DETAILED ACTION
This action is responsive to the application filed 5/17/2024.
Claims 1-14 are pending.
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.
This application currently names joint inventors. In considering patentability of the claims the examiner presumes that the subject matter of the various claims was commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the claimed invention(s) absent any evidence to the contrary. Applicant is advised of the obligation under 37 CFR 1.56 to point out the inventor and effective filing dates of each claim that was not commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the later invention in order for the examiner to consider the applicability of 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(C) for any potential 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) prior art against the later invention.
Claims 1-14 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Yu, et al., U.S. PGPUB No. 2019/0304166 (“Yu”).
With regard to Claim 1, Yu teaches a method comprising: at a computer system in communication with a display generation component and one or more input devices ([0057]-[0059]):
while displaying, via the display generation component, content of a first application in a three-dimensional environment, displaying, via the display generation component, the system user interface in the three-dimensional environment, including in accordance with a determination that the first application is configured to display content in a first mode of operation ([0032]-[0033] describes that the system displays within a virtual environment a planar in an interface with an alternative virtual environment, where a virtual environment may refer to a 3D model. Therefore, the interface is available only in accordance with determining the application is displaying these types of environments), wherein
the first mode of operation is a mode in which the first application is permitted to display content that is spatially distributed throughout an available display area of the three-dimensional environment ([0032] describes that the planar element exists within a displayed virtual environment, also shown at Figs. 2-11),
displaying, in the system user interface, a first selectable option that is selectable to cease display of the content of the first application in the first mode of operation ([0052]-[0054] describe that the planar element is selectable such that the alternative virtual environment can be displayed in place of the currently displayed virtual environment);
while displaying the system user interface that includes the first selectable option, detecting, via the one or more input devices, a second input corresponding to selection of the first selectable option; and in response to detecting the second input, ceasing to display the content in the first mode of operation ([0052]-[0054] and Figs. 7-9 show that the user selects the element corresponding to the alternative virtual environment, causing that environment to be displayed and the previous virtual environment to cease being displayed).
Yu also teaches displaying a system user interface for controlling one or more functionalities of the computer system, wherein the system user interface is a user interface of an operating system of the computer system. [0057] describes the arrangement of a computing device and its components to implement the described displays that operate on the device, as part of its operating systems. [0047] and Fig. 2 describe a menu environment, which includes the planar elements offering the ability to browse available virtual reality applications and other elements.
Yu does not explicitly teach detecting, via the one or more input devices, a first input corresponding to a request to display the system user interface, or displaying the interface in response to detecting the first input. Examiner takes Official notice that detecting an input corresponding to a request to display a system user interface and displaying the interface in response to detecting the input was well-known to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time this application was filed. Examples of this which would be well-known are various keyboard and mouse shortcuts in the Windows operating system that, when input, display a system menu interface for selecting from among various options for displaying specific content.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time this application was filed to modify Yu to include this well-known function such that a user input selectively displays the interface menu described in Yu. One of skill in the art would have been motivated to make this modification, to improve user experience. Yu’s menu interface takes up a significant portion of the display space, and therefore would interfere with user viewing and enjoyment of a virtual environment if persistently displayed. By enabling selective display of the menu, users can experience a full, unobstructed virtual environment while retaining the ability to navigate to alternative environments as desired.
Claim 13 recites the computer system carrying out the method of Claim 1, and is similarly rejected. Claim 14 recites a medium storing program instructions executed to implement the computer system carrying out the method of Claim 1, and is likewise rejected.
With regard to Claim 2, Yu suggests that in response to detecting the first input, in accordance with a determination that the first application is not configured to display content in the first mode of operation, forgoing the display of the first selectable option in the system user interface. [0032]-[0033] describe that the planar element are associated with an alternative virtual environment, where a virtual environment refers to a three-dimensional model. Therefore, a planar element is not associated by the system with an application which is not configured to include a 3D model, as this is the content specifically identified to be associated with a planar element in the interface.
With regard to Claim 3, Yu teaches displaying the content of the first application in the first mode of operation includes preventing concurrent display of content of other applications in the three-dimensional environment while the first application is displaying content in the first mode of operation. Fig. 9 shows that a virtual environment can be the only thing displayed, with no other content or applications displayed concurrently therewith.
With regard to Claim 4, Yu teaches that ceasing to display the content in the first mode of operation includes ceasing to display content of the first application in the three-dimensional environment. [0052]-[0054] and Figs. 7-9 show that the user selects the element corresponding to the alternative virtual environment, causing that environment to be displayed and the previous virtual environment to cease being displayed in the three-dimensional environment.
With regard to Claim 5, Yu teaches that ceasing to display the content in the first mode of operation includes displaying the content of the first application in a second mode of operation, different from the first mode of operation, wherein the second mode of operation is a mode in which the content of the first application is restricted to being displayed in one or more application containers. Figs. 10 and 11 and [0055]-[0056] show that the previously displayed content that has ceased to be displayed can be displayed in a planar element container in the interface.
With regard to Claim 6, Yu teaches that displaying the content of the first application in the second mode of operation includes displaying a second selectable option that is selectable to display the content of the first application in the first mode of operation. [0056] describes that the user can interact with the planar element displaying the content previously displayed. [0052] describes selecting a planar element to display the corresponding virtual environment.
With regard to Claim 7, Yu teaches that when the first input is detected, the content of the first application is displayed with a first visual appearance, and while displaying the system user interface, a visual appearance of the content of the first application is changed from the first visual appearance to a second visual appearance different from the first visual appearance. Figs. 3-7 show that the content is displayed with different appearances as the view moves around the virtual space while the interface is displayed.
With regard to Claim 8, Yu teaches changing the visual appearance of the content of the first application from the first visual appearance to the second visual appearance includes changing the visual appearance of the content of the first application by a first amount, the method further comprising: in response to detecting the second input, displaying the content of the first application in a second mode of operation with a third visual appearance, wherein the second mode of operation is a mode in which the content of the first application is restricted to being displayed in one or more application containers.
[0048]-[0051] describe that the visual appearance changes an amount relative to the change of the user’s viewing angles and direction. [0055]-[0056] and Figs. 10-11 show that the previous virtual environment is subsequently displayed in an application container.
Yu also teaches while displaying the content of the first application in the second mode of operation, displaying the system user interface in the three-dimensional environment, wherein displaying the system user interface includes changing the visual appearance of the content of the first application from the third visual appearance to a fourth visual appearance different from the third visual appearance, and wherein changing the visual appearance of the content of the first application from the third visual appearance to the fourth visual appearance includes changing the visual appearance of the content of the first application by a second amount, greater than the first amount.
Yu teaches at [0055]-[0056] that the first virtual environment can be moved around in an interface when displayed with the alternate environment previously selected. Yu also shows at Figs. 2-8 that the opened menu allows for further displays of a virtual environment in a container to move around, and by an amount that changes more drastically in response to more drastic head movements.
Yu does not explicitly teach detecting a third input corresponding to a request to display the system user interface; and in response to receiving the third input, displaying the system user interface. Examiner takes Official notice that detecting an input corresponding to a request to display a system user interface and displaying the interface in response to detecting the input was well-known to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time this application was filed. Examples of this which would be well-known are various keyboard and mouse shortcuts in the Windows operating system that, when input, display a system menu interface for selecting from among various options for displaying specific content.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time this application was filed to modify Yu to include this well-known function such that a user input selectively displays the interface menu described in Yu. One of skill in the art would have been motivated to make this modification, to improve user experience. Yu’s menu interface takes up a significant portion of the display space, and therefore would interfere with user viewing and enjoyment of a virtual environment if persistently displayed. By enabling selective display of the menu, users can experience a full, unobstructed virtual environment while retaining the ability to navigate to alternative environments as desired.
With regard to Claim 9, Yu teaches prior to displaying the content of the first application in the three-dimensional environment in the first mode of operation, displaying, in the three-dimensional environment, one or more user interfaces of one or more applications in a second mode of operation, different from the first mode of operation, wherein the second mode of operation is a mode in which the content of the first application is restricted to being displayed in one or more application containers; while displaying the one or more user interfaces of the one or more applications in the second mode of operation, receiving, via the one or more input devices, a third input corresponding to a request to display the content of the first application in the three-dimensional environment in the first mode of operation; in response to receiving the third input: displaying the content of the first application in the three-dimensional environment in the first mode of operation; ceasing to display the one or more user interfaces of the one or more applications in the three-dimensional environment; and in response to receiving the second input, redisplaying the one or more user interfaces of the one or more applications in the three-dimensional environment.
Yu at [0055]-[0056] describes that a first environment is displayed in a planar container, which can be interacted with by a user. As explained at [0052] a user can select a planar tile in order to expand the environment shown therein to take up the full space of the displayed virtual environment instead of being displayed in the tile/container. Therefore, one of skill in the art would understand that the system of Yu functions such that the environment 200 shown in Fig. 2, over which the interface for selecting another environment is overlaid, would be accessible by the currently displayed environment having been previously viewed and selected in the interface. Similarly, additional inputs to successively display other environments and this environment would be understood by those of skill in the art as suggested by the disclosure of Yu.
With regard to Claim 10, Yu teaches that when the third input was received, the one or more user interfaces were displayed with a first spatial arrangement, and redisplaying the one or more user interfaces in the three-dimensional environment includes redisplaying the one or more user interfaces with the first spatial arrangement. Fig. 2 shows an arrangement of interfaces, where the panel 220 for a selectable environment is displayed. Fig. 11 shows an interface where the panel for the replaced environment is displayed in a similar position, thereby suggesting that interfaces are subsequently displayed in a same spatial arrangement at various times.
With regard to Claim 11, Yu teaches that the first spatial arrangement includes a spatial arrangement of the one or more user interfaces relative to each other. Figs. 2 and 11 both show the selectable interface for expanding respective virtual environments are spatially arranged at a right end of the interface. Fig. 2 also shows the selectable panel in that location.
With regard to Claim 12, Yu teaches that the first spatial arrangement includes a spatial arrangement of the one or more user interfaces relative to the three-dimensional environment. Figs. 2-6 show that the arrangement of elements in the interface remain in a fixed position relative to the virtual environment within which they are displayed.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. Church, U.S. PGPUB No. 2017/0263033 and Bennett, et al., U.S. PGPUB No. 2019/0278432 teach particularly relevant prior art methods for user interfaces integrated into a virtual environment.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to KEITH D BLOOMQUIST whose telephone number is (571)270-7718. The examiner can normally be reached M-F, 8:30-5 PM.
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, Kieu Vu can be reached at 571-272-4057. 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.
/KEITH D BLOOMQUIST/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2171
4/22/2026
Prosecution Insights