DETAILED ACTION
Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status
The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
Drawings
The drawings are objected to under 37 CFR 1.83(a). The drawings must show every feature of the invention specified in the claims. Therefore, the “plurality of display devices positioned at different angles” (claims 1, 7 and 16) must be shown or the feature(s) canceled from the claim(s). No new matter should be entered.
Corrected drawing sheets in compliance with 37 CFR 1.121(d) are required in reply to the Office action to avoid abandonment of the application. Any amended replacement drawing sheet should include all of the figures appearing on the immediate prior version of the sheet, even if only one figure is being amended. The figure or figure number of an amended drawing should not be labeled as “amended.” If a drawing figure is to be canceled, the appropriate figure must be removed from the replacement sheet, and where necessary, the remaining figures must be renumbered and appropriate changes made to the brief description of the several views of the drawings for consistency. Additional replacement sheets may be necessary to show the renumbering of the remaining figures. Each drawing sheet submitted after the filing date of an application must be labeled in the top margin as either “Replacement Sheet” or “New Sheet” pursuant to 37 CFR 1.121(d). If the changes are not accepted by the examiner, the applicant will be notified and informed of any required corrective action in the next Office action. The objection to the drawings will not be held in abeyance.
The drawings are objected to under 37 CFR 1.83(a) because they fail to show “one or more display devices 102a-n are positioned at different angles to a partial transparent and partial reflective sheet 104” as described in the specification (¶0031). Any structural detail that is essential for a proper understanding of the disclosed invention should be shown in the drawing. MPEP § 608.02(d). Corrected drawing sheets in compliance with 37 CFR 1.121(d) are required in reply to the Office action to avoid abandonment of the application. Any amended replacement drawing sheet should include all of the figures appearing on the immediate prior version of the sheet, even if only one figure is being amended. The figure or figure number of an amended drawing should not be labeled as “amended.” If a drawing figure is to be canceled, the appropriate figure must be removed from the replacement sheet, and where necessary, the remaining figures must be renumbered and appropriate changes made to the brief description of the several views of the drawings for consistency. Additional replacement sheets may be necessary to show the renumbering of the remaining figures. Each drawing sheet submitted after the filing date of an application must be labeled in the top margin as either “Replacement Sheet” or “New Sheet” pursuant to 37 CFR 1.121(d). If the changes are not accepted by the examiner, the applicant will be notified and informed of any required corrective action in the next Office action. The objection to the drawings will not be held in abeyance.
Claim Interpretation
The original disclosure describes “one or more display devices 102a-n are positioned at different angles to a partial transparent and partial reflective sheet 104” (¶0031, fig. 1); and claims 1, 7 and 16 recite a “plurality of display devices positioned at different angles”. No “different angles” were found in the drawings as specified by ¶0031. No reference axis, axes and/or point(s) were found to allow for a reasonable interpretation, without considerable speculation, of the “different angles” at which the “plurality of display devices” are positioned. However, figs. 1 and 2 describe the “plurality of display devices” either facing the sheet 104 at different distance from the transparent and reflective sheet (i.e. sheet 104- ¶0031, figs. 1-2). For the purpose of prior reference analysis, Examiner will contemplate interpreting “plurality of display devices positioned at different angles” as illustrated in figs. 1 and 2.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(b):
(b) CONCLUSION.—The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph:
The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the applicant regards as his invention.
Claims 1-6 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor, or for pre-AIA the applicant regards as the invention. The term “a stable animation of said image” in claim 1 is a relative term which renders the claim indefinite. The term “stable” is not defined by the claim, the specification does not provide a standard for ascertaining the requisite degree, and one of ordinary skill in the art would not be reasonably apprised of the scope of the invention. Therefore, the stability of the created “animation of said plurality of images” is indefinite. Examiner will interpret “automatically moving said plurality of display devices” aso inherently creating “stable animation of said plurality of images”.
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 of this title, 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 set forth in Graham v. John Deere Co., 383 U.S. 1, 148 USPQ 459 (1966), that are applied 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 1-3 and 5 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Ashley Crowder et al [US 20160266543 A1: already of record] in view of Matthew Deuel et al. [US 20230302372 A1].
Regarding claim 1, Ashley teaches:
1. An interactive display system to create a holographic scene (i.e. Systems and methods herein are directed to three-dimensional image sources for an enhanced Pepper's Ghost Illusion- Abstract), the interactive display system comprising:
a plurality of display devices (i.e. Another example holographic projection system, therefore, with reference generally to FIGS. 3 and 4, may be established with video panel displays 270- ¶0035) positioned at different angles (i.e. In particular, as shown in FIG. 8, a contoured image source 270 (e.g., projector bounce, though contoured panel displays may be created by an array of flat panel displays) may be shaped with a topography to include regions of different heights 271a/271b (i.e., different distances d1a and d1b from the holographic screen), resulting in a displayed image 275a/275b appearing to have regions at different depths to the viewer (distances d2a and d2b)- ¶0051); and
a sheet that is transparent and reflective (i.e. As shown, a tensioning frame 220 is used to stretch a clear foil into a stable, wrinkle-free (e.g., and vibration resistant) reflectively transparent surface (that is, displaying/reflecting light images for the holographic projection, but allowing the viewer to see through to the background)- ¶0034);
wherein said sheet includes an angle from 40 degrees to 50 degrees relative to said plurality of display devices for creating a plurality of images on said sheet (i.e. While the bounce 270 remains at a 45-degree angle to the holographic screen 220 (foil/glass/etc.)- ¶0054);
wherein each of said plurality of images correspond to each of said plurality of display devices(i.e. In particular, as shown in FIG. 8, a contoured image source 270 (e.g., projector bounce, though contoured panel displays may be created by an array of flat panel displays) may be shaped with a topography to include regions of different heights 271a/271b (i.e., different distances d1a and d1b from the holographic screen), resulting in a displayed image 275a/275b appearing to have regions at different depths to the viewer (distances d2a and d2b)- ¶0051);
wherein each of said plurality of display devices movable vertically up and down to simulate movement of each of said plurality of images in and out (i.e. Additionally, as shown in FIGS. 16A and 16B, the same concept is available for moving a single image source, thus moving a single object's depth correspondingly. According to one or more embodiments herein, the height of the one or more image sources can be changed based on pre-configured timings in a corresponding display program (e.g., to control one or more motors), or based on stage hands manually adjusting the height. In still another embodiment, the image source(s) can be dynamically moved based on a detected depth of the object, whether live-streamed or else pre-recorded- ¶0066-0067);
wherein said plurality of display devices is at least three display devices (i.e. In one embodiment, two or more projectors can be used to projection map the bounce from different angles/sides, thus creating a more realistic 3D effect, and allowing a person walking by the display to see a realistic perspective- ¶0008);
wherein said plurality of display devices include an automatic control system for automatically moving said plurality of display devices for creating a stable animation of said plurality of images (i.e. In order to accomplish object-depth-based control of image source height in this manner, a video capture device that videos the object may comprise a camera that is capable of detecting object distance. One such example camera that is commercially available is the KINECT™ camera system available from MICROSOFT™, and as such, certain terms used herein may be related to such a specific implementation. However, it should be noted that the techniques herein are not limited to a KINECT™ system, and other suitable video capture and processing systems may be equally used with the embodiments described herein- ¶0068);
further wherein said automatic control system having an object tracker for tracking objects in a video feed from a video camera (i.e. Based on the images from the camera 900, a corresponding depth range of a captured object may be set and/or determined using the captured depth information (e.g., IR information). For example, FIG. 18A illustrates an example source image 1010 that may be captured by the video camera 910. Conversely, FIG. 18B illustrates an example depth-based image 1020 that may be captured by the depth capturing component 920, such as the IR image captured by the IR camera 924 based on reflected IR light from the IR emitter 922. In particular, the image 1020 in FIG. 18B may be limited (manually or dynamically) to only show the desired depth range of a given subject (person, object, etc.), such as based on the intensity of the IR reflection off the objects¶0071… According to one or more embodiments herein, the depth range selected to produce the image 1020 in FIG. 18B may be adjusted on-the-fly (e.g., manually by a technician or dynamically based on object detection technology) in order to control what can be “seen” by the camera. For instance, the techniques herein thus enable object tracking during live events, such as individual performers move around a stage- ¶0072).
However, Ashley does not teach explicitly:
wherein said automatic control system moves selectively said plurality of display devices along a first rail in a first direction.
In the same field of endeavor, Matthew teaches:
wherein said automatic control system moves selectively said plurality of display devices along a first rail (i.e. track- ¶0012-0013) in a first direction (i.e. Optionally, in some embodiments, the display includes a projector assembly and a drive portion, where the drive portion is configured to move the display along the track- ¶0012-0013, claim 11).
It would have been obvious to one with ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to modify the teachings of Ashley with the teachings of Matthew to facilitate movement of display components, such as the projector assembly (Mathew- ¶0039).
Regarding claim 2, Ashley and Matthew teach all the limitations of claim 1 and Mathew further teaches:
wherein movements of said tracked objects are automatically transmitted to said automatic control system for corresponding said moves of said plurality of display devices along said first rail (i.e. In still another embodiment, the image source(s) can be dynamically moved based on a detected depth of the object, whether live-streamed or else pre-recorded- ¶0067).
Regarding claim 3, Ashley and Matthew teach all the limitations of claim 2 and Mathew further teaches:
wherein a position of each of said plurality of display devices are adjusted to match the virtual motion of said video feed for creating a synchronized holographic scene (i.e. Based on the set, tracked, adjusted, and/or determined depths of the objects that are being holographically portrayed, the image sources herein may be adjusted accordingly based on that depth information to portray a similar perspective aspect in the holographic image. For example, if one person walks toward a camera, and another walks away from the camera (whether the same camera or not), the image sources may be adjusted according to the techniques above based on the change in distance/depth each person was from the camera- ¶0075).
Regarding claim 5, Ashley and Matthew teach all the limitations of claim 3 and Mathew further teaches:
wherein said plurality of display devices having a manual controller for creating said synchronized holographic scene (i.e. According to one or more embodiments herein, the height of the one or more image sources can be changed based on pre-configured timings in a corresponding display program (e.g., to control one or more motors), or based on stage hands manually adjusting the height- ¶0067).
Claim 4 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Ashley Crowder et al [US 20160266543 A1: already of record] in view of Matthew Deuel et al. [US 20230302372 A1] and further in view of Joze Pececnik [US 9916717 B2].
Regarding claim 4, Ashley and Matthew teach all the limitations of claim 3.
However, Ashley and Matthew do not teach explicitly:
wherein said video feed is wireless
In the same field of endeavor, Joze teaches:
wherein said video feed is wireless (i.e. a processor having a game controller that provides random game event outcomes and transmits video information related to the random game event outcomes to each of the at least one video display screens through a wireless or physical communication link- Claim 1).
It would have been obvious to one with ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to modify the teachings of Ashley and Matthew with the teachings of Joze to reduces the total amount of data that must be stored in displaying outcomes (Joze- ¶Col 5, line 59-60).
Claim 6 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Ashley Crowder et al [US 20160266543 A1: already of record] in view of Matthew Deuel et al. [US 20230302372 A1] and further in view of Sara Ferris et al. [US 20200293146 A1].
Regarding claim 6, Ashley and Matthew teach all the limitations of claim 3.
However, Ashley and Matthew do not teach explicitly:
wherein said plurality of display devices having a second rail for manual sliding movement of said plurality of display devices in a second direction.
In the same field of endeavor, Sara teaches:
wherein said plurality of display devices having a second rail for manual sliding movement of said plurality of display devices in a second direction (i.e. FIG. 4 illustrates a rail-based projector-position adjustment system that enables moving peripheral display projectors along horizontal and/or vertical adjustment rails mounted on the example monitor of FIGS. 1 and 2- ¶0005).
It would have been obvious to one with ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to modify the teachings of Ashley and Matthew with the teachings of Sara To enable such horizontal and/or vertical adjustments (Sara- ¶0029).
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 7-20 are allowed.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to CLIFFORD HILAIRE whose telephone number is (571)272-8397. The examiner can normally be reached 5:30-1400.
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, SATH V PERUNGAVOOR can be reached at (571)272-7455. 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.
CLIFFORD HILAIRE
Primary Examiner
Art Unit 2488
/CLIFFORD HILAIRE/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2488