingsof Breisacher into Black and Zuhars to improve position detection of objects in a system.
Claim 6 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Black in view of Zuhars, in further view of Breisacher, and further in view of Wheatley (US 11016229).
Consider Claim 6, Black, Zuhars, and Breisacher do not disclose the limitations of this claim.
However, Wheatley discloses the system of claim 4, wherein the object comprises one or more retroreflectors configured to reflect a portion of the illumination infrared light to the optical sensor as the infrared light (Column 26, Lines 36-40 where IR light is reflected from retroreflector and back towards sensor).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before theeffective filing date of applicant’s claimed invention to have incorporated the teachingsof Wheatley into Black, Zuhars, and Breisacher to improve position detection of objects in a system.
Claim 9 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Black in view of Zuhars, and further in view of Gregerson (US 11857269).
Consider Claim 9, Black and Zuhars do not disclose the limitations of this claim.
However, Gregerson discloses the system of claim 1, wherein the position data comprises location data and orientation data of the object, wherein the location data comprises location coordinates relative a (Column 16, Lines 10-11, where x,y,z coordinate system is used) associated with the area, wherein the orientation data comprises YAW, PITCH, and ROLL information of the object (Column 16, Line 12, where yaw, pitch, and roll can be measured).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before theeffective filing date of applicant’s claimed invention to have incorporated the teachingsof Gregerson into Black and Zuhars to accurately detect position of objects in a system.
Claim 10 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Black in view of Zuhars, and further in view of Fletcher (US 20240094529).
Consider Claim 10, Black and Zuhars do not disclose the limitations of this claim.
However, Fletcher discloses the system of claim 1, comprising one or more additional optical sensors configured to detect the object in the area (Figure 18, element 1802 and Paragraph 0141, where first HMD has plurality of angle sensitive detectors ready to receive light), wherein the controller is configured to receive additional data indicative of the first location of the object from the one or more additional optical sensors (Figure 18, element 1808 and paragraph 0149, where processor of HMD receives sensor data from plurality of angle sensitive detectors).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before theeffective filing date of applicant’s claimed invention to have incorporated the teachingsof Fletcher into Black and Zuhars to increase the number of sensors for more precise object tracking.
Claim 14 is under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Rosenthal (US 20060192852) in view of Black and in further view of Zuhars.
Consider Claim 14, Rosenthal discloses an optical tracking system, comprising: an optical sensor configured to detect a first object and a second object in an area (Figure 1, element 105 senses first and second object elements 106); a controller (Figure 1, element 102) configured to: receive first data indicative of a first location of the first object from the optical sensor (Figure 1, element 102 receives data from element 105 and Paragraph 0025 where data includes locational information of object); receive second data indicative of a second location of the second object from the optical sensor (Figure 1, element 102 receives data from element 105 and Paragraph 0025 where data includes locational information of object) but does not disclose wherein the first object comprises a first portable device and the second object comprises a second portable device; receiving third data indicative of an additional location of the optical sensor; computing first position data for the first object based on the first location data and the additional location; computing second position data for the second object based on the second location and the additional location wherein the first object is configured to output one or more first effects comprising lights, sounds, or a combination thereof, based on the first position data instructing a light emitter to transmit the first position data to the first object via a first optical signal and instructing the light emitter to transmit the second position data to the second object via a second optical signal.
However, Black discloses wherein the first object comprises a first portable device (Figure 5, HMD element 112) and the second object comprises a second portable device (Figure 5, HMD element 152); wherein receiving third data indicative of an additional location of the optical sensor (Figure 7, element 706 where second data is generated of second HMD (which includes the optical sensor on HMD); computing first position data for the first object based on the first location data and the additional location (Figure 7, element 708); the first object is configured to output one or more first effects comprising lights, sounds, or a combination thereof, based on the first position data (Figure 5, element 714, Column 14, Lines 29-31, where first HMD presents proximity indication with an alert using modalities, and Column 6, Lines 40-41, where modalities include audible or visual presentations) but does not disclose instructing a light emitter to transmit the first position data to the first object via a first optical signal and instructing the light emitter to transmit the second position data to the second object via a second optical signal. While Black does not also explicitly disclose computing second position data for the second object based on the second location, it would be obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art that Figure 7, element 708, which was used to calculate position data of first object based on location data and sensor location, then the same could be done for computing a second position data for a second object. Black also does not explicitly disclose wherein the second object is configured to output one or more second effects comprising lights, sounds, or a combination thereof, based on the second position data. However, Figure 5, element 714, Column 14, Lines 29-31 of Black discloses where first HMD presents proximity indication with an alert using modalities, and Column 6, Lines 40-41, disclose where modalities include audible or visual presentations. It would be obvious to one of skill in the ordinary art that if a first HMD (object) is capable of this function, a second HMD (object) would also be capable to achieve the same effect as recited by the claim.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before theeffective filing date of applicant’s claimed invention to have incorporated the teachingsof Black into Rosenthal to accurately detect position of objects in a system.
However, Zuhars discloses instructing a light emitter to transmit the first position data to the first object via a first optical signal (Claim 1, Lines 7-9 where an LED on at least one tracker transmits signal to at least a tracking device); and instructing the light emitter to transmit the second position data to the second object via a second optical signal (Claim 1, Lines 7-9 where an LED on at least one tracker transmits signal to at least a tracking device and paragraph 0047, where plurality of devices, tracking arrays, or tracking arrays can be used).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before theeffective filing date of applicant’s claimed invention to have incorporated the teachingsof Zuhars into Rosenthal and Black to ensure that tracked objects receive location information for optimal function within system.
Claim 15 is under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Rosenthal in view of Black in further view of Zuhars, and in further view of Smith (US 11787346).
Consider Claim 15, Rosenthal, Black, and Zuhars do not disclose the limitations of this claim.
However, Smith discloses the optical tracking system of claim 14, wherein the first object and the second object comprise autonomously controlled flying objects (Figure 6, elements 650-1 and 650-2 are drones and Column 28, Lines 48-50, where drones are controlled to fly autonomously)
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before theeffective filing date of applicant’s claimed invention to have incorporated the teachingsof Smith into Rosenthal, Black, and Zuhars to know position of flying objects to ensure that objects are on correct path in air.
Claim 16 is under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Rosenthal in view of Black in further view of Zuhars, and in further view of Breisacher.
Consider Claim 16, Rosenthal, Black, and Zuhars do not disclose the limitations of this claim.
However, Breisacher discloses the optical tracking system of claim 14, wherein the first object and the second object comprise a respective object light emitter configured to emit light detectable by the optical sensor (Column 6, Lines 63-67 and Column 7, Lines 1-2, where elements 44 and 46 can include LEDs that can be picked up by sensor element 40),
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before theeffective filing date of applicant’s claimed invention to have incorporated the teachingsof Breisacher into Rosenthal, Black, and Zuhars to improve position detection of objects in a system.
Claim 21 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Black in view of Zuhars and further in view of Stenzler (US 10207193).
Consider Claim 21, Black and Zuhars do not disclose the limitations of this claim.
However, Stenzler discloses the system of claim 1, wherein the area comprises an amusement park (Figure 19, where environment is an amusement park),
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before theeffective filing date of applicant’s claimed invention to have incorporated the teachingsof Stenzler into Black and Zuhars to ensure proper functioning of attractions at park.
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 ASIF SHAMEEM whose telephone number is (571)272-6576. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday 8:00 AM EST-5:00 PM 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, KENNETH VANDERPUYE can be reached at (571) 272-3078. 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.
/ASIF SHAMEEM/Examiner, Art Unit 2634
/KENNETH N VANDERPUYE/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2634
Prosecution Insights