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
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 1, 3 and 5-6 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Poltaretskyi
20190380792 and in view of McKinney US 20150004590
Claim 1: The Poltaretskyi reference provides a teaching of a networked instructional system utilizing 3D image capabilities for enhancing a learning experience, the networked instructional system (see abstract) comprising:
a learning platform implemented as a communication network element for interacting with a teacher computing device (see FIG. 128 item 12802) and a plurality of remotely-located student computing devices (see FIG. 128 item 12804A…N), wherein all computing devices have installed like educational software (see paragraph 1152, 1155 software installed on both the instructor and student terminal) , the learning platform including:
a service management component for controlling networked configurations of the teacher computing device and an identified subset of student computing devices for a real-time learning session (see paragraph 725 providing real time collaboration session between participants);
and a 3D imaging system component compatible with controlling manipulation of objects within the educational software application, the 3D imaging system responsive to teacher lesson control commands (see paragraph 730 sharing display and control of the presentation of the remote environment),
The Poltaretskyi reference is silent on the teaching of thereafter transmitting these commands to the plurality of remotely-located student computing devices such that the teacher computing device controls the operation of the student computing devices including the capability to remotely control projection and manipulation of 3D objects on the student computing devices.
However, the McKinney reference provide a teaching of thereafter transmitting these commands to the plurality of remotely-located student computing devices such that the teacher computing device controls the operation of the student computing devices including the capability to remotely control projection and manipulation of 3D objects on the student computing devices (see paragraph 42 and 44 allowing instructor movement and input to be mirrored to the user’s co0mputing device).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the Poltaretskyi with the feature of thereafter transmitting these commands to the plurality of remotely-located student computing devices such that the teacher computing device controls the operation of the student computing devices including the capability to remotely control projection and manipulation of 3D objects on the student computing devices, as taught by the McKinney reference, in order to provide collaboration capabilities between instructor and student (see paragraph 17).
Claim 3: The Poltaretskyi reference is silent on the teaching of wherein the teacher lesson control commands associated with 3D objection manipulation include movements of a mouse controller associated with the teacher computing device.
However, the McKinney provides a teaching of wherein the teacher lesson control commands associated with 3D objection manipulation include movements of a mouse controller associated with the teacher computing device (see paragraph 42 showing mouse input to virtual move an object and zoom in and out).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the McKinney reference with the feature of wherein the teacher lesson control commands associated with 3D objection manipulation include movements of a mouse controller associated with the teacher computing device, as taught by the McKinney reference, in order to provide collaboration capabilities between instructor and student (see paragraph 17).
Claim 5: The Poltaretskyi reference provides a teaching wherein the service management component is configured to transfer control of an instantiated classroom session from the teacher computing device to an identified student computing device upon receipt of a "transfer of control" command from the teacher computing device (see paragraph 141 and 144 providing instructor control of the student terminal upon the student’s agreement).
Claim 6: The Poltaretskyi reference provides a teaching of the transfer of control to a student computing device includes the capability of the identified student computing device to perform 3D object manipulation that is replicated on the remaining student computing devices and the teacher computing device.
However, the McKinney reference provides a teaching of the transfer of control to a student computing device includes the capability of the identified student computing device to perform 3D object manipulation that is replicated on the remaining student computing devices and the teacher computing device (see paragraph 44 allowing the student’s content to be mirrored to the instructor and other student’s station).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the Poltaretskyi with the feature of the transfer of control to a student computing device includes the capability of the identified student computing device to perform 3D object manipulation that is replicated on the remaining student computing devices and the teacher computing device, as taught by the McKinney reference, in order to provide collaboration capabilities between instructor and student (see paragraph 17).
Claim 2 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Poltaretskyi
20190380792 and in view of McKinney US 20150004590 and in view of Ziv-el US 5437555
Claim 2: The Poltaretskyi reference is silent on the teaching of wherein the teacher lesson control commands associated with 3D object manipulation include at least keystrokes delivered by the teacher computing device.
However, the Ziv-el reference provides a teaching of wherein the teacher lesson control commands associated with 3D object manipulation include at least keystrokes delivered by the teacher computing (see col. 15:55-65).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the Poltaretskyi with the feature of wherein the teacher lesson control commands associated with 3D object manipulation include at least keystrokes delivered by the teacher computing, as taught by the Ziv-el reference, in order to allow the user to provide instant feedback to the student (see col. 2:40-45).
Claim 4 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Poltaretskyi
20190380792 and in view of McKinney US 20150004590 and in view of Bao CN 107341980
Claim 4: The Poltaretskyi reference is silent on the teaching of wherein the service management component is configured to verify the existence of a same version of the educational software on the teacher computing device and the identified subset of student computing devices prior to initiating a virtual classroom session.
However, the Bao reference provides a teaching of wherein the service management component is configured to verify the existence of a same version of the educational software on the teacher computing device and the identified subset of student computing devices prior to initiating a virtual classroom session (see page 6 paragraph 9 updating the student software version when it is different from the teacher software version).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the Poltaretskyi reference with the feature of wherein the service management component is configured to verify the existence of a same version of the educational software on the teacher computing device and the identified subset of student computing devices prior to initiating a virtual classroom session, as taught by the Bao reference, in order to ensure that the student’s software are current.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ROBERT J UTAMA whose telephone number is (571)272-1676. The examiner can normally be reached 9:00 - 17:30 Monday - Friday.
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, Kang Hu can be reached at (571)270-1344. 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.
/ROBERT J UTAMA/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3715