DETAILED ACTION
The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
This Action is responsive to the Application filed on 05/29/2024. Claims 86-138 and 142-143 are pending in the case.
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.
Claims 86-87, 89-93 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Linville et al. (US 20210004146 A1, hereinafter Linville) in view of Lee et al. (US 20250298498 A1, hereinafter Lee).
As to independent claim 86, Linville teaches a method, comprising:
at a computer system that is in communication with a first display generation component (Fig. 1, AR device 102 including near-eye display 106) and one or more input devices (“input subsystem 608 may comprise or interface with one or more input devices. An input device may include a sensor device or a user input device. Examples of user input devices include a keyboard, mouse, touch screen, or game controller. In some embodiments, the input subsystem may comprise or interface with selected natural user input (NUI) componentry.” Paragraph 0066):
detecting, via the one or more input devices, a start of a first user input that meets adjustment criteria (“Specifically, augmented reality device 102 is displaying an interface 112 for a music player application currently playing audio. Augmented reality device 102 is also displaying a virtual dial control 114. As discussed above, rotation of a virtual dial control may in some cases cause adjustment of an adjustable parameter associated with the augmented reality device, or another device/system. In this case, rotation of virtual dial control 114 adjusts the volume with which the augmented reality device outputs audio from music player application. In FIG. 1, virtual images 112 and 114 are shown in dashed lines to indicate that, while they are visible to the user,” paragraph 0016); and
in response to detecting the start of the first user input that meets the adjustment criteria:
in accordance with a determination that first criteria are met, adjusting a first parameter of the computer system in accordance with one or more first characteristic values of the first user input (“In this case, rotation of virtual dial control 114 adjusts the volume with which the augmented reality device outputs audio from music player application.” Paragraph 0016-0017); and
in accordance with a determination display brightness, change a visual property of a virtual object (e.g., position, orientation, size, color), or alter any number of other parameters associated with the augmented reality device or other device/system.” Paragraph 0012. “For instance, the virtual dial control may be selectively hidden and only revealed when needed... In one approach, the virtual dial control may be hidden by default and only displayed when the user interacts with something that the virtual dial control can affect.” Paragraph 0023).
Linville does not appear to expressly teach in accordance with a determination that second criteria different from the first criteria are met, adjusting a second parameter of the computer system.
Lee teaches in accordance with a determination that second criteria different from the first criteria are met, adjusting a second parameter of the computer system, different from the first parameter of the computer system, (“ Referring to FIG. 2, the wearable device 101 may process information associated with a gaze of the user wearing the wearable device 101 based on an execution of the gaze tracker 271 in the framework layer 270.” Paragraph 0047. “Referring to FIG. 5, in an operation 520, according to an embodiment, the wearable device may identify an input for connecting at least one application screen with an area associated with one or more parameters…The input for connecting an area of the operation 520 and the at least one screen may be received based on the motion of the user, tracked by an execution of the gesture tracker 272 and/or the gaze tracker 271 of FIG. 2.” Paragraph 0089-0090, “the wearable device 101 may identify an input for connecting the area 640 and at least one of application screens 141, 142, and 143, included in the display area 130, in the state 602 of FIG. 6B. The input may be identified based on motion of the user 110 detected using a camera (e.g., the camera 225 of FIG. 2) of the wearable device 101” paragraph 0099).
Accordingly, it would have been obvious to a person of skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the method of Linville to comprise in accordance with a determination that second criteria different from the first criteria are met, adjusting a second parameter of the computer system, different from the first parameter of the computer system, in accordance with the one or more first characteristic values of the first user input. One would have been motivated to make such a combination to manage virtual objects more intuitively using gestures, gaze, or spatial context Lee [0091], [0135]-[0147].
As to dependent claim 87, Linville teaches the method of claim 86, Linville further teaches wherein the first parameter is an audio output parameter for audio outputs of the computer system (“in FIG. 1 the virtual dial control adjusts an audio volume of the augmented reality device,” paragraph 0017).
As to dependent claim 89, Linville teaches the method of claim 86, Linville further teaches wherein detecting the first user input that meets the adjustment criteria includes detecting the first user input directed to a first input device of the one or more input devices, and wherein the method includes:
before detecting the first user input, detecting a user input that sets a default parameter corresponding to the first input device to the first parameter, wherein the first criteria are met as a result of the default parameter being set to the first parameter at a time of the first user input (Fig. 1, music application 112 displays a default volume for currently playing audio – paragraph 0016. “In one approach, the virtual dial control may be hidden by default and only displayed when the user interacts with something that the virtual dial control can affect.” Paragraph 0023).
As to dependent claim 90, Linville teaches the method of claim 86, Linville further teaches wherein detecting the first user input that meets the adjustment criteria includes detecting the first user input directed to a first input device of the one or more input devices, and wherein the method includes:
before detecting the first user input, detecting a user input that sets a default parameter corresponding to the first input device to the second parameter, wherein the second criteria are met as a result of the default parameter being set to the second parameter at a time of the first user input (Default parameter of display brightness associated with the display of the augmented reality device detected before user input received. “In one approach, the virtual dial control may be hidden by default and only displayed when the user interacts with something that the virtual dial control can affect.” Paragraph 0023).
As to dependent claim 91, Linville teaches the method of claim 86, Linville further teaches wherein the first criteria are met as a result of satisfaction of a first set of conditions, including a first condition that the computer system was generating audio outputs at a time when the first user input was detected (“augmented reality device 102 is displaying an interface 112 for a music player application currently playing audio.” Paragraph 0016, “In the example of FIG. 1, virtual dial control 114 may be selectively displayed while user 100 interacts with interface element 112 corresponding to the music player application and hidden at other times.” Paragraph 0023).
As to dependent claim 92, Linville teaches the method of claim 91, Linville further teaches wherein the second criteria are met as a result of satisfaction of a second set of conditions, including a second condition that the computer system was not generating audio outputs at the time when the first user input was detected (“For instance, the virtual dial control may be selectively hidden and only revealed when needed... In one approach, the virtual dial control may be hidden by default and only displayed when the user interacts with something that the virtual dial control can affect.” Paragraph 0023).
As to dependent claim 93, Linville teaches the method of claim 86, Linville does not appear to expressly teach the method including:
in response to detecting the start of the first user input that meets the adjustment criteria:
in accordance with a determination that third criteria, different from the first criteria and the second criteria, are met, adjusting a third parameter, different from the first parameter and the second parameter, of the computer system in accordance with the one or more first characteristic values of the first user input.
Lee teaches in accordance with a determination that third criteria, different from the first criteria and the second criteria, are met, adjusting a third parameter, different from the first parameter and the second parameter, of the computer system in accordance with the one or more first characteristic values of the first user input (“In the state 703, the wearable device 101 may identify a direction (G) of a gaze of a user 110. The direction (G) may be tracked by the wearable device 101 based on an execution of the gaze tracker 271 of FIG. 2. In the state 703, in response to identifying the direction (G) of a gaze facing a point P1 in the area 710, the wearable device 101 may identify at least one parameter commonly applied to the application screens 141 and 142 included in the area 710. For example, the wearable device 101 may display a visual object 730 for adjusting a volume among parameters corresponding to the application screens 141 and 142 based on the direction (G) of a gaze of the user gazing at the point P1 in the area 710 longer than a preset duration.” Paragraph 0109).
Accordingly, it would have been obvious to a person of skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the method of Linville to comprise in response to detecting the start of the first user input that meets the adjustment criteria: in accordance with a determination that third criteria, different from the first criteria and the second criteria, are met, adjusting a third parameter, different from the first parameter and the second parameter, of the computer system in accordance with the one or more first characteristic values of the first user input. One would have been motivated to make such a combination to manage virtual objects more intuitively using gestures, gaze, or spatial context [0091], [0135]-[0147].
Claim 88 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Linville et al. in view of Lee et al. and Jutan et al. (US 20220343590 A1, hereinafter Jutan).
As to dependent claim 88, Linville teaches the method of claim 86, Linville does not appear to expressly teach wherein the second parameter is a level of immersion for three-dimensional content that is displayed in a three-dimensional environment.
Jutan teaches wherein the second parameter is a lighting of immersion for three-dimensional content that is displayed in a three-dimensional environment (“process 1000 includes receiving a selection of an image for a virtual light, and generating the image for the virtual light in the region of the immersive virtual environment to which the lighting value is to be applied. In a second implementation, the lighting value comprises an intensity value. In a third implementation, the lighting value comprises a color value. In a fourth implementation, the lighting value comprises a shape value. In a fifth implementation, the lighting value comprises a softness value.” Paragraph 0140, it is possible to include level of immersion parameter).
Accordingly, it would have been obvious to a person of skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the method of Linville to comprise wherein the second parameter is a level of immersion for three-dimensional content that is displayed in a three-dimensional environment. One would have been motivated to make such a combination to improve an operation in an immersive content production system.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 94-138 are objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, but would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure:
Bruns et al. US 20220254127 A1 teaches presenting a view of an environment at an electronic device on a display. The view includes visual representations of a plurality of applications. The method further includes determining to provide a first application with access to a control parameter.
Erivantcev et al. US 20220291753 A1 teaches spatial gesture recognition using inputs from different devices to control a computing device.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to MAHELET SHIBEROU whose telephone number is (571)270-7493. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 9:00 AM-5:00 PM Eastern Time.
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.
/MAHELET SHIBEROU/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2171
Prosecution Insights