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 .
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 101
35 U.S.C. 101 reads as follows:
Whoever invents or discovers any new and useful process, machine, manufacture, or composition of matter, or any new and useful improvement thereof, may obtain a patent therefor, subject to the conditions and requirements of this title.
Claims 15-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. §101 because the claimed invention is directed to non-statutory subject matter.
In particular, these claims recite a “computer readable medium”. The United States Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO) is obliged to give claims their broadest reasonable interpretation consistent with the specification during proceedings before the USPTO. The broadest reasonable interpretation of a claim drawn to “a computer readable medium” or “a computer readable storage” typically covers forms of non-transitory tangible media and transitory propagating signals per se, particularly when the specification does not limit the terms to exclude transitory media. The examiner suggests that these claims should be amended to recite “a non-transitory computer readable medium” to overcome the §101 rejection.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
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.
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.
Claim(s) 1-20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Shipkov et al. (Pub. No. US 2017/0263051), in view of Spence et al. (Pub. No. US 2017/0352325).
Regarding claim 1, Shipkov discloses a system comprising:
at least one processor (See par. 134); and
at least one memory device, wherein the at least one memory device is communicatively coupled to the at least one processor (See par. 134), the at least one memory device storing computer-executable instructions (See par. 135) defining at least an animation solver (The algorithm illustrated in Figs. 4A-4D could be interpreted as an animation solver because it determines how a high-resolution (hi-res) mesh representing an object is deformed based on a proxy, low-resolution (lo-res) mesh), wherein execution of the computer-executable instructions, during runtime of the animation solver, causes the at least one processor to:
receive a joint selection corresponding to a first joint among a plurality of joints (Par. 95: “In Operation 442, one of the instances of the first relaxed points RncL is selected”. In particular, a relaxed point is derived from an Hn point on a hi-res mesh. Pars. 84 and 94 give an example of selecting an Hn point, such as vertex 208-CD on the hi-res mesh 102 in Fig. 2. Vertex 208-CD could be interpreted as a joint because it is a joint of the two edges 208-C and 208-D);
instantiate a locator object in a first world space position (Par. 107: “As shown in FIG. 4C, per Operation 460 and for at least one embodiment, a second deformed proxy mesh is obtained or generated”, and par. 85: “In Operation 422, the closest point “Pn” on the first proxy mesh 104 relative to the selected Hnth point is found. Point Pn can be represented as a point matrix existing in three dimensions in the virtual space on an nth proxy mesh coordinate system, such as coordinate system 214 (FIG. 2). For example, in FIG. 2, the closet point on the proxy mesh 104 to vertex 208-CD is vertex 210”. In particular, a point on the proxy mesh that corresponds to the selected point on the hi-res mesh could be interpreted as a “locator object”. Furthermore, pars. 86-87 disclose that points on the proxy mesh and points on the hi-res mesh have different coordinate systems. The coordinate system of points on the proxy mesh could be viewed as a first world coordinate system);
translate the first world space position of the locator object to a local position corresponding to the first joint (See steps 444-448 in Fig. 4B and the associated description. More specifically, a transformation matrix could be used to translate a point on the coordinate system of the proxy mesh (world coordinate system) to a point on the coordinate system of the hi-res mesh (local coordinate system));
cause the first joint to be manipulated to the local position based in part on joint logic corresponding to the joint selection (See step 462 in Fig. 4C and par. 108. The transformation matrices could be interpreted as the joint logic); and
produce one or more (Par. 69: “it is to be appreciated that any number of incremental movements from the relaxed state to the final state may be modeled and captured as frames, as a given animator may desire for any given project”).
Shipkov, however, does not disclose that the generated frames are keyframes.
In the same field of animation, Spence teaches an animation technique based on keyframes (Par. 59: “In one embodiment some applications can provide animation key-frames to the window server 114. The window server 114 can then generate additional, interpolated frames to enable smooth animation of the transitions between the key-frames. The key-frames and the transition frames can be scheduled within the timestamp queue 121 for processing”).
It would have been obvious to one skilled in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to incorporate keyframe-based animation taught by Spence into Shipkov by requiring a user to only define critical, "key" poses or positions, while software automatically interpolates the "in-between" frames. This approach significantly boosts efficiency, enables smooth, complex, and consistent motion, and allows precise control over timing, easing, and artistic style.
Regarding claim 2, Shipkov in view of Spence teaches the system of claim 1, wherein causing the first joint to be manipulated to the local position causes one or more joints coupled to the first joint to be manipulated in response to the manipulation of the first joint (Shipkov, pars. 67 and 69).
Regarding claim 3, Shipkov in view of Spence teaches the system of claim 2, wherein joints coupled to the first joint are each manipulated based in part on the joint logic corresponding to each coupled joint (Shipkov, par. 87: “The generation of transformation matrices, for at least one embodiment, is accomplished on a point by point basis”).
Regarding claim 4, Shipkov in view of Spence teaches the system of claim 3, wherein the joint logic is configurable (Par. 87 cited above suggests that a first transformation matrix applied to a first point Hn1 may be different from a second transformation matrix applied to a second point Hn2. This means the transformation matrices are configurable).
Regarding claim 5, Shipkov in view of Spence teaches the system of claim 4, wherein the joint logic enables the animation solver to manipulate joints without use of rig objects (Shipkov, par. 107: “such deformation of the first proxy mesh may arise, for example, by an animator's manual, semi-automatic or automatic manipulation of an animation skeleton corresponding to the first proxy mesh and the first hi-res mesh. Such deformation may also occur by an animator's manipulation of the first proxy mesh itself, without the use of an animation skeleton”. A skeleton is a rig object).
Regarding claim 6, Shipkov in view of Spence teaches the system of claim 5, wherein the one or more keyframes produced include a timestamp corresponding to one or more animation sequences (See par. 43 of Spence).
Regarding claim 7, Shipkov in view of Spence teaches the system of claim 6, wherein the one or more keyframes produced are used to produce a keyframe animation through keyframe interpolation (See par. 59 of Spence cited above).
Claims 8-14 recite similar limitations as respective claims 1-7, but are directed to a method. Since Shipkov also discloses such a method (See the abstract, for example), these claims could be rejected under the same rationales set forth in the rejection of their respective claims.
Claims 15-20 recite similar limitations as respective claims 1-6, but are directed to a computer readable medium (CRM). Since Shipkov also discloses such a CRM (See par. 144, for example), these claims could be rejected under the same rationales set forth in the rejection of their respective claims.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to PHONG X NGUYEN whose telephone number is (571)270-1591. The examiner can normally be reached Mon-Fri 8am - 5pm 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, King Poon can be reached at (571)272-7440. 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.
/PHONG X NGUYEN/ Primary Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2617