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 Interpretation
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(f):
(f) Element in Claim for a Combination. – An element in a claim for a combination may be expressed as a means or step for performing a specified function without the recital of structure, material, or acts in support thereof, and such claim shall be construed to cover the corresponding structure, material, or acts described in the specification and equivalents thereof.
The following is a quotation of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph:
An element in a claim for a combination may be expressed as a means or step for performing a specified function without the recital of structure, material, or acts in support thereof, and such claim shall be construed to cover the corresponding structure, material, or acts described in the specification and equivalents thereof.
The claims in this application are given their broadest reasonable interpretation using the plain meaning of the claim language in light of the specification as it would be understood by one of ordinary skill in the art. The broadest reasonable interpretation of a claim element (also commonly referred to as a claim limitation) is limited by the description in the specification when 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is invoked.
As explained in MPEP § 2181, subsection I, claim limitations that meet the following three-prong test will be interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph:
(A) the claim limitation uses the term “means” or “step” or a term used as a substitute for “means” that is a generic placeholder (also called a nonce term or a non-structural term having no specific structural meaning) for performing the claimed function;
(B) the term “means” or “step” or the generic placeholder is modified by functional language, typically, but not always linked by the transition word “for” (e.g., “means for”) or another linking word or phrase, such as “configured to” or “so that”; and
(C) the term “means” or “step” or the generic placeholder is not modified by sufficient structure, material, or acts for performing the claimed function.
Use of the word “means” (or “step”) in a claim with functional language creates a rebuttable presumption that the claim limitation is to be treated in accordance with 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph. The presumption that the claim limitation is interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is rebutted when the claim limitation recites sufficient structure, material, or acts to entirely perform the recited function.
Absence of the word “means” (or “step”) in a claim creates a rebuttable presumption that the claim limitation is not to be treated in accordance with 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph. The presumption that the claim limitation is not interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is rebutted when the claim limitation recites function without reciting sufficient structure, material or acts to entirely perform the recited function.
Claim limitations in this application that use the word “means” (or “step”) are being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, except as otherwise indicated in an Office action. Conversely, claim limitations in this application that do not use the word “means” (or “step”) are not being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, except as otherwise indicated in an Office action.
This application includes one or more claim limitations that do not use the word “means,” but are nonetheless being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, because the claim limitation(s) uses a generic placeholder that is coupled with functional language without reciting sufficient structure to perform the recited function and the generic placeholder is not preceded by a structural modifier. Such claim limitation(s) is/are: point capturing module, comparison indexing module, voxel layer data construction module and connection data construction module in claim 17.
Because this/these claim limitation(s) is/are being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, it/they is/are being interpreted to cover the corresponding structure described in the specification as performing the claimed function, and equivalents thereof.
If applicant does not intend to have this/these limitation(s) interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, applicant may: (1) amend the claim limitation(s) to avoid it/them being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph (e.g., by reciting sufficient structure to perform the claimed function); or (2) present a sufficient showing that the claim limitation(s) recite(s) sufficient structure to perform the claimed function so as to avoid it/them being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph.
Claim Objections
Claims 1-19 are objected to because of the following informalities:
For claim 1, Examiner believes this claim should be amended in the following manner:
A data processing method based on voxel data, wherein the data processing method comprises the following steps:
in a x, y, z three-dimensional space, taking a base plane of z=z′, wherein there are multiple base points on the base plane; and forming multiple base columns by using [[the]] a base point as a bottom point and using a z coordinate as a height, wherein there are L element points on each base column;
accessing the multiple base columns in parallel in a graphics processing unit (GPU), traversing each element point on [[the]] each base column in each parallel thread, reaching a voxel point corresponding to [[the]] that element point by indexing according to the voxel data, and determining whether the voxel point is a hollow point or a solid point;
collecting a continuous hollow point segment on each base column, and if a height of the continuous hollow point segment is greater than or equal to a first preset height, defining the continuous hollow point segment as a voxel layer; and
obtaining a positional relationship between each voxel layer on each base column and each voxel layer on [[the]] an adjacent base column by calculation, and if there is an overlapping part between [[the]] two voxel layers in a height direction, determining that there is connection data between the two voxel layers, so that an operation object passes between the two voxel layers;
wherein the voxel point, the two voxel layers, and the connection data constitute a three-dimensional space based on the voxel data.
For claim 2, Examiner believes this claim should be amended in the following manner:
The data processing method according to claim 1, wherein if a height of the overlapping part is smaller than the first preset height, determining that the connection data is impassableindicating that the operation object cannot pass between the two voxel layers; and if [[a]] the height of the overlapping part is greater than or equal to the first preset height, determining that the connection data is passableindicating that the operation object can pass between the two voxel layers.
For claim 3, Examiner believes this claim should be amended in the following manner:
The data processing method according to claim 2, wherein the first preset height is greater than or equal to a height of the operation object, and the two voxel layers comprise a first voxel layer and a second voxel layer, a height of [[the]] a lowest element point of the first voxel layer is n, and a height of [[the]] a lowest element point of the second voxel layer is f, wherein:
if the height of the overlapping part is greater than or equal to the first preset height, and f−n ≤ a second preset height, determining that the indicating that a
if the height of the overlapping part is greater than or equal to the first preset height, and the second preset height < f−n ≤ a third preset height, determining that the indicating that [[a]] the
if the height of the overlapping part is greater than or equal to the first preset height, and the third preset height < f−n ≤ a fourth preset height, determining that the indicating that [[a]] the
For claim 4, Examiner believes this claim should be amended in the following manner:
The data processing method according to claim 3, wherein the first passable from the first voxel layer to the second voxel layer further comprises a fifth passing manner.
For claim 5, Examiner believes this claim should be amended in the following manner:
The data processing method according to claim 2, wherein the operation object has a first posture and a second posture, a posture height of the first posture is greater than a posture height of the second posture, and the operation object further has a first action manner and a second action manner, the first preset height is greater than or equal to the posture height of the second posture of the operation object, and the two voxel layers comprise a first voxel layer and a second voxel layer, a height of [[the]] a lowest element point of the first voxel layer is n, and a height of [[the]] a lowest element point of the second voxel layer is f, wherein:
if the height of the overlapping part ≥ the posture height of the first posture, and f−n ≤ a second preset height, determining that the indicating that when the operation object passes from the first voxel layer to the second voxel layer, the operation object performs the first posture, the second posture, and the first action manner;
if the posture height of the first posture>the height of the overlapping part ≥ the posture height of the second posture, and f−n ≤ the second preset height, determining that the data, and indicating that when the operation object passes from the first voxel layer to the second voxel layer, the operation object performs the second posture, and the first action manner;
if the height of the overlapping part ≥ the posture height of the first posture, and the second preset height < f−n ≤ [[the]] a third preset height, determining that the indicating that when the operation object passes from the first voxel layer to the second voxel layer, the operation object performs the first posture, and the second action manner; and
if the posture height of the first posture > the height of the overlapping part ≥ the posture height of the second posture, and the second preset height < f−n ≤ the third preset height, determining that the indicating that when the operation object passes from the first voxel layer to the second voxel layer, the operation object performs the second posture, and the second action manner.
For claim 6, Examiner believes this claim should be amended in the following manner:
The data processing method according to claim 5, wherein the operation object further has a third action manner, wherein: if the height of the overlapping part ≥ the posture height of the first posture, and the third preset height < f−n ≤ [[the]] a fourth preset height, determining that the indicating that when the operation object passes from the first voxel layer to the second voxel layer, the operation object performs the first posture, and the third action manner.
For claim 7, Examiner believes this claim should be amended in the following manner:
The data processing method according to claim 5, wherein the operation object further has a third posture, a posture height of the third posture is less than the posture height of the second posture, and the first preset height greater than or equal to the posture height of the third posture of the operation object, wherein:
the fourth passable the operation object performs the third posture;
the fifth passable the operation object performs the third posture;
if the posture height of the second posture > the height of the overlapping part ≥ the posture height of the third posture, and f−n ≤ the second preset height, determining that the indicating that when the operation object passes from the first voxel layer to the second voxel layer, the operation object performs the third posture, and the first action manner.
For claim 8, Examiner believes this claim should be amended in the following manner:
The data processing method according to claim 1, wherein the data processing method further comprises the steps of: calculating a navigation path through which the operation object passes from a starting-point voxel layer to an ending-point voxel layer in the three-dimensional space based on the voxel data according to the connection data.
For claim 9, Examiner believes this claim should be amended in the following manner:
The data processing method according to claim 8, wherein
the navigation path obtained by calculation is a path with a shortest distance or a that is smallest, and the distance cost is [[the]] a cost required for the operation object to pass through a distance corresponding to the navigation path; or,
the navigation path obtained by calculation is a path with [[a]] an that is smallest, and the action cost is [[the]] a cost required for the operation object to take [[the]] a passing manner; or,
the navigation path obtained by calculation is a path that a sum of the distance cost and the action cost is smallest.
For claim 10, Examiner believes this claim should be amended in the following manner:
The data processing method according to claim 9, wherein,
the ending-point voxel layer comprises a task-free ending-point voxel layer and a task-containing ending-point voxel layer, wherein:
[[a]] the distance cost between a current position of the operation object and the task-free ending-point voxel layer is obtained by calculation in real time, and when the distance cost obtained by calculation is 0,
when the operation object triggers a task at [[the]] a current voxel layer,
For claim 11, Examiner believes this claim should be amended in the following manner:
The data processing method according to claim 10, wherein the task comprises a first task and a second task; and that when
when a distance between the operation object and [[the]] a target object does not exceed a preset distance and a ray detection result is passable, the first task is triggered, and the target object is an object capable of interacting with the operation object; and
when a configuration parameter value of the operation object is lower than a preset the current voxel layer in which the operation object is located has a configuration parameter supply for increasing the configuration parameter value, the second task is triggered.
For claim 12, Examiner believes this claim should be amended in the following manner:
The data processing method according to claim 11, wherein that when the configuration parameter value of the operation object is lower than [[a]] the preset the current voxel layer in which the operation object is located has [[a]] the configuration parameter supply for increasing the configuration parameter value, the second task is triggered comprises:
when the configuration parameter value of the operation object is lower than [[a]] the preset the current voxel layer in which the operation object is located has [[a]] the configuration parameter supply, and when a result of ray detection between the operation object and the target object is impassable, the second task is triggered.
For claim 13, Examiner believes this claim should be amended in the following manner:
The data processing method according to claim 1, wherein the three-dimensional space based on the voxel data is applied to a game scene, original data of the game scene constitutes a pixel scene, the pixel scene comprises multiple different data types of scene elements, and the original data of the multiple different data types of the scene elements is exported respectively;
an expected side length of a unit voxel is set, and combined with a given side length of the unit voxel, the original data of the multiple different data types of the scene elements is converted into the voxel data respectively, wherein the voxel data represented in the game scene is represented as a voxel module; and
according to relative positions of [[the]] voxel modules of all the scene elements in the pixel scene, the voxel modules of all the scene elements are spliced to obtain [[the]] a voxel scene.
For claim 14, Examiner believes this claim should be amended in the following manner:
The data processing method according to claim 13, wherein the game scene comprises a dynamic object, and types of all dynamic objects and offset coordinates of a contour point of each of different types of dynamic objects relative to a center point of the dynamic object are obtained;
update coordinates of the to be refreshed are obtained by calculation according to [[the]] coordinates of the center point of the to be refreshed and the offset coordinates of the contour point; and
writing is performed at update positions of all contour points after the dynamic object is refreshed, and erasing is performed for original positions of all contour points before the dynamic object is refreshed, so as to complete dynamic refreshing of the dynamic object.
For claim 15, Examiner believes this claim should be amended in the following manner:
The data processing method according to claim 14, wherein the game scene further comprises a static object; during [[the]] a game, a set of static data composed of the static object is reused, and dynamic refreshing of the dynamic object is continuously performed, and dynamic data composed of the dynamic object before refreshing is discarded each time dynamic refreshing performed.
For claim 16, Examiner believes this claim should be amended in the following manner:
The data processing method according to claim 15, wherein the scene elements of the game scene comprise terrain, vegetation, a building, and an outdoor decoration; the exporting the original data of the multiple different data types of the scene elements respectively comprises:
exporting 3D model file format data and coordinate information of the outdoor decoration and the building; exporting comma-separated value file format data of the vegetation; and orthogonally capturing by a depth camera to export a picture of the terrain, wherein the picture comprises surface height data of the terrain; and
the setting [[an]] the expected side length of [[a]] the unit voxel, and combined with the given side length of the unit voxel, converting the original data of the multiple different data types of the scene elements into the voxel data respectively comprises:
converting the 3D model file format data of the outdoor decoration and the building into the voxel data; obtaining a size of a collision body of the vegetation, combined with the given side length of the unit voxel, obtaining a quantity of voxels that the vegetation needs to occupy in the voxel scene and a voxel shape by calculating; and according to the picture in which the surface height data of the terrain is stored, performing sampling point by point according to the given side length of the unit voxel to convert the surface height data of the terrain into the voxel data.
For claim 17, Examiner believes this claim should be amended in the following manner:
A data processing server based on voxel data, wherein the data processing server comprises a point capturing module, a comparison indexing module, a voxel layer data construction module and a connection data construction module;
the point capturing module takes a base plane of z=z′ in a x, y, z three-dimensional space, wherein there are multiple base points on the base plane; the point capturing module forms multiple base columns by taking [[the]] a base point as a bottom point and using a z coordinate as a height, wherein there are L element points on each base column;
the comparison indexing module accesses the multiple base columns in parallel in a graphics processing unit (GPU), traverses each element point on [[the]] each base column in each parallel thread, reaches a voxel point corresponding to [[the]] that element point by indexing according to the voxel data, and determines whether the voxel point is a hollow point or a solid point;
the voxel layer data construction module collects a continuous hollow point segment on each base column, and if a height of the continuous hollow point segment is greater than or equal to a first preset height, defines the continuous hollow point segment as a voxel layer; and
the connection data construction module obtains a positional relationship between each voxel layer on each base column and each voxel layer on [[the]] an adjacent base column by calculation, and if there is an overlapping part between [[the]] two voxel layers in a height direction, determines that there is connection data between the two voxel layers, so that an operation object passes between the two voxel layers;
wherein the voxel point, the two voxel layers, and the connection data constitute a three-dimensional space based on the voxel data.
For claim 18, Examiner believes this claim should be amended in the following manner:
A computer-readable storage medium, storing instructions for data processing based on voxel data, wherein the instructions implement the following steps when executed by a processor:
in a x, y, z three-dimensional space, taking a base plane of z=z′, wherein there are multiple base points on the base plane; and forming multiple base columns by using [[the]] a base point as a bottom point and using a z coordinate as a height, wherein there are L element points on each base column;
accessing the multiple base columns in parallel in a graphics processing unit (GPU), traversing each element point on [[the]] each base column in each parallel thread, reaching a voxel point corresponding to [[the]] that element point by indexing according to the voxel data, and determining whether the voxel point is a hollow point or a solid point;
collecting a continuous hollow point segment on each base column, and if a height of the continuous hollow point segment is greater than or equal to a first preset height, defining the continuous hollow point segment as a voxel layer; and
obtaining a positional relationship between each voxel layer on each base column and each voxel layer on [[the]] an adjacent base column by calculation, and if there is an overlapping part between [[the]] two voxel layers in a height direction, determining that there is connection data between the two voxel layers, so that an operation object passes between the two voxel layers;
wherein the voxel point, the two voxel layers, and the connection data constitute a three-dimensional space based on the voxel data.
For claim 19, Examiner believes this claim should be amended in the following manner:
A computer program product, comprising a computer-executable instruction, wherein the computer-executable instruction is executed by a processor to implement the following steps:
in a x, y, z three-dimensional space, taking a base plane of z=z′, wherein there are multiple base points on the base plane; and forming multiple base columns by using [[the]] a base point as a bottom point and using a z coordinate as a height, wherein there are L element points on each base column;
accessing the multiple base columns in parallel in a graphics processing unit (GPU), traversing each element point on [[the]] each base column in each parallel thread, reaching a voxel point corresponding to [[the]] that element point by indexing according to [[the]] voxel data, and determining whether the voxel point is a hollow point or a solid point;
collecting a continuous hollow point segment on each base column, and if a height of the continuous hollow point segment is greater than or equal to a first preset height, defining the continuous hollow point segment as a voxel layer; and
obtaining a positional relationship between each voxel layer on each base column and each voxel layer on [[the]] an adjacent base column by calculation, and if there is an overlapping part between [[the]] two voxel layers in a height direction, determining that there is connection data between the two voxel layers, so that an operation object passes between the two voxel layers;
wherein the voxel point, the two voxel layers, and the connection data constitute a three-dimensional space based on the voxel data.
Appropriate correction is required.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(b):
(b) CONCLUSION.—The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph:
The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the applicant regards as his invention.
Claims 1-19 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor (or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the applicant), regards as the invention.
For independent claim 1, this claim establishes a “voxel layer on each base column” and “voxel layer on the adjacent base column”. Claim 1 goes on to recite the phrase “the voxel layer” and it is unclear and ambiguous which of the previously established “voxel layer on each base column” and “voxel layer on the adjacent base column” is being referenced by the phrase “the voxel layer”. Examiner has suggested amendments in the claim objections above to resolve the ambiguities.
For dependent claims 2-16, these claims depend from claim 1 and inherit the deficiencies of claim 1. Therefore, claims 2-16 are likewise indefinite.
Examiner further makes the following marks for specific dependent claims within dependent claims 2-16 and it should be understood that any deficiencies for any of the subsequent dependent claims are likewise inherited by their respective dependent claims.
Furthermore, for dependent claim 2, this claim repeatedly uses the pronoun “it” and it unclear and ambiguous to which of the previously established nouns are being referenced by the pronoun “it”. Furthermore, parent claim 1 establishes “connection data” and claim 2 further establishes “impassable connection data”. Claim 2 goes on to recite the phrase “the connection data” and it is unclear to which of the previously established “connection data” and “impassable connection data” is being referenced by the phrase “the connection data”. Examiner has suggested amendments in the claim objections above to resolve the ambiguities.
Furthermore, for dependent claim 3, this claim repeatedly uses the pronoun “it” and it unclear and ambiguous to which of the previously established nouns are being referenced by the pronoun “it”. Furthermore, this claim establishes multiple types of “passable connection data” and goes on to recite the phrase “the passable connection data”. It is unclear and ambiguous to which of the previously established multiple types of “passable connection data” is being referenced by the phrase “the passable connection data”. Examiner has suggested amendments in the claim objections above to resolve the ambiguities.
Furthermore, for dependent claim 5, this claim repeatedly uses the pronoun “it” and it unclear and ambiguous to which of the previously established nouns are being referenced by the pronoun “it”. Furthermore, this claim establishes multiple types of “passable connection data” and goes on to recite the phrase “the passable connection data”. It is unclear and ambiguous to which of the previously established multiple types of “passable connection data” is being referenced by the phrase “the passable connection data”. Furthermore, this claim establishes “a posture”, “first posture” and “second posture”. This claim goes on to recite the phrase “the posture” and it is unclear and ambiguous to which of the previously established “posture”, “first posture” and “second posture” are being referenced by the phrase “the posture”. Furthermore, this claim establishes “an action manner”, “first action manner”, and “second action manner”. This claim goes on to recite the phrase “the action manner” and it is unclear and ambiguous to which of the previously established “action manner”, “first action manner”, and “second action manner” are being reference by the phrase “the action manner”. Examiner has suggested amendments in the claim objections above to resolve the ambiguities.
Furthermore, for dependent claim 6, this claim repeatedly uses the pronoun “it” and it unclear and ambiguous to which of the previously established nouns are being referenced by the pronoun “it”. Furthermore, parent claim 5 establishes multiple types of “passable connection data” and claim 6 goes on to recite the phrase “the passable connection data”. It is unclear and ambiguous to which of the previously established multiple types of “passable connection data” is being referenced by the phrase “the passable connection data”. Examiner has suggested amendments in the claim objections above to resolve the ambiguities.
For dependent claim 8, parent claim establishes a “x, y, z three-dimensional space” and a “three-dimensional space based on voxel data”. Claim 8 goes on to recite the phrase “the three-dimensional space” and it is unclear to which of the previously established “x, y, z three-dimensional space” and “three-dimensional space based on voxel data” is being referenced by the phrase “the three-dimensional space”. Examiner has suggested amendments in the claim objections above to resolve the ambiguities.
For dependent claim 10, this claim repeatedly uses the pronoun “it” and it unclear and ambiguous to which of the previously established nouns are being referenced by the pronoun “it”. Examiner has suggested amendments in the claim objections above to resolve the ambiguities.
For dependent claim 11, this claim establishes a “configuration parameter value” and a “preset configuration parameter value”. This claim goes on to recite the phrase “the configuration parameter value” and it is unclear and ambiguous to which of the previously established “configuration parameter value” and “preset configuration parameter value” is being referenced by the phrase “the configuration parameter value”.
Examiner has suggested amendments in the claim objections above to resolve the ambiguities.
For dependent claim 13, parent claim 1 establishes a first “voxel data” and claim 13 goes on to establishes second “voxel data”. Claim 13 goes on to recite the phrase “the voxel data” and it is unclear to which of the previously established first “voxel data” and second “voxel data” is being referenced by the phrase “the voxel data”. Examiner has suggested amendments in the claim objections above to resolve the ambiguities.
For dependent claim 14, this claim establishes a “dynamic object” and a “refreshed dynamic object”. This claim goes on to recite the phrase “the dynamic object” and it is unclear and ambiguous to which of the previously established “dynamic object” and “refreshed dynamic object” is being referenced by the phrase “the dynamic object”. Examiner has suggested amendments in the claim objections above to resolve the ambiguities.
For dependent claim 16, parent claim 13 establishes a “side length” and an “expected side length”. Claim 16 goes on to recite the phrase “the side length” and it is unclear and ambiguous to which of the previously established “side length” and “expected side length” is being referenced by the phrase “the side length”. Examiner has suggested amendments in the claim objections above to resolve the ambiguities.
For independent claim 17, this claim establishes a “voxel layer on each base column” and “voxel layer on the adjacent base column”. Claim 17 goes on to recite the phrase “the voxel layer” and it is unclear and ambiguous which of the previously established “voxel layer on each base column” and “voxel layer on the adjacent base column” is being referenced by the phrase “the voxel layer”. Examiner has suggested amendments in the claim objections above to resolve the ambiguities.
For independent claim 18, this claim establishes a “voxel layer on each base column” and “voxel layer on the adjacent base column”. Claim 18 goes on to recite the phrase “the voxel layer” and it is unclear and ambiguous which of the previously established “voxel layer on each base column” and “voxel layer on the adjacent base column” is being referenced by the phrase “the voxel layer”. Examiner has suggested amendments in the claim objections above to resolve the ambiguities.
For independent claim 19, this claim establishes a “voxel layer on each base column” and “voxel layer on the adjacent base column”. Claim 19 goes on to recite the phrase “the voxel layer” and it is unclear and ambiguous which of the previously established “voxel layer on each base column” and “voxel layer on the adjacent base column” is being referenced by the phrase “the voxel layer”. Examiner has suggested amendments in the claim objections above to resolve the ambiguities.
Appropriate correction is required.
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 18-19 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 101 because they encompass nonstatutory subject matter.
For independent claim 18, this claim is directed to a “computer-readable storage medium”. Applicants’ Specification describes the “computer-readable storage medium” in permissive and exemplary languages in stating the “[c]omputer-readable storage medium can be integrated in hardware” (Specification at page 31). However, Applicants’ Specification further describes an electrical connection as a communication medium for implementing the invention (Specification at pages 10-11) and Examiner finds “computer-readable storage medium” may be broadly interpreted to cover signals, carrier waves and other ineligible transitory media. Therefore, claim 18 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 101 for encompassing nonstatutory subject matter.
For independent claim 19, this claim is directed to a “computer program product”. Applicants’ Specification does not specifically describe what forms the “computer program product” may take. Examiner accordingly finds the “computer program product” may be broadly interpreted to be a program and claim 19 fails to fall within a statutory category of invention. It is directed to the program itself, not a process occurring as a result of executing the program, a machine programmed to operate in accordance with the program nor a manufacture structurally and functionally interconnected with the program in a manner which enables the program to act as a computer component and realize its functionality. It’s also clearly not directed to a composition of matter. Therefore, it’s nonstatutory under 35 U.S.C. 101.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Laine (U.S. Patent Application Publication 2014/0176545 A1) discloses a system and method for processing voxel data (par. 6) where the voxel data is arranged as points of columns on a plane within a three-dimensional space (par. 27-30).
Bajic (U.S. Patent Application Publication 2015/0254877 A1) similarly discloses a system and method for processing voxel data (par. 75) where the voxel data may be arranged in columns to be processed in parallel by a GPU by parallel threads (par. 34, 104 and 111).
Abe at al. (U.S. Patent Application Publication 2015/0356788 A1) similarly discloses a system and method for processing voxel data (par. 136) where the voxel data may be arranged to form hollow segments in a three-dimensional space (par. 160).
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to CHARLES TSENG whose telephone number is (571)270-3857. The examiner can normally be reached 8-5.
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, Xiao Wu can be reached at (571) 272-7761. 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.
/CHARLES TSENG/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2613