DETAILED ACTION
Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status
1. The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
2. 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.
3. 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.
4. Claim(s) 1-2, 4, 6-8, and 19 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Hara et al. (U.S. Patent Application Publication No. 2009/0080803 A1), hereinafter referred to as Hara, in view of West et al. (U.S. Patent Application Publication No. 2004/0263511 A1), hereinafter referred to as West.
5. Regarding claim 1, Hara teaches a method of graphical rendering, comprising:
obtaining a first three-dimensional (3D) graphical object, wherein the first 3D graphical object is associated with at least a first material (Paragraph 71 teaches rendering a semi-transparent model 306 which can be considered the first 3D graphical object associated with a semi-transparent material which is the first material) and wherein the first material is associated with an adjustable density value (Paragraph 71 teaches a concentration value of the semi-transparent 3D object which can be set from 0.0 to 1.0. Thus, the concentration value is an adjustable density value) and comprises at least a first plane with an adjustable position within a virtual environment (Paragraph 71 teaches the semi-transparent or 3D graphical object uses one or more polygons and exists in a three-dimensional space. Thus, the 3D object has at least one plane associated with it; Paragraph 77 and Figure 13 teach the 3D graphical object can move. Thus, the object and its planes associated with it have an adjustable position);
and rendering, from a first viewpoint and using a first shader, at least a portion of the first 3D graphical object in the virtual environment by applying the determined transparency value to the first material (Paragraph 57 teaches the virtual environment and its objects are rendered which includes shading or a shader. Paragraph 71 teaches setting a viewpoint 304 which can be considered the first viewpoint and determining the transparency based on the concentration value or density. Paragraph 73 teaches rendering the 3D graphical object or semi-transparent model in the virtual environment).
However, Hara fails to teach determining a transparency value based, at least in part, on the adjustable density value and a distance between the first plane and the first 3D graphical object.
West teaches determining a transparency value based, at least in part, on the adjustable density value and a distance between the first plane and the first 3D graphical object (Paragraph 79 and Figure 8C teach the visibility or transparency value is determined based on the fog density, which is depth adjustable, and based on the distance between a first plane like Z.sub.V1 and another point on the first 3D graphical object like Z.sub.V2. The depth adjustable density means the density value is adjustable).
Hara and West are considered analogous to the claimed invention as because both are in the same field of rendering semi-transparent objects. Thus, it would have been obvious to a person holding ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to modify the method of rendering a semi-transparent object taught by Hara with the determination of a transparency value based on the density and distance taught by West in order to accurately model light attenuation effects like semi-transparent surfaces when rendering an object scene (West Paragraph 33).
6. Regarding claim 2, Hara in view of West teaches the limitations of claim 1. Hara further teaches the method wherein the first 3D graphical object is further associated with a second material (Paragraph 76 teaches the first 3D graphical object or semi-transparent model is associated with a canvas pattern which can be considered the second material), and wherein the rendering of at least a portion of the first 3D graphical object in the virtual environment further comprises: blending between the first material and the second material according to the determined transparency value (Paragraph 76 teaches controlling the blend ratio between the texture data and canvas pattern. The texture data can be considered the first material of the semi-transparent model and the canvas pattern the second material).
7. Regarding claim 4, Hara in view of West teaches the limitations of claim 1. Hara further teaches the method wherein the first plane comprises a horizontal plane, and wherein the adjustable position comprises an adjustable height within the virtual environment (Paragraph 71 teaches a semitransparent model 306 which can be considered the first 3D graphical object associated with a semi-transparent material. Since the semi-transparent model using one or more polygons exists in a three-dimensional space, it has at least a first horizontal plane associated with it; Paragraph 77 and Figure 13 teach the 3D graphical object can move in the three-dimensional space. Thus, it has an adjustable position or height).
8. Regarding claim 6, Hara in view of West teaches the limitations of claim 1. Hara further teaches the method wherein the first material comprises a semi-transparent material (Paragraph 83 teaches a simulation of fog in a three-dimensional space. The fog is a first material that comprises a semi-transparent material).
9. Regarding claim 7, Hara in view of West teaches the limitations of claim 6. Hara further teaches the method wherein the first material comprises at least one of: fog, mist, water, cloud, dust, or particles (Paragraph 83 teaches a simulation of fog in a three-dimensional space. The fog is a first material).
10. Regarding claim 8, Hara in view of West teaches the limitations of claim 1. Hara further teaches the method wherein the rendering of the first 3D graphical object in the virtual environment further comprises a single pass rendering operation that renders both opaque and non-opaque materials in the virtual environment (Paragraphs 82-85 teach calculating the transparency through a single light source and viewpoint. This can be considered a single pass rendering by calculating the fog or transparency of the materials through one viewpoint, a single pass, and storing the values into a texture buffer. The Applicant does not define what a single pass rendering operation is so under the broadest reasonable interpretation, rendering the graphical object through a single viewpoint can be considered the single pass rendering operation; Paragraphs 87-89 teach rendering the image data according to the concentration map or fog value. The opaque objects like the character, building, tree and the non-opaque materials like the fog are rendered in the virtual environment).
11. Regarding claim 19, Hara in view of West teaches a device comprising: a memory; and one or more processors (Hara Abstract teaches a device using a memory and processor to render an object in a virtual three-dimensional space) configured to perform the method of claim 1 (See rejection for claim 1 above).
12. Claim(s) 3 and 9 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Hara et al. (U.S. Patent Application Publication No. 2009/0080803 A1), hereinafter referred to as Hara, in view of West et al. (U.S. Patent Application Publication No. 2004/0263511 A1), hereinafter referred to as West, as applied to claim 1 and 2 above, and further in view of Kim et al. (Korean Patent Application Publication No. 2022/0000266 A), hereinafter referred to as Kim.
13. Regarding claim 3, Hara in view of West teaches the limitations of claim 2. However, Hara and West fail to teach the method wherein the rendering of at least a portion of the first 3D graphical object in the virtual environment further comprises, for one or more rendered pixels of the first 3D graphical object: (a) computing, for a first ray emanating from the first viewpoint and terminating at a respective rendered pixel of the first 3D graphical object, a first intersection point between the first ray and the first plane; (b) computing a second intersection point between the first ray and the first 3D graphical object, wherein the second intersection point is behind the first plane with respect to the first viewpoint; (c) determining a first distance between the first intersection point and the second intersection point; (d) determining based, at least in part, on the first distance and the adjustable density value of the first material, a first transparency value to apply to the first material at the second intersection point; and (e) rendering a portion of the first 3D graphical object at the second intersection point based, at least in part, on the determined first transparency value, the first material, and a portion of the second material corresponding to the first 3D graphical object at the second intersection point
Kim teaches the method wherein the rendering of at least a portion of the first 3D graphical object in the virtual environment further comprises, for one or more rendered pixels of the first 3D graphical object: (a) computing, for a first ray emanating from the first viewpoint and terminating at a respective rendered pixel of the first 3D graphical object, a first intersection point between the first ray and the first plane (Paragraph 182-186 and Figure 13a teach a camera ray or ray from a first viewpoint intersecting a volume. The length of the ray passing through the volume has a first intersection point x which intersects the first plane of the volume where x exists);
(b) computing a second intersection point between the first ray and the first 3D graphical object, wherein the second intersection point is behind the first plane with respect to the first viewpoint (Paragraph 182-186 and Figure 13a teach a camera ray or ray from a first viewpoint intersecting a volume. The length of the ray passing through the volume has a second intersection point x’ which is behind the first plane or first intersection point x);
(c) determining a first distance between the first intersection point and the second intersection point (Paragraph 183 and Figure 13a teach the length of the ray or distance traveled within media is stored in a variable. The distance traveled within media is the distance between the first and second intersection points);
(d) determining based, at least in part, on the first distance and the adjustable density value of the first material, a first transparency value to apply to the first material at the second intersection point (Paragraph 175 teaches using Beer-Lambert’s law to generate the opacity or transparency value of a volume. It teaches Beer-Lambert’s law in Equation 5 relies on the distance ‘t' and density ‘d’. The distance ‘t’ is the distance traveled through the volume or the first distance. Paragraph 181 teaches that using Beer-Lambert’s law in Equation 5 and the absorption in Equation 6 can then determine the opacity or transparency of the object);
and (e) rendering a portion of the first 3D graphical object at the second intersection point based, at least in part, on the determined first transparency value, the first material, and a portion of the second material corresponding to the first 3D graphical object at the second intersection point (Paragraph 19-20 teach using the volume rendering to render the three-dimensional atmospheric environment information like cloud information. It also teaches that there are various terrain skins which can be fused with the three-dimensional display. This can be considered the second material which would be rendered corresponding to the opacity of the first 3D graphical object; Paragraph 172-173 teaches rendering the volume or 3D graphical object by returning the opacity or transparency value for each pixel which would include the second intersection point).
Hara, West, and Kim are considered analogous to the claimed invention as because both are in the same field of rendering semi-transparent objects. Thus, it would have been obvious to a person holding ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to modify the method of rendering a semi-transparent object taught by Hara in view of West with an adjustable density with the determination and rendering of transparency taught by Kim in order to enable rendering of clouds or fine dust which are commonly found difficult to express in three dimensions (Kim Paragraph 171).
14. Regarding claim 9, Hara in view of West teaches the limitations of claim 1. Hara teaches an adjustable density (Paragraph 71 teaches a concentration value of the semi-transparent 3D object which can be set from 0.0 to 1.0. Thus, the concentration value is an adjustable density value).
However, Hara and West fail to teach the method wherein determining the transparency value further comprises applying the Beer-Lambert law to the first material based on one or more of: an absorptivity of the first material, the distance between the first plane and the first 3D graphical object, and the adjustable density value for the first material.
Kim teaches the method wherein determining the transparency value further comprises applying the Beer-Lambert law to the first material based on one or more of: an absorptivity of the first material, the distance between the first plane and the first 3D graphical object, and the adjustable density value for the first material (Paragraph 175 teaches using Beer-Lambert’s law to generate the opacity or transparency value of a volume. It teaches Beer-Lambert’s law in Equation 5 relies on the distance ‘t' and density ‘d’. The distance ‘t’ is the distance traveled through the volume which can be considered a distance between an entry point or first plane of the volume and an exit point of the volume which is the first 3D graphical object. Since the Applicant uses ‘one or more of’ only one of the listed requirements need to be taught in the prior art. Thus, the distance and density are taught. The adjustable density is taught through combination with Hara; Paragraph 178 and Equation 6 teach calculating the absorption of the volume or first material. Paragraph 181 teaches that using Beer-Lambert’s law in Equation 5 and the absorption in Equation 6 can then determine the opacity or transparency of the object).
Hara, West, and Kim are considered analogous to the claimed invention because all are in the same field of rendering semi-transparent objects. Thus, it would have been obvious to a person holding ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to modify the method of rendering a semi-transparent object taught by Hara in view of West with an adjustable density with the Beer-Lambert Law taught by Kim in order to enable rendering of clouds or fine dust which are commonly found difficult to express in three dimensions (Kim Paragraph 171).
15. Claim(s) 5 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Hara et al. (U.S. Patent Application Publication No. 2009/0080803 A1), hereinafter referred to as Hara, in view of West et al. (U.S. Patent Application Publication No. 2004/0263511 A1), hereinafter referred to as West, as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Deering (U.S. Patent Application Publication No. 2004/0174376 A1).
Regarding claim 5, Hara in view of West teaches the limitations of claim 1. However, Hara and West fail to teach the method wherein the first plane further comprises a rotatable and scalable plane within the virtual environment.
Deering teaches the method wherein the first plane further comprises a rotatable and scalable plane within the virtual environment (Paragraph 38 teaches you can render an object with any combination of rotation and scaling of the object. Thus, the object consists of a rotatable and scalable plane within a virtual environment).
Hara, West, and Deering are considered analogous to the claimed invention because all are in the same field of rendering a three-dimensional object in a scene. Thus, it would have been obvious to a person holding ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to modify the method of rendering a semi-transparent object taught by Hara and West with the rotatable and scalable plane taught by Deering in order to render complex three-dimensional objects and scenes that are injected into a virtual world space with any desired placement of the object (Deering Paragraph 4 and 38).
16. Claim(s) 10-11 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Hara et al. (U.S. Patent Application Publication No. 2009/0080803 A1), hereinafter referred to as Hara, in view of West et al. (U.S. Patent Application Publication No. 2004/0263511 A1), hereinafter referred to as West, as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Liu et al. (U.S. Patent Application Publication No. 2024/0029341 A1), hereinafter referred to as Liu.
17. Regarding claim 10, Hara in view of West teaches the limitations of claim 1. However, Hara and West fail to teach the method wherein the virtual environment comprises an extended reality (XR) virtual environment.
Liu teaches the method wherein the virtual environment comprises an extended reality (XR) virtual environment (Paragraph 3 teaches rendering objects in virtual reality which is an extended reality virtual environment; Paragraph 47 teaches rendering object volumes through their density or opacity).
Hara, West, and Liu are considered analogous to the claimed invention as because both are in the same field of rendering three-dimensional objects in a scene. Thus, it would have been obvious to a person holding ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to modify the method of rendering semi-transparent objects taught by Hara in view of West with the extended reality virtual environment taught by Liu in order to increase the performance of rendering transparent objects and effects in virtual reality simulators (Liu Paragraph 4-5).
18. Regarding claim 11, Hara in view of West and Liu teach the limitations of claim 10. However, Hara and West fail to teach the method wherein the virtual environment further comprises a system-level layer, upon which one or more application-level layers may be rendered.
Liu teaches the method wherein the virtual environment further comprises a system-level layer, upon which one or more application-level layers may be rendered (Paragraph 31 teaches the user equipment which may be a virtual reality device renders a target scene from the server. The target scene rendered can be considered the application-level layer. The device hardware can be considered the system-level layer; Paragraph 69 teaches the device runs using a CPU and GPU to execute instructions. This can be considered the system-level layer).
Hara, West, and Liu are considered analogous to the claimed invention as because both are in the same field of rendering three-dimensional objects in a scene. Thus, it would have been obvious to a person holding ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to modify the method of rendering semi-transparent objects taught by Hara in view of West with the application and system-level layers taught by Liu in order to increase the performance of rendering transparent objects and effects in virtual reality simulators (Liu Paragraph 4-5).
19. Claim(s) 12 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Hara et al. (U.S. Patent Application Publication No. 2009/0080803 A1), hereinafter referred to as Hara, in view of West et al. (U.S. Patent Application Publication No. 2004/0263511 A1), hereinafter referred to as West, as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Watanabe (U.S. Patent Application Publication No. 2022/0319099 A1).
Regarding claim 12, Hara in view of West teaches the limitations of claim 1. However, Hara and West fail to teach the method wherein determining the transparency value is further based, at least in part, on a current value of a time-of-day variable for the virtual environment.
Watanabe teaches the method wherein determining the transparency value is further based, at least in part, on a current value of a time-of-day variable for the virtual environment (Paragraph 43 and Equation 2 teaches the transparency of each voxel T.sub.i is determined based on a variable d.sub.i which is associated with a time. Paragraph 59 teaches the d.sub.i variable is associated with a date and time. Thus, the variable d.sub.i can be considered the current value for that date and time).
Hara, West, and Watanabe are considered analogous to the claimed invention because all are in the same field of rendering three-dimensional objects. Thus, it would have been obvious to a person holding ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to modify the method of rendering semi-transparent objects taught by Hara and West with the time-of-day variable affect the transparency taught by Watanabe in order to improve the visibility of voxels based on numerical data like sensor data (Watanabe Paragraph 5).
20. Claim(s) 13-14, 16-17, and 20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Hara et al. (U.S. Patent Application Publication No. 2009/0080803 A1), hereinafter referred to as Hara, in view of Gu et al. (Chinese Patent Application Publication No. 111951362 A1), hereinafter referred to as Gu.
21. Regarding claim 13, a method of graphical rendering, comprising: obtaining a first three-dimensional (3D) graphical object, wherein the first 3D graphical object is associated with at least a first material (Paragraph 71 teaches rendering a semi-transparent model 306 which can be considered the first 3D graphical object associated with a semi-transparent material which is the first material), wherein the first material comprises a 3D volume with an adjustable position within a virtual environment (Paragraph 71 teaches the semi-transparent or 3D graphical object uses one or more polygons and exists in a three-dimensional space. Thus, the 3D object has at least one plane associated with it; Paragraph 77 and Figure 13 teach the 3D graphical object can move. Thus, the object and its planes associated with it have an adjustable position), and wherein the first material is associated with an adjustable density value (Paragraph 71 teaches a concentration value of the semi-transparent 3D object which can be set from 0.0 to 1.0. Thus, the concentration value is an adjustable density value)
and rendering, from the first viewpoint and using a first shader, at least a portion of the first 3D graphical object in the virtual environment by applying the determined transparency value to the first material (Paragraph 57 teaches the virtual environment and its objects are rendered which includes shading or a shader. Paragraph 71 teaches setting a viewpoint 304 which can be considered the first viewpoint and determining the transparency based on the concentration value or density. Paragraph 73 teaches rendering the 3D graphical object or semi-transparent model in the virtual environment).
However, Hara fails to teach wherein the first material is associated with a 3D noise texture; and determining a transparency value based, at least in part, on values within the 3D noise texture between a first viewpoint and the first 3D graphical object.
Gu teaches a method of graphical rendering, comprising: obtaining a first three-dimensional (3D) graphical object, wherein the first 3D graphical object is associated with at least a first material (Paragraph 9-10 teach constructing a 3D volumetric cloud which is a 3D graphical object associated with a cloud material), and wherein the first material is associated with an adjustable density value and a 3D noise texture (Paragraph 64 teaches a three-dimensional noise texture which affects the density of each point. Thus, the density is adjustable based on the 3D noise texture); and determining a transparency value based, at least in part, on values within the 3D noise texture between a first viewpoint and the first 3D graphical object (Paragraph 11 teaches determining the transparency of the pixels based on the density of the material; Paragraph 64 teaches a three-dimensional noise texture which affects the density of each point; Paragraph 72 teaches determining the density based on the points sampled between a first and second intersection point along a viewing direction. The viewing direction is from a viewpoint and the intersection points are between the viewpoint and first 3D graphical object. The density is affected by the 3D noise texture so the transparency is based on values within the 3D noise texture between the viewpoint and the graphical object).
Hara and Gu are considered analogous to the claimed invention as because both are in the same field of rendering semi-transparent objects. Thus, it would have been obvious to a person holding ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to modify the method of rendering a 3D graphical object taught by Hara with the noise texture and determining a transparency value taught by Gu in order to render three-dimensional clouds with realistic lighting effects without using too much storage space (Gu Paragraph 7).
22. Regarding claim 14, Hara in view of Gu teaches the limitations of claim 13. Hara further teaches the method wherein the first 3D graphical object is further associated with a second material (Paragraph 76 teaches the first 3D graphical object or semi-transparent model is associated with a canvas pattern which can be considered the second material), and wherein the rendering of at least a portion of the first 3D graphical object in the virtual environment further comprises: blending between the first material and the second material according to the determined transparency value (Paragraph 76 teaches controlling the blend ratio between the texture data and canvas pattern. The texture data can be considered the first material of the semi-transparent model and the canvas pattern the second material).
23. Regarding claim 16, Hara in view of Gu teaches the limitations of claim 13. However, Hara fails to teach the method wherein the 3D noise texture comprises a tiling 3D volume.
Gu teaches the method wherein the 3D noise texture comprises a tiling 3D volume (Paragraphs 64-65 teach that three-dimensional noise texture maps are used to make up the volumetric cloud. Gu teaches that only two texture maps are needed which can be offset or scaled through a height-density function to create a variety of clouds. Thus, these noise maps used with the height-density function can be considered the tiling 3D volume since they are extended throughout the 3d volume).
Hara and Gu are considered analogous to the claimed invention as because both are in the same field of rendering semi-transparent objects. Thus, it would have been obvious to a person holding ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to modify the method of rendering a semi-transparent object taught by Hara with the noise texture comprising a tiling 3D volume taught by Gu in order to render three-dimensional clouds with realistic lighting effects without using too much storage space (Gu Paragraph 7).
24. Regarding claim 17, Hara in view of Gu teaches the limitations of claim 13. Hara further teaches the method wherein the first material comprises at least one of: fog, mist, water, cloud, dust, or particles (Paragraph 83 teaches a simulation of fog in a three-dimensional space. The fog is a first material).
25. Regarding claim 20, Hara in view of Gu teaches a non-transitory computer-readable medium that stores instructions (Hara Abstract teaches a device using a memory and processor to render an object in a virtual three-dimensional space) that, when executed, cause the performance of the method of claim 13 (See rejection of claim 13 above).
26. Claim(s) 15 and 18 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Hara et al. (U.S. Patent Application Publication No. 2009/0080803 A1), hereinafter referred to as Hara, in view of Gu et al. (Chinese Patent Application Publication No. 111951362 A1), hereinafter referred to as Gu, as applied to claim 14 above, and further in view of Kim et al. (Korean Patent Application Publication No. 2022/0000266 A), hereinafter referred to as Kim.
27. Regarding claim 15, Hara in view of Gu teaches the limitations of claim 14. However, Hara fails to teach the method wherein the rendering of at least a portion of the first 3D graphical object in the virtual environment further comprises, for one or more rendered pixels of the first 3D graphical object:
(a) computing a first plurality of points along a first ray emanating from the first viewpoint and terminating at a respective rendered pixel of the first 3D object, wherein at least a part of the first ray passes through the 3D volume, and wherein the first ray intersects with the first 3D object at an intersection point; (b) computing an integration value based on noise values corresponding to locations of each of the first plurality of points within the 3D noise texture and the adjustable density value; (c) determining based, at least in part, on the computed integration value, a first transparency value to apply to the first material at the intersection point; and (d) rendering a portion of the first 3D graphical object at the intersection point based, at least in part, on the determined first transparency value, the first material, and a portion of the second material corresponding to the first 3D graphical object at the intersection point.
Gu teaches the method wherein the rendering of at least a portion of the first 3D graphical object in the virtual environment further comprises, for one or more rendered pixels of the first 3D graphical object: (a) computing a first plurality of points along a first ray emanating from the first viewpoint and terminating at a respective rendered pixel of the first 3D object, wherein at least a part of the first ray passes through the 3D volume, and wherein the first ray intersects with the first 3D object at an intersection point (Paragraph 72 teaches determining starting and ending intersection points for a viewing direction which is a ray from the viewpoint through a volumetric cloud or first 3D object. Gu also teaches computing a first plurality of points along a first ray emanating from a viewpoint through a step size. These points are computed up to the ending intersection point which is a respective rendered pixeled of the first 3D object);
(b) computing an integration value based on noise values corresponding to locations of each of the first plurality of points within the 3D noise texture and the adjustable density value (Paragraph 64-65 teach the noise maps are mapped to certain points in the volumetric cloud and their densities. It teaches the remap function is used to offset or scale the noise signal based on the different altitudes. This can be considered the integration value computed; Paragraph 72 teaches mapping the points along the first ray to the 3D noise texture space and sampling the density values at each point. Hara teaches the adjustable density values as explained above in claim 13);
(c) determining based, at least in part, on the computed integration value, a first transparency value to apply to the first material at the intersection point (Paragraph 70 teaches the densities are summed to obtain the total density of the 3D volumetric cloud in the line of sight; Paragraph 72 teaches the densities are sampled from the plurality of points within the 3D noise texture space. Based on the summed and overall density, the transparency is determined. The computed overall density can be considered the computed integration value; Paragraph 59 teaches applying the determined transparency value to the first material or object when rendering);
and (d) rendering a portion of the first 3D graphical object at the intersection point based, at least in part, on the determined first transparency value, the first material(Paragraph 59 teaches rendering the volumetric cloud using the determined transparency value of all the pixels, thus including the intersection point, and the densities. The rendered volumetric cloud is the rendered fist material).
Hara and Gu are considered analogous to the claimed invention as because both are in the same field of rendering semi-transparent objects. Thus, it would have been obvious to a person holding ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to modify the method of rendering a 3D graphical object taught by Hara with the noise texture and determining a transparency value taught by Gu in order to render three-dimensional clouds with realistic lighting effects without using too much storage space (Gu Paragraph 7).
However, Hara and Gu fail to teach rendering a portion of the second material corresponding to the first 3D graphical object at the intersection point.
Kim teaches rendering a portion of the second material corresponding to the first 3D graphical object at the intersection point (Paragraph 19-20 teach using the volume rendering to render the three-dimensional atmospheric environment information like cloud information. It also teaches that there are various terrain skins which can be fused with the three-dimensional display. This can be considered the second material which would be rendered corresponding to the opacity of the first 3D graphical object; Paragraph 172-173 teaches rendering the volume or 3D graphical object by returning the opacity or transparency value for each pixel which would include the second intersection point).
Hara, Gu, and Kim are considered analogous to the claimed invention as because both are in the same field of rendering semi-transparent objects. Thus, it would have been obvious to a person holding ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to modify the method of rendering a semi-transparent object taught by Hara and Gu with an adjustable density with the determination and rendering of transparency taught by Kim in order to enable rendering of clouds or fine dust which are commonly found difficult to express in three dimensions (Kim Paragraph 171).
28. Regarding claim 18, Hara in view of Gu and Kim teaches the limitations of claim 15. Hara fails to teach the method wherein computing the integration value further comprises: computing a summation of the adjustable density value multiplied by noise values corresponding to locations of each of the first plurality of points within the 3D noise texture.
Gu teaches the method wherein computing the integration value further comprises: computing a summation of the adjustable density value multiplied by noise values corresponding to locations of each of the first plurality of points within the 3D noise texture (Paragraph 70 teaches the densities are summed to obtain the total density of the 3D volumetric cloud in the line of sight; Paragraph 72 teaches the densities are sampled from the plurality of points within the 3D noise texture space. Based on the summed and overall density, the transparency is determined. The computed overall density is the computed integration value).
Hara, Gu, and Kim are considered analogous to the claimed invention as because both are in the same field of rendering semi-transparent objects. Thus, it would have been obvious to a person holding ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to modify the method of rendering a semi-transparent object taught by Hara in view of Kim with the noise texture and integration value taught by Gu in order to render three-dimensional clouds with realistic lighting effects without using too much storage space (Gu Paragraph 7).
Conclusion
29. The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Halen (U.S. Patent Application Publication No. 2020/0273239 A1) teaches rendering shadows of transparent objects by analyzing the rays traveling through the transparent object.
Wada (U.S. Patent Application Publication No. 2003/0193496 A1) teaches rendering a semi-transparent object like fog using a texture map.
Gardiner et al. (U.S. Patent Publication No. 9,092,888 B1) teaches rendering a volumetric object with atmospheric effects like dust, smoke, clouds, and fog.
30. Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to CHRISTINE Y AHN whose telephone number is (571)272-0672. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 8-5pm.
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, Alicia Harrington can be reached at (571)272-2330. 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.
/CHRISTINE YERA AHN/Examiner, Art Unit 2615
/DANIEL F HAJNIK/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2616