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 .
Response to Amendment
Examiner acknowledges receipt of Applicant’s amendments and arguments filed 04/01/2026. The arguments set forth are addressed herein below.
Applicant’s amendments necessitated the new ground of rejection set forth herein; therefore, this action is made Final.
Applicant’s IDS submission is acknowledged and provided herewith.
Claims 1-15 are now pending.
Claim Objections
Claim 13 is objected to because of the following informalities: it recites a dependency from claim “12F” which does not exist. Appropriate correction is required.
AIA Notice
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 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.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
The following is a quotation of the appropriate paragraphs of 35 U.S.C. 102 that form the basis for the rejections under this section made in this Office action:
A person shall be entitled to a patent unless –
(a)(1) the claimed invention was patented, described in a printed publication, or in public use, on sale or otherwise available to the public before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
(a)(2) the claimed invention was described in a patent issued under section 151, or in an application for patent published or deemed published under section 122(b), in which the patent or application, as the case may be, names another inventor and was effectively filed before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claims 1-15 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) as being U.S. Patent 10,726,611 to Court.
Regarding Claim 1, and similarly recited Claims 11 and 12, (Currently Amended) A method of virtual character modelling, comprising the steps of:
defining a damage map for all or part of a virtual character, the damage map having a form corresponding to a texture map applied to the all or part of the virtual character, herein each point on the damage map corresponds to a respective vertex, texel, or pixel of the virtual character, thereby providing a spatial record of damage (figs. 3-5, Col. 1:30 – Col. 2:34, Col. 7:15-50 discloses an instance of a virtual object, a blend map in texture form, the blend map having grid elements that correspond respectively to pixels on a location of the particular instance of the object; the blend map is therefore a texture-form map whose points (grid elements) correspond to respective pixels/locations of the object surface);
assigning initial damage values to each point on the damage map (figs. 4A-4B, figs. 3-5, Col. 1:30 – Col. 2:34, Col. 8:45-60, Col. 9:28-55 discloses each grid element of the blend map stores a transform value indicating a degree of blending between an unaltered (undamaged) version and an altered (damaged) version of the object; the initial (unaltered) state corresponds to assigning initial values to each point);
recording on the damage map damage caused by a spatial interaction of a virtual damage agent at one or more of the points on the virtual character corresponding to the points on the damage map by altering the damage values that those points (figs. 4A-4B, Col. 9:8 – Col. 10:30 discloses the blend map is dynamically updated based on one or more actions within the gaming environment, expressly indicating the amount of damage a player has inflicted on the object at the locations where damage has occurred; locations corresponding to grid elements indicating heavy damage are recorded in the blend map); and
modifying an aspect of the virtual character in response to the recorded damage (figs. 4A-4B, 7, Col. 1:30 – Col. 2:34, Col. 6:15-55 discloses blending the unaltered and altered versions according to the per-grid element transform values so that the damaged locations the rendered shape/appearance conforms more to the damaged version).
Regarding Claim 2, and similarly recited Claim 13, (Previously Presented) Court discloses the method of claim 1, in which the spatial interaction comprises one or more of:
i. an intersection by the virtual character with at least part of the virtual damage agent;
ii. an intersection by the virtual character with at least part of an area effect associated with the virtual damage agent (Col. 6:15-55);
iii. an intersection by the virtual character with at least part of a damage pattern associated with the virtual damage agent; and
iv. an intersection by the virtual character with at least part of a hit box associated with the virtual damage agent.
Regarding Claim 3, (Previously Presented) Court discloses the method of claim 1, in which the spatial interaction comprises one or more of:
i. a predetermined interaction;
ii. one of a selection of interactions; and
iii. a simulated interaction (Col. 6:15-67).
Regarding Claim 4, (Currently Amended) Court discloses the method of claim 1,in which a point on the damage map corresponds to one of:
i. a respective pixel of the virtual character (figs. 3-5, Col. 1:30 – Col. 2:34, Col. 7:15-50);
ii. a respective texel of the virtual character;
iii. a respective vertex of the virtual character mesh; and
[[iii.]]iv. all or part of a respective polygon of the virtual character mesh.
Regarding Claim 5, (Currently Amended) Court discloses the method of claim 1,in which the step of recording damage on the damage map comprises modifying the damage value at a point on the damage map to an extent responsive to a weighting that in turn is responsive to [[the]]a current damage value at that point (Col. 9:8-55).
Regarding Claim 6, (Original) Court discloses the method of claim 1, comprising the step of
defining a weighting map for all or part of a virtual character, the weighting map having a form corresponding to a texture map applied to the all or part of the virtual character, with points on the weighting map corresponding to points on the damage map (Col. 9:8-55); and
the step of recording damage on the damage map comprises modifying the damage value at a respective point on the damage map to an extent responsive to a corresponding weighting indicated by the weighting map (figs. 3-5, Col. 1:30 – Col. 2:34, Col. 9:8-55).
Regarding Claim 7, (Currently Amended) Court discloses the method of claim 1, comprising the step of: changing the damage map in response to a change to [[the]]a shape of the character model (figs. 3-5, Col. 1:30 – Col. 2:34, Col. 9:8-55).
Regarding Claim 8, (Original) Court discloses the method of claim 1, comprising the step of: recording on the damage map healing at one or more of the points on the virtual character corresponding to the points on the damage map by altering the damage values that those points (figs. 3-5, Col. 1:30 – Col. 2:34, Col. 9:8-55).
Regarding Claim 9, and similarly recited Claim 14, (Previously Presented) Court discloses the method of claim 1, in which the step of modifying an aspect of the virtual character in response to the recorded damage comprises one or more of:
i. modifying a displacement map;
ii. modifying a bump map;
iii. modifying a normal map;
iv. modifying a transparency map; and
v. modifying a blend map (figs. 3-5, Col. 1:30 – Col. 2:34, Col. 8:20-55);
for the character responsive to the values of the damage map.
Regarding Claim 10, and similarly recited Claim 15, (Original) Court discloses the method of claim 1, in which two of more damage maps for a character are defined in respective colour channels of a data structure corresponding to a texture map applied to the all or part of the virtual character (figs. 3-5, Col. 1:30 – Col. 2:34, Col. 9:8-55).
Response to Arguments/Remarks
Applicant’s arguments filed 04/01/2026 have been fully considered but they are moot because the arguments do not apply to any of the references used in the current rejection.
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 SHAUNA-KAY HALL whose telephone number is (571)270-1419. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 9:00AM-5:00PM.
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, Xuan Thai can be reached at (571) 272-7147. 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.
/S.N.H/Examiner, Art Unit 3715
/XUAN M THAI/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3715
Prosecution Insights