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 .
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.
Claim(s) 1, 15 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Chandler et al. (“Immersive landscapes modelling ecosystem reference conditions in virtual reality”, 202103, hereinafter Chandler), in view of Hannah Erickson et al. (“XR in Sustainability: A Holistic Approach to Testing Transportation Design Proposals”, 2022, hereinafter Erickson).
Regarding Claim 15. Chandler teaches an interactive virtual reality (VR) environment based on biomimicry, comprising: at least one VR output device to generate a virtual reality environment for the user simulating a natural ecosystem (Chandler, Page 1295, "In this article, we showcase a proof-of-concept immersive virtual reality (VR) visualisation of an exemplar dynamic ecosystem model" "exported as an immersive experience mediated by VR headsets"); at least one VR input device to receive a user selection of a [[ biomimicry ]] design principle from the simulated natural ecosystem (Chandler, Page 1302; "The presentation consisted of an introduction to the project and ecosystem modelling" 1301, "Using an interactive dashboard (Fig. 5g, 5h), the user can adjust sliders for the time of the day and month and see the model and lighting alter accordingly"); at least one computer processor to process the user selection of the [[ biomimicry ]] design principle and apply the [[ biomimicry ]] design principle to a technology in an urban environment (Chandler, Page 1307, "VR landscapes have the potential to not only help land managers and policymakers make better decisions, but also to engage and inform students of ecology, and citizens, living in increasingly urban environments(' Page 1302, "the user can adjust sliders for the time of the day and month and see the model and lighting alter accordingly"); and a computer-generated simulation of the urban environment showing the technology incorporating the [[ biomimicry ]] design principle (Chandler, Page 1295, "Virtual Reality can engage people who live in increasingly urban environments by creating a visceral or emotive response").
But Chandler does not explicitly disclose technology incorporating the biomimicry
design principle.
However, Erickson teaches at least one VR input device to receive a user selection of a biomimicry design principle from the simulated natural ecosystem (Erickson, Page 36, "The first topic explored was the availability of extended reality tools. Extended reality (XR) is an umbrella term for all the immersive technologies - augmented reality, virtual reality, and mixed reality" 39, "placing users in the perspective of animals in urban environments, using principles of nature (biomimicry) to design better system"; Page 7, "natural ecosystems have been devastated by the creation of infrastructure"); at least one computer processor to process the user selection of the biomimicry design principle and apply the biomimicry design principle to a technology in an urban environment (Erickson, Page 1, "employ extended reality technology as a medium to test the social, environmental, and economic viability of sustainable transportation solutions before they are built", Page 39, "using principles of nature (biomimicry) to design better systems"; Page 30, "using VR in architecture to test how users interact with spaces"; Page 1, "employ extended reality technology as a medium to test the social, environmental, and economic viability of sustainable transportation solutions before they are built"); a computer-generated simulation of the urban environment showing the technology incorporating the biomimicry design principle (Erickson, Page 33, "XR simulations for researching the sustainability of transportation, VR may be most beneficial because of the immersive nature of the software"; Page 28, "touching on city planning ... in cities around the world, where urban planners have attempted to improve the status quo"; Page 39, " ... using principles of nature (biomimicry) to design better systems").
Erickson and Chandler are analogous since both of them are dealing with immersive XRNR simulations that allow users to experience and interact with computer-generated environments, where Chandler provides an immersive virtual reality (VR) visualization exported as an immersive experience mediated by VR headsets. Erickson provided a way of employing XR simulation in city-planning/urban contexts, including an XR simulation manifest and applying on city planning and using XR to test the viability of sustainable transportation solutions before they are built while also applying principles of nature (biomimicry) to design better systems. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention was made to incorporate biomimicry principles into the simulated experience taught by Erickson into modified invention off Chandler such that extending Chandler's immersive VR ecosystem experience (VR headsets; interactive user control causing the model to alter) to support an XR simulation for city planning/urban technologies informed by biomimicry principles. The motivation is to test the viability of sustainable transportation solutions before they are built using XR discussed by Erickson in Page 27.
Regarding Claim 1, it recites limitations similar in scope to the limitations of Claim 15 but as a method and the combination of Chandler and Erickson teaches all the limitations as of Claim 15. Therefore is rejected under the same rationale.
Claim(s) 2, 3, 8, 16, 17 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Chandler et al. (“Immersive landscapes modelling ecosystem reference conditions in virtual reality”, 202103, hereinafter Chandler), in view of Hannah Erickson et al. (“XR in Sustainability: A Holistic Approach to Testing Transportation Design Proposals”, 2022, hereinafter Erickson) as applied to Claim 1, 15 above respectively and further in view of Jamei et al. (“Biomimicry and the Built Environment Learning from Natures Solutions”, 20210816, hereinafter Jamei).
Regarding Claim 2, the combination of Chandler and Erickson teaches the
invention in Claim 1.
The combination further teaches [[ matching the biomimicry design principle with the technology based on the ability ]] of the biomimicry design principle [[ to address a problem solved by the technology]] (Chandler, Page 1302, "Procedure g) was initially designed for VR headsets and hand-held controllers, using a tracking system that allowed users to move around in virtual space")
Erickson teaches [[ matching the biomimicry design principle with the technology
based on the ability ]] of the biomimicry design principle [[ to address a problem solved by the technology]]. (Erickson, Page 39, "using principles of nature (biomimicry) to
design better systems")
Chandler and Erickson are analogous since both of them are dealing with immersive XRNR environments used for system exploration and design. Chandler provided a way of an interactive VR environment in which user interactions modify a rendered model. Erickson provided a way of applying biomimicry principles to design better systems. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention was made to incorporate the use of biomimicry principles as system design guidance taught by Erickson into the modified
invention of Chandler so that biomimicry principles can be used within the interactive
VR environment to guide technology design. The motivation is to design better systems
using principles of nature, as discussed by Erickson (PDF p. 41 , "using principles of
nature (biomimicry) to design better systems").
The combination does not explicitly disclose but Jamei teaches matching the
biomimicry design principle ([with the technology]] based on the ability of the biomimicry
design principle to address a problem solved by the technology. (Jamei, Page 2,
"Biomimicry is also known for its problem-driven or solution-driven approach to
architectural design issues ... In this approach, the designer explores solutions to
address the problems through biology, whereas in the solution-driven approach
biology is used as a solution to copy and then transfer to design system ... ")
Chandler and Jamei are analogous since both of them are dealing with workflows
that translate environmental or biological information into design solutions. Chandler
provided a way of presenting and interacting with information in a VR environment.
Jamei provided a way of selecting biological solutions using a problem-driven
biomimicry approach. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in
the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention was made to incorporate
problem-driven biomimicry selection taught by Jamei into the modified invention of
Chandler so that biomimicry principles addressing design problems can be selected and
used within the VR environment. The motivation is to address design problems by exploring biological solutions, as discussed by Jamei (Page 2, "problem-driven ... designer explores solutions to address the problems through biology").
Regarding Claim 3, the combination of Chandler and Erickson teaches the
invention in Claim 1.
The combination further teaches [[ selecting the biomimicry design principle from a plurality of biomimicry design principles having naturally occurring characteristics that address the problem solved by the technology in a different way]].
(Chandler, Page 1295, "immersive virtual reality (VR) visualisation of an exemplar
dynamic ecosystem model")
Chandler does not explicitly disclose but Erickson teaches [[selecting the
biomimicry design principle from a plurality of biomimicry design principles having
naturally occurring characteristics that address the problem solved by the technology in
a different way]]. (Erickson, Page 39, "using principles of nature (biomimicry) to
design better systems")
Chandler and Erickson are analogous since both of them are dealing with
immersive XRNR environments for exploring environments and applying nature inspired
concepts to design. Chandler provided a way of immersive VR ecosystem visualization. Erickson provided a way of using biomimicry principles in system design. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention was made to incorporate biomimicry-based design principles derived from nature taught by Erickson into the modified invention of Chandler so that nature-inspired design principles can be selected from the simulated ecosystem within the VR environment. The motivation is to use principles of nature to design better systems, as discussed by Erickson (Page 41 ).
The combination does not explicitly disclose but Jamei teaches selecting the
biomimicry design principle from a plurality of biomimicry design principles [[having
naturally occurring characteristics that address the problem solved by the technology in
a different way]]. (Jamei, Page 2, "Biomimicry inspires architecture in three ways;
organism (imitation of nature), behavior (imitation of natural processes), and
ecosystem levels (imitation of the working principles of ecosystems)")
Chandler and Jamei are analogous since both of them are dealing with extracting useful design knowledge from nature and ecosystems. Chandler provided a way of immersive VR visualization of an ecosystem. Jamei provided a way of organizing biomimicry inspirations into multiple categories, including organism-level, behavior-level, and ecosystem-level approaches. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention was made to incorporate a plurality of biomimicry design principles organized at different biological
levels taught by Jamei into the modified invention of Chandler so that multiple
biomimicry design principles can be selected from the simulated ecosystem within the
VR environment. The motivation is to use multiple biomimicry approaches to inspire
design, as discussed by Jamei (Page 2, "organism ... behavior ... ecosystem levels").
Regarding Claim 8, the combination of Chandler and Erickson teaches the
invention in Claim 1.
The combination further teaches rendering for the user, via the at least one VR output device (Chandler, Page 1295, "immersive virtual reality (VR) visualisation
of an exemplar dynamic ecosystem model")
The combination does not explicitly disclose but Jamei teaches a hypothetical city of the future to explore that is based on a current city in the same state that the ecosystem is located (Jamei, Page 1, “Biomimicry is the design that is inspired by nature in terms of functional concepts of an organism or an ecosystem” Page 10, “Engineers and scientists have many future possibilities in mimicking nature and developing engineering designs and construction”; Page 2, “The ecosystem and nature can be mimicked and contribute to the resilient, sustainable, and adaptable built environment, which improves the capacity of regeneration in the natural environment and adaptation against climate change”).
Jamei and Chandler are analogous since both of them are dealing with workflows
that translate environmental or biological information into design solutions. Chandler
provided a way of presenting and interacting with information in a VR environment.
Jamei provided a way of selecting biological solutions using dynamic ecosystem to create future city planning through biomimicry and learning process. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention was made to incorporate biomimicry process to create future city taught by Jamei into the modified invention of Chandler such that system will be able to dynamically modifying and creating the future city planning in order for user to see what is the potential future city will be based on the biomimicry and built environment which enhance the system functionality and increase the flexibility of the system.
Regarding Claim 16, it recites limitations similar in scope to the limitations of Claim 2 and therefore is rejected under the same rationale.
Regarding Claim 17, it recites limitations similar in scope to the limitations of Claim 3 and therefore is rejected under the same rationale.
Claim(s) 4-6, 12, 18-20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Chandler et al. (“Immersive landscapes modelling ecosystem reference conditions in virtual reality”, 202103, hereinafter Chandler), in view of Hannah Erickson et al. (“XR in Sustainability: A Holistic Approach to Testing Transportation Design Proposals”, 2022, hereinafter Erickson) as applied to Claim 1, 15 above respectively and further in view of Holz et al. US 10885710 B2, hereinafter Holz).
Regarding Claim 4, the combination of Chandler and Erickson teaches the
invention in Claim 1.
The combination further teaches receiving, via [[ a motion detector ]], a direction
for the user to travel in the virtual reality environment. (Chandler, Page 1302, "Procedure g) was initially designed for VR headsets and hand-held controllers,
using a tracking system that allowed ... users to move around in virtual space.")
rendering, via the at least one VR output device, a naturally occurring plant, animal,
and/or object [[ corresponding to the direction the user travels in the virtual reality
environment ]]. (Chandler, Page 1295, "immersive virtual reality (VR) visualisation
of an exemplar dynamic ecosystem model")
Chandler does not explicitly disclose but Erickson teaches receiving, via a
motion detector, a direction for the user to travel in the virtual reality environment]].
(Erickson, Page 28, "How might an XR simulation manifest? In a 3rd person view
or a first person"), rendering a naturally occurring plant, animal, and/or object corresponding to the direction the user travels in the virtual reality environment.
(Erickson, Page 39, "placing users in the perspective of animals in urban
environments"; Page 3, “exploring XR beyond headsets, and enabling users to view urban environments from the perspective of animals”; Page 8, “Holistically “biodiversity refers to every living thing, including plants, bacteria, animals, and humans” (nationalgeographic.org)”)
Chandler and Erickson are analogous since both of them are dealing with XRNR
experiences in which a user navigates within a simulated environment. Chandler
provided a way of user movement within a VR environment using tracked input devices.
Erickson provided a way of XR simulations using first-person or third-person viewpoints.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the
effective filing date of the claimed invention was made to incorporate XR navigation
viewpoints for user movement taught by Erickson into the modified invention of
Chandler so that user travel within the VR environment can be presented using XR
simulation viewpoints. The motivation is to provide immersive XR simulation experiences, as discussed by Erickson (Page. 33).
The combination does not explicitly disclose but Holz teaches receiving, via [[a motion detector]], a direction for the user to travel in the virtual reality environment. (Holz, Column 17-18, I. 65, "The VR roam tracking device can ... detect possible
target walkable directions for the user to ... "); rendering, via the at least one VR
output device, a naturally occurring plant [[corresponding to the direction the user
travels in the virtual reality environment]]. (Holz, Column 9-10, Line 25-30, "device can determine where physical obstructions (e.g., ... / trees, curbs, buildings) ... and generate ... corresponding virtual objects ... ")
Chandler and Holz are analogous since both of them are dealing with VR
environments that support tracked user navigation. Chandler provided a way of allowing
users to move within a VR environment using tracking systems. Holz provided a way of
detecting possible travel directions for a user in a VR roaming system. Therefore, it
would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date
of the claimed invention was made to incorporate travel-direction detection for VR
roaming taught by Holz into the modified invention of Chandler so that the VR
environment can determine and guide the direction in which the user travels.
The motivation is to enable guided VR navigation, as discussed by Holz (Column 17-18,
Line 1-35).
Regarding Claim 5, the combination of Chandler and Erickson teaches the
invention in Claim 1.
The combination further teaches receiving, via [[a position of a user tracking
device]], a user selection of a naturally occurring [[ plant, animal, and/or object]] in the
simulated natural ecosystem. (Chandler, Page 1302, "Procedure g) was initially
designed for VR headsets and using a tracking system that allowed ... users to
move around in virtual space.") outputting for the user, via a VR display and/or a VR audio device, [[ the biomimicry design principle corresponding to the user selection of the naturally occurring plant, animal, and/or object]] in the simulated natural ecosystem. (Chandler, Page 1301, "Using an interactive dashboard(Fig. 5g,5h) ... / user can adjust sliders for the time of the day ... / month and see the model and lighting alter accordingly.")
Chandler does not explicitly disclose but Erickson teaches the biomimicry design principle corresponding to the user selection of the naturally occurring plant, animal, and/or object]] in the simulated natural ecosystem (Erickson, Page 36, "The first topic explored was the availability of extended reality tools. Extended reality (XR) is an umbrella term for all the immersive technologies - augmented reality, virtual reality, and mixed reality" 39, "placing users in the perspective of animals in urban environments, using principles of nature (biomimicry) to design better system"; Page 7, "natural ecosystems have been devastated by the creation of infrastructure");
Chandler and Erickson are analogous since both of them are dealing with XRNR
experiences in which a user navigates within a simulated environment. Chandler
provided a way of user movement within a VR environment using tracked input devices.
Erickson provided a way of XR simulations using first-person or third-person viewpoints.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the
effective filing date of the claimed invention was made to incorporate XR navigation
viewpoints for user movement taught by Erickson into the modified invention of
Chandler so that user travel within the VR environment can be presented using XR
simulation viewpoints. The motivation is to provide immersive XR simulation experiences, as discussed by Erickson (Page. 33).
The combination does not explicitly disclose but Holz teaches receiving, via a
position of a user tracking device, a user selection of [[ a naturally occurring plant,
animal, and/or object]] in the simulated natural ecosystem. (Holz, Column 9-10, I. 15,
"system (GPS), that can track its location (and thereby the user) at any given
time."; Holz, Column 19-20, I. 10, "The user can provide the input (e.g., via
speech, controller, eye tracking, motion tracking) to select the destination ... ")
Chandler and Holz are analogous since both of them are dealing with VR
systems that track user position and respond to user input. Chandler provided a way of
tracking user movement in a VR environment. Holz provided a way of tracking user
position and receiving user input selections. Therefore, it would have been obvious to
one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention was
made to incorporate position-based user selection using tracking devices taught by Holz
into the modified invention of Chandler so that user selections in the VR environment
can be determined based on the user's tracked position and input. The motivation is to
enable user selection and interaction based on tracked position, as discussed by Holz
(Column 9-10, I. 15; Column 19-20, Line 10).
Regarding Claim 6, the combination of Chandler and Erickson teaches the
invention in Claim 1.
The combination further teaches [[ rendering a map for the user, via a VR
display]]. (Chandler, Page 1302, "The interactive application described above (Fig.
3h, g) was initially designed for VR headsets and handheld controllers, ... ")
receiving, via a user tracking device, a user selection of [[a location on the map for
virtually exploring ecosystems, biomes, habitats, and/or natural locations to learn about
different living organisms in their natural habitats]]. (Chandler, Page 1302, " ... using a
tracking system that allowed users to move around in virtual space .. ")
The combination does not explicitly disclose but Holz teaches rendering a map
[[for the user, via a VR display]]. (Holz, Column 11-12, Line 10, "are depicted on an
electronic map (e.g., a bird's eye per/ spectivemap) ... ") receiving, via a user
tracking device, a user selection of a location on the map [[for virtually exploring
ecosystems, biomes, habitats, and/or natural locations to learn about different living
organisms in their natural habitats]]. (Holz, Column 9-10, Line 15, "system (GPS),
that can track' its location (and thereby the I user) at any giventime."; Holz,
Column 19-20, Line 10, " ... eyetracking, motiontracking) to selectthe
destination ... ")
Chandler and Holz are analogous since both of them are dealing with VR
environments that allow user navigation through tracked interaction. Chandler provided
a way of VR environments with user movement tracking. Holz provided a way of
displaying locations on an electronic map and receiving user selection of a destination
while tracking user location. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary
skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention was made to
incorporate map-based destination selection with user location tracking taught by Holz
into the modified invention of Chandler so that users can select locations on a map to
navigate within the VR environment. The motivation is to support VR navigation using
map-based selection, as discussed by Holz (Column 11-12, Line 1 O; Column 19-20,
Line 10).
Regarding Claim 18, it recites limitations similar in scope to the limitations of Claim 4 and therefore is rejected under the same rationale.
Regarding Claim 19, it recites limitations similar in scope to the limitations of Claim 5 and therefore is rejected under the same rationale.
Regarding Claim 20, it recites limitations similar in scope to the limitations of Claim 6 and therefore is rejected under the same rationale.
Claim(s) 7, 9 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Chandler et al. (“Immersive landscapes modelling ecosystem reference conditions in virtual reality”, 202103, hereinafter Chandler), in view of Hannah Erickson et al. (“XR in Sustainability: A Holistic Approach to Testing Transportation Design Proposals”, 2022, hereinafter Erickson) as applied to Claim 1 above, further in view of Rezaei et al. (“Transdisciplinarity”, 2022, Springer, hereinafter Rezaei).
Regarding Claim 7, the combination of Chandler and Erickson teaches the
invention in Claim 1.
The combination further teaches rendering in the virtual reality environment, via the VR output device (Chandler, Page 1302, "Procedure g) was initially designed for VR headsets and hand-held controllers, using a tracking system that allowed ... users to move around in virtual space.")
, different living organisms for the user to virtually gather information about the different living organisms (Chandler, Page 1294, “Ecosystems consist of biological communities of interacting organisms and their physical environment”)
, the information including at least a function that the different living organisms has solved, the strategy of how the different living organisms solved the function (Chandler, Page 1299, “The first stage of the virtualization of these plant species involved defining specific information such as height, overall plant profile, and the shape of leaves and flowers, including changes in the size and shape of the plant and leaves at different stages of their lifecycle.” 1306, “Future research might soon attempt the simulation of organic, growing virtual ecosystems that capture the dynamics of forest, soil, hydrological, atmospheric systems and human impacts”),
The combination does not explicitly disclose but Rezaei teaches an abstracted design principle (ADP) with all biology removed so that the user can utilize the information about the different living organisms in application ideas of the user (Rezaei, Page 653, “Abstracted design principles (ADPs) are illustrated, demonstrating how the mechanism works including the scale, texture, subcomponents, behavior, or interconnecting functions” “they reach the crucial and most difficult step, writing an abstracted design principle in which biological terms are eliminated and exchanged for non-biological terms to make this natural design lesson accessible to designers and engineers”; Page 657, “define one biological function, write out the strategy that allows the organism to meet this function, and then write a longer piece about the specific biological mechanism that achieves this strategy”).
Rezaei and Chandler are analogous since both of them are dealing with VR
environments that allow user navigation through tracked interaction. Chandler provided
a way of VR environments with user movement tracking. Rezaei provided a way of using Abstracted design principles mechanism in the biomimicry research process in virtual reality environment to track and project the city planning. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention was made to incorporate Abstracted design principles taught by Rezaei into the modified invention of Chandler such that system can make nature's solutions accessible, boosting creativity, efficiency, and resilience by letting designers visualize complex bio-inspired functions in immersive, interactive 3D environments.
Regarding Claim 9, the combination of Chandler, Erickson and Rezaei teaches the invention in Claim 7.
The combination further teaches rendering for the user, via the at least one VR output device(Chandler, Page 1295, "immersive virtual reality (VR) visualisation
of an exemplar dynamic ecosystem model")
Chandler does not explicitly disclose but Rezaei teaches a virtual guide for the hypothetical city which points out sustainable, resilient, and regenerative features of the hypothetical city (Rezaei, Page 31, “planning will be largely influenced by transdisciplinarity and, above all, by the indeterministic forms of city planning derived from the studies of the biology of evolution” Page 652, “applying scientific principles to create resilient human innovations that are vetted by science and sustainable by design” Page 730, “It will be possible to take a virtual tour through the streets of a digitally crafted three-dimensional ancient city or even chat with some ancient personalities”).
As explained in rejection of claim 7, the obviousness for combining of Abstracted design principles of Rezaei into Chandler is provided above.
Claim(s) 10 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Chandler et al. (“Immersive landscapes modelling ecosystem reference conditions in virtual reality”, 202103, hereinafter Chandler), in view of Hannah Erickson et al. (“XR in Sustainability: A Holistic Approach to Testing Transportation Design Proposals”, 2022, hereinafter Erickson), further in view of Jamei et al. (“Biomimicry and the Built Environment Learning from Natures Solutions”, 20210816, hereinafter Jamei) as applied to Claim 8 above and further in view of Stevens et al. (“The Art and Science of Biomimicry-Abstracting Design Principles from Nature”, 2022, hereinafter Stevens).
Regarding Claim 10, the combination of Chandler, Erickson and Jamei teaches the invention in Claim 8.
The combination further teaches rendering for the user, via the at least one VR output device (Chandler, Page,1293-1294, "Virtual reality (VR) can be used to render virtual landscapes as immersive, visceral experiences and communicate ecosystem dynamics to users in an effective and engaging way ... modelled a reference Australian Box Gum Grassy Woodland landscape"; Page.1302, "We used several Oculus Go all-in-one headsets ... these animated 360° panoramic visualisations allowed the participants to look around the virtual environment while seated with the headsets on."). rendering for the user, via the at least one VR output device, the guide showing the user a future technology (Erickson, Page 1-2, “Industrial designers can leverage extended reality technology as a medium to test the social, environmental, and economic feasibility of sustainable transportation solutions before implementing them,"; "this study examines how current transportation infrastructure can be redesigned ... using extended reality tools. "),
and asking the user to practice biomimicry by matching the future technology to an organism the user encountered in the natural ecosystem so that the participants see how an organism can inspire different technologies (Erickson, Page 3, "Potential areas of application ... include ... adopting biomimicry principles to create better systems, ... enabling users to view urban environments from the perspective of animals < read on evaluating nature-connected design proposals in XR>" ).
As explained in rejection of claim 1, the obviousness for combining of biomimicry principles of Erickson into Chandler is provided above.
But the combination does not explicitly disclose but Stevens teaches the guide showing the user a future technology and asking the user to practice biomimicry by matching the future technology to an organism the user encountered in the natural ecosystem so that the participants see how an organism can inspire different technologies (Stevens, Page 650-651, "matching that function and context to natural mentors" <read on matching the future technology to an organism>; pp.652-653, "researching the function, strategy, and mechanism of adaptations is key for translating those from nature into human design," "writing an abstracted design principle ... to make this natural design lesson accessible to designers and engineers," and "Abstracted design principles (ADPs) ... used as a starting point for design ideation" <read on seeing how an organism can inspire different technologies> ).
Stevens and Chandler are analogous since both of them are dealing with immersive XR experiences to engage users with nature-linked content and evaluate design solutions in simulated environments for education, policy, or design research purposes. Chandler provided a way of constructing and rendering immersive VR ecosystems with headsets and animated ecological scenes for users to experience and evaluate. Stevens provided a way of using XR to present future sustainable technologies/ infrastructure to users for testing and feedback in immersive scenarios. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to incorporate the biomimicry practice and matching workflow taught by Stevens into the modified system of Chandler such that the VR ecosystem experience are combined with a user task that asks users to match a future technology to an organism encountered in the ecosystem such that users see how the organism can inspire different technologies.
Claim(s) 12 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Chandler et al. (“Immersive landscapes modelling ecosystem reference conditions in virtual reality”, 202103, hereinafter Chandler), in view of Hannah Erickson et al. (“XR in Sustainability: A Holistic Approach to Testing Transportation Design Proposals”, 2022, hereinafter Erickson) as applied to Claim 1 above and further in view of Stevens et al. (“The Art and Science of Biomimicry-Abstracting Design Principles from Nature”, 2022, hereinafter Stevens).
Regarding Claim 12, the combination of Chandler and Erickson teaches the
invention in Claim 1.
The combination further teaches rendering for the user, via the at least one VR output device (Chandler, Page.1293-1295, “immersive VR used to communicate ecosystem dynamics and allow experiencing different temporal conditions; citations to related work on "visualize forests under climate change," "walking through the forests of the future," supporting a transition/gateway concept between states/ times), (PA 1, p.1302, "Oculus Go all-in-one headsets ... animated 360° panoramic visualisations allowed the participants to look around the virtual environment").
Chandler does not explicitly disclose but Erickson teaches during ... a travel gateway to a future version of an urban Environment (Erickson, Page.1-3, "test. .. sustainable transportation solutions before implementing them," "comparing rural and urban transportation systems," "adopting biomimicry principles to create better systems," and "enabling users to view urban environments from the perspective of animals.").
As explained in rejection of claim 1, the obviousness for combining of biomimicry principles of Erickson into Chandler is provided above.
The combination does not explicitly disclose but Stevens teaches a … environment for the user to match a biomimicry strategy to a design installation of the technology (Stevens, Page 651, "matching that function and context to natural mentors" < read on matching a biomimicry strategy to a design installation of the technology>; Page 652, "researching the function, strategy, and mechanism of adaptations is key for translating those from nature into human design"; page 652-653, "writing an abstracted design principle ... to make this natural design lesson accessible to designers and engineers," and "Abstracted design principles (ADPs) ... used as a starting point for design ideation" <read on matching the biomimicry strategy to a specific design installation/technology>)
Stevens and Chandler are analogous as both use immersive VR/XR to move users between contexts/ states (ecosystem - designed/ future environments) for learning and evaluation purposes. Chandler provided a way of rendering immersive ecosystem scenes with headset VR and of representing time/ seasonal changes (a foundation for "gateway" transitions). Stevens provided a way of matching strategy between devices during the VR simulation. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to incorporate the biomimicry strategy-to-design matching procedure taught by Stevens into the invention of Chandler such that the system renders a "travel gateway" from ecosystem to a future urban environment and then tasks the user to "match a biomimicry strategy to a design installation of the technology. The motivation is to enable users to experience a coherent pedagogical flow-ecosystem with future urban scene and explicit biomimicry strategy matching-thereby teaching and evaluating nature-inspired technologies in context, consistent with XR sustainability testing goals.
Claim(s) 11, 13, 14 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Chandler et al. (“Immersive landscapes modelling ecosystem reference conditions in virtual reality”, 202103, hereinafter Chandler), in view of Hannah Erickson et al. (“XR in Sustainability: A Holistic Approach to Testing Transportation Design Proposals”, 2022, hereinafter Erickson) as applied to Claim 1 above and further in view of Aaron et al. (US 20080167129 A1, hereinafter Aaron).
Regarding Claim 11, the combination of Chandler and Erickson teaches the invention in Claim 1.
The combination further teaches [[a pop-up window]] highlighting specific information about each of the organisms in the ecosystem, wherein the information collected is [[the basis of the biomimicry research]] and is [[stored as data in the participants field journal to be accessed later]] (Chandler, Page 1298, “Common dominant species include Themeda triandra Forssk., Poa sieberiana Spreng., Microseris… as well as saplings of the dominant overstorey species Eucalyptus albens. Canopy trees include Eucalyptus albens and Brachychiton populneus”; Page1303-1304, "We received suggestions for improving the understory ... improving ground cover ... natural imperfections, such as adding tree hollows and ground litter and others proposed more diverse stages of growth of the same plant... diversity, natural imperfections and details were deemed important in the visualizations to create an immersive experience." <read on highlighting specific information about each of the organisms in the ecosystem>).
But Chandler does not explicitly disclose a pop-up window that the information is explicitly basis of the biomimicry research and is stored as data in the participant's field journal to be accessed later.
However, Erickson teaches wherein the information collected is the basis of the biomimicry research and is stored as data in the participant's [[ field journal ]] to be accessed later (Erickson, Page 2-3, "Primary research consisted of semi-structured interviews with experts in the fields of transportation design, sustainability, and extended reality technologies. These interviews were supplemented by secondary research, such as academic papers, books, and case studies. he results of this research were then used to develop desi n recommendation for how industrial designers can employ extended reality technology as a medium to test the social, environmental, and economic feasibility of sustainable transportation solutions before implementing them."; Page 6-7, "Biomimicry design thinking is the methodology which merges biomimicry thinking and design thinking, following the design phases of scoping the challenge, discovering existing solutions, creating ideas, and evaluating them to create innovative design solutions. Within biomimicry, each phase is focused on what we, as designers, can learn from nature." <read on "wherein the information collected is the basis of the biomimicry research and is stored as data ... to be accessed later" and < read on "based on biomimicry" >).
Erickson and Chandler are analogous since both of them are dealing with immersive/XR environments used to engage users with nature-related content and to support research and decision-making about sustainability and environmental issues. Chandler provided a way of constructing and presenting an immersive VR simulation of a real ecological community, including detailed species-level information and expert evaluation of that virtualecology for education and land-management purposes. Erickson provided a way of using XR as a research tool where information collected from participants and scenarios (interviews, observations, and evaluations) becomes the basis for sustainability and biomimicry-oriented design recommendations, emphasizing that data from XR experiences is captured and analyzed as research output. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention was made to incorporate the research-data collection and use model taught by Erickson into the modified invention of Chandler such that information presented to or gathered from users in the virtual ecosystem is treated and stored as research data forming the basis of biomimicry/sustainability analysis. The motivation is to use immersive VR ecosystems not just for visualization but also as structured research instruments, as discussed by Erickson when advocating XR as "a medium to test the social, environmental, and economic feasibility of sustainable transportation solutions" and to collect data for developing design recommendations (Erickson, Page1-3).
But the combination does not explicitly disclose stored as data in the participant's field journal to be accessed later.
However, Aaron teaches a pop-up window highlighting specific information about [[ each of the organisms in the ecosystem ]], wherein the information collected is [[ the basis of the biomimicry research ]] and is stored as data in the participant's field journal to be accessed later (Aaron shows a dedicated on-screen window labeled "LOG BOOK" with specific information entries, function n as a pop-up (Aaron, Fig. 5, "310 Log book" and entries "9/7 /05- Jane smith arrived at waypoint. Travelled from libertyville, illinois. hiked last 7 miles. trip took two days. saw a black bear on the way. great cache location! 2. l 0/13/05- jeff smith, bensonville, Indiana 3. l 0/14/05- john and mary doe. our first geocache! what an experience. 4. 10/28/05- charles beckenridge log entry (use stylus) <read on "a pop-up window within specific information" and <read on "field journal"> ). further describes storage of game/user data in memory (Aaron, 11- , Page 9-10, "The memory 720 may include, for exam le, an operating system 722 and the video game application 724. The memory may also include data associated with the video game (e.g., the contents of each players virtual depository) and input/output(I/O) device drivers 770.” <read on “is stored as data in the participants field journal to be accessed later>).
Aaron and Chandler are analogous since both of them are dealing with interactive graphical environments that display contextual information to users and maintain persistent user-specific records. Chandler provided a way of presenting a complex, information-rich VR landscape (with specific plant species and ecological detail) to users via VR headsets, and expert feedback in Chandler shows that users desire more detailed and accessible information about the organisms and ecological details in the visualization. Aaron provided a way of presenting a dedicated on-screen window ("LO BOOK") that displays and records specific information entries from the user, and of s ring this and other user-specific data (e.g., contents of each player's virtual depository) in memory as data associated with the user that can be accessed later in the game. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention was made to incorporate LOG BOOK-style pop-up and data storage mechanism taught by Aaron into the modified invention of Chandler such that the VR environment includes a pop-up window (field-journal-style LOG BOOK) hi heightening specific information about each organism encountered in the ecosystem, and the information entered or displayed there is stored as data in a participant-specific record (read on "field journal") that can be accessed later. The motivation is to improve the usability and research value of the ecosystem VR by providing a participant-accessible journal/logbook for organism-specific observations and notes, mirroring the LOG BOOK behavior in Aaron and aligning with ecological/field-study practice.
Regarding Claim 13, the combination of Chandler and Erickson teaches the
invention in Claim 1.
The combination further teaches [[ generating a prize for the user when the user correctly ]] matches an organism to the technology (Erikson, Page 7, “Phase two explores this next question, “how can extended reality technology be used to test the validity of sustainable transportation design proposals” Page 2, “This research investigates the potential of using extended reality tools to redesign current transportation infrastructure and minimize ecological decline and the impacts of climate change” “Industrial designers can leverage extended reality technology to test the social, environmental, and economic feasibility of sustainable transportation solutions before implementing them” Page 1, “There is an opportunity for industrial designers to employ extended reality technology as a medium to test the social, environmental, and economic viability of sustainable transportation solutions before they are built Page 3, “this research include comparing rural and urban transportation systems, designing public transportation in suburban areas, adopting biomimicry principles to create better systems, exploring XR beyond headsets”).
The combination does not explicitly disclose but Aaron teaches generating a prize for the user when the user correctly matches certain condition (Aaron, Paragraph [0055], “It will be also appreciated that numerous other criteria for selecting the virtual prize may be used. Finally, as shown at block 530 of FIG. 7, the virtual prize may be awarded to the player” [0047], “the virtual prize that may be awarded upon receipt of confirmation that the player 11 2 has reached a waypoint 160 in the geocaching aspect of the game 200”).
Aaron and Chandler are analogous since both of them are dealing with interactive user experiences in which the system provides a user-facing outcome after a user completes a task within a presented environment. Chandler provided a way of presenting an immersive virtual environment ("render virtual landscapes as immersive .. . experiences"). Aaron provided a way of awarding a virtual prize to the user ("the virtual prize may be awarded to the player") and tying award to confirmation of task completion ("virtual prize ... awarded upon receipt of confirmation ... "). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention was made to incorporate Aaron's virtual-prize awarding upon confirmed task completion taught by Aaron into modified invention off Chandler such that the immersive VR method further includes generating a prize for the user when the user successfully completes the required selection/matching task. The motivation is to increase user engagement and reinforce successful task completion by awarding a virtual prize, as shown by Aaron's prize award after confirmation and prize award at block 530.
Regarding Claim 14, the combination of Chandler and Erickson teaches the
invention in Claim 1.
The combination further teaches rendering [[ the prize ]] for the user, via the at least one VR output device [[, as a virtual lens ]] showing the user the urban environment as if the user was another species (Chandler, Page 1293, Abstract, “Virtual reality (VR) can be used to render virtual landscapes as immersive, visceral experiences and communicate ecosystem dynamics to users in an effective and engaging way”).
But Chandler does not explicitly disclose viewing through virtual lens.
However, Erickson teaches rendering [[ the prize ]] for the user, via the at least one VR output device, as a virtual lens showing the user (Erickson, Page 37, “One example is Microsoft’s HoloLens <Read on virtual lens>, which “allows you to place digital objects into the room you are standing in and give you the ability to spin it around or interact with the digital object in any way possible”).
Erickson and Chandler are analogous since both of them are dealing with immersive XRNR simulations that allow users to experience and interact with computer-generated environments, where Chandler provides an immersive virtual reality (VR) visualization exported as an immersive experience mediated by VR headsets. Erickson provided a way of employing XR simulation using HoloLens which is virtual lens and applying on city planning for user to see the virtual world. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention was made to incorporate HoloLens taught by Erickson into modified invention off Chandler such that system will be able to extend immersive VR ecosystem experience through HoloLens to support an XR simulation for city planning/urban technologies informed by biomimicry principles.
The combination does not explicitly disclose But Aaron teaches rendering the prize for the user (Aaron, Paragraph [0055], “It will be also appreciated that numerous other criteria for selecting the virtual prize may be used. Finally, as shown at block 530 of FIG. 7, the virtual prize may be awarded to the player” [0047], “the virtual prize that may be awarded upon receipt of confirmation that the player 11 2 has reached a waypoint 160 in the geocaching aspect of the game 200”).
Aaron and Chandler are analogous since both of them are dealing with interactive user experiences in which the system provides a user-facing outcome after a user completes a task within a presented environment. Chandler provided a way of presenting an immersive virtual environment ("render virtual landscapes as immersive .. . experiences"). Aaron provided a way of awarding a virtual prize to the user ("the virtual prize may be awarded to the player") and tying award to confirmation of task completion ("virtual prize ... awarded upon receipt of confirmation ... "). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention was made to incorporate Aaron's virtual-prize awarding upon confirmed task completion taught by Aaron into modified invention off Chandler such that the immersive VR method further includes generating a prize for the user when the user successfully completes the required selection/matching task. The motivation is to increase user engagement and reinforce successful task completion by awarding a virtual prize, as shown by Aaron's prize award after confirmation and prize award at block 530. The combination does not explicitly disclose rendering the prize for the user, via the at least one VR output device, as a virtual lens showing the user the urban environment as if the user was another species.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
US 20230214925 A1 Transaction platforms where systems include sets of other systems
US 20170221267 A1 Virtual reality based interactive learning
US 20130286045 A1 Method of simulating lens using augmented reality
US 20130249902 A1 System and Method for Defining an Augmented Reality View in a Specific Location
US 20120113144 A1 Augmented reality virtual guide system
US 20100271394 A1 System and method for merging virtual reality and reality to provide an enhanced sensory experience
US 20080134056 A1 Computer Simulation Method With User-Defined Transportation And Layout
“Cultivating Cooperative Relationships: Identifying Learning Gaps When Teaching Students Systems Thinking Biomimicry”, 2022, MDPI
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to YUJANG TSWEI whose telephone number is (571)272-6669. The examiner can normally be reached 8:30am-5:30pm 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, Kent Chang can be reached on (571) 272-7667. 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.
/YuJang Tswei/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2614