DETAILED ACTION
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 02/19/2026 regarding the 35 USC 103 rejections with respect to the amended limitations of claims 1-12, 14-21 have been considered but are moot in view of the new ground(s) of rejection necessitated by the amendment.
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.
Claims 1-6, 8-12, 14-15, 21 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Chen et al (Chen J, Zhang Y, Kang D, Zhe X, Bao L, Jia X, Lu H. Animatable neural radiance fields from monocular rgb videos. arXiv preprint arXiv:2106.13629. 2021 Jun 25.), in view of Gafni et al (Gafni, Guy, et al. "Dynamic neural radiance fields for monocular 4d facial avatar reconstruction." Proceedings of the IEEE/CVF conference on computer vision and pattern recognition. 2021, Applicant cited) and further in view of Grabli et al (US 20200286284 A1).
RE claim 1, Chen teaches A method (Fig 1, abstract) comprising:
receiving a first sequence of images of a user, the first sequence of images being monocular images (Fig 1, abstract, page 2 col 2);
generating an avatar based on the first sequence of images, the avatar being based on a model including a vertex, the vertex being associated with at least one of a color or a density based on the first sequence of images (Fig 1, abstract, page 2 col 2);
Chen is silent RE: a portion of a user.
However Gafni teaches receiving a first sequence of images of a portion of a user and extracting nerf in order to generate a facial mesh from the portion images in Abstract Fig 1.
Thus, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to include in Chen a system and method of receiving a sequence of images of the portion of the user, as suggested by Grabli, in order to generate the avatar corresponding to the portion of the avatar eg, a facial avatar model to synthesize novel head poses as well as changes in facial expressions and thereby increasing system effectiveness and user experience.
Chen as modified by Gafni is silent RE: receiving a second sequence of images of the portion of the user; and based on the second sequence of images, modifying the avatar with a displacement of the vertex to represent a gesture of the avatar.
However Grabli teaches receiving a second sequence of images of the portion of the user; and based on the second sequence of images, modifying the avatar with a displacement of the vertex to represent a gesture of the avatar in abstract, [0011], [0031], [0041] to identify and transfer the facial expressions of the user to the avatar. This is readily available or can equally be applied, as both Chen (page 2 col 2) and Gafni (Fig 2) readily teaches pose/expression generation deformation of spatial points using the 3D model for generating different corresponding pose as the gestures to reconstruct dynamic human/expressions.
Thus, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to include in Chen as modified by Gafni a system and method of receiving a second sequence of images of the portion of the user; and based on the second sequence of images, modifying the avatar with a displacement of the vertex to represent a gesture of the avatar, as suggested by Grabli, in order to generate different avatar gestures and thereby increasing system effectiveness and user experience.
RE claim 2, Chen as modified by Gafni and Grabli teaches, wherein the modifying the avatar with the displacement of the vertex includes: determining a vertex location of the model of an expression avatar based on the second sequence of images; determining displacement of the vertex based on the vertex location of the model of the expression avatar and a location of the vertex; and modifying the location of the vertex based on the displacement of the vertex (Grabli [0031]-[0032]).
RE claim 3, Chen as modified by Gafni and Grabli teaches, further comprising determining a color of a three-dimensional point of the avatar based on colors of multiple nearest-neighbor vertices of the three-dimensional point, the multiple nearest-neighbor vertices of the three-dimensional point including the vertex (Chen Fig 1, page 2 col 2, page 3 col 2).
RE claim 4, Chen as modified by Gafni and Grabli teaches, further comprising determining the displacement of the vertex based on a difference between a feature of the portion of the user in the first sequence of images and a feature of the portion of the user in the second sequence of images (Grabli Fig 5, [0044], [0084], [0086]).
RE claim 5, Chen as modified by Gafni and Grabli teaches, wherein: the model includes a three-dimensional morphable model configured to be translated into a two-dimensional representation for presentation on a computer display; and the vertex is a mesh vertex included in the three-dimensional morphable model (Chen Fig 1, page 3 col 1-2, Grabli [0003], [0006]).
RE claim 6, Chen as modified by Gafni and Grabli teaches, further comprising: determining an expression vertex location within an expression avatar based on the second sequence of images; and determining the displacement of the vertex based on the expression vertex location and a location of the vertex (Grabli Fig 5, [0031]-[0032], [0044]).
RE claim 8, Chen as modified by Gafni and Grabli teaches, wherein the model includes a triangle mesh and the vertex is included in a triangle in the triangle mesh (Chen Fig 1, page 3 col 1-2 and Grabli [0066]).
RE claim 9, Chen as modified by Gafni and Grabli teaches, wherein the gesture of the avatar includes a facial expression (Grabli Fig 5, [0031]-[0032], [0044]).
RE claim 21, Chen as modified by Gafni and Grabli teaches, wherein the vertex is associated with both the color and the density based on the first sequence of images (Chen Fig 1, page 2 col 2, page 3 col 2).
Claims 10-12, 14-15 recite limitations similar in scope with limitations of claims 4, 2-3, 5-6 and therefore rejected under the same rationale. In addition Chen as modified by Gafni and Grabli teaches A non-transitory computer-readable storage medium comprising instructions stored thereon (Chen abstract, Fig 1, wherein method steps are typically stored in CRM, eg., Grabli Fig 7, [0135]).
Claims 7, 16-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Chen as modified by Gafni and Grabli, and further in view of Planche et al (US 20240029867 A1).
RE claim 7, Chen as modified by Gafni and Grabli teaches, wherein generating the avatar includes applying a neural network to the first sequence of images to determine the color or density associated with the vertex (Chen Fig 1, abstract).
Chen as modified by Gafni and Grabli is silent RE using a convolutional neural network. However Planche teaches in [0019] to predict the image properties of the multiple 3D points (vertices).
Thus, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to include in Chen as modified by Gafni and Grabli a system and method of applying a convolutional neural network, as suggested by Planche, in order to effectively predict/compute the nerf and color/density applying a typical CNN and thereby increasing system effectiveness and user experience.
Claim 16 recites limitations similar in scope with limitations of claim 7 and therefore rejected under the same rationale.
Claims 17-20 recite limitations similar in scope with limitations of claims 7, 2-4 and therefore rejected under the same rationale. In addition Chen as modified by Gafni and Grabli teaches A computing system comprising: at least one processor; and a non-transitory computer-readable storage medium comprising instructions stored thereon (Chen abstract, Fig 1, wherein method steps are implemented with a typical computing system, eg., Grabli Fig 7, [0132]).
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure (see attached 892).
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 SULTANA MARCIA ZALALEE whose telephone number is (571)270-1411. The examiner can normally be reached Monday- Friday 8:00am-4:30pm.
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, Kent Chang can be reached at (571)272-7667. 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.
/Sultana M Zalalee/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2614
Prosecution Insights