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 .
Claims in Consideration
Claims 4-14, 18-28, and 32-42, are cancelled.
Claims 1-3, 15-17, and 29-31, are pending in this application.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 8/24/2026 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive. Referring to page 8 of the arguments where a list is presented of all deficiencies: Applicant's arguments do not comply with 37 CFR 1.111(c) because they do not clearly point out the patentable novelty which he or she thinks the claims present in view of the state of the art disclosed by the references cited or the objections made. Further, they do not show how the amendments avoid such references or objections.
Applicant’s arguments, filed 8/24/2026, with respect to the rejection(s) of independent claim(s) under 35 USC 102, to Lacey, have been fully considered and are persuasive. Therefore, the rejection has been withdrawn. However, upon further consideration, a new ground(s) of 35 USC 103 rejection is made in view of the combination of Lacey, Lee, and Kristensson, wherein the two new references have been added to cure the deficiencies of Lacey.
Claim Rejection Notes
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.
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) 1-3, 15-17, and 29-31, are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Lacey et al. (US 20190362557 A1, published: 11/28/2019), in view of Lee (US 20180101517 A1, published: 4/12/2018), and in further view of Kristensson et al. (US 20160062458 A1, published: 3/3/2016).
Claim 1. (Currently Amended): Lacey teaches a method of input for using augmented or alternative communications (AAC) system including an eye tracking device (the wearable system 200 can include an outward-facing imaging system 464 (shown in FIG. 4) which observes the world in the environment around the user. The wearable system 200 can also include an inward-facing imaging system 462 (shown in FIG. 4) which can track the eye movements of the user. The inward-facing imaging system may track either one eye's movements or both eyes' movements [Lacey, 0098]), the method comprising:
displaying, via a user interface of a display, an interaction window comprising a message window, a plurality of quick message buttons, and a keyboard, the keyboard comprising a plurality of word prediction buttons (FIG. 34 illustrates an example of editing a selected word 3400 using a virtual keyboard 3410. The virtual keyboard 3410 can be controlled by user gaze inputs, gesture inputs, inputs received from a user input device, etc. [Lacey, 0342, FIG. 34]. After a word has been selected, the wearable system can present a set of possible actions in addition to or in alternative to displaying a list of suggested alternative words for replacing the selected word[Lacey, 0343]);
receiving, by the eye tracking device, at least one gaze input from a user of the eye tracking device (wearable system 200 can determine the gaze direction based on the inward-facing imaging system 462 and can cast a cone 2806 or ray in the gaze direction [Lacey, 0325]), the at least one gaze input comprising a selection of a quick message button of the plurality of quick message buttons or a word prediction button of the plurality of word prediction buttons (FIG. 34 illustrates an example of editing a selected word 3400 using a virtual keyboard 3410. The virtual keyboard 3410 can be controlled by user gaze inputs, gesture inputs, inputs received from a user input device, etc. [Lacey, 0342, FIG. 34]. After a word has been selected, the wearable system can present a set of possible actions in addition to or in alternative to displaying a list of suggested alternative words for replacing the selected word[Lacey, 0343]);
displaying, via the user interface, at least one selected text portion in response to receiving the at least one gaze input, the at least one selected text portion forming a message (the wearable system can select one or more words that intercept with the user's direction of gaze [Lacey, 0325, FIG. 28B]; Examiner's Note: as illustrated) comprising the selection of the quick message button or the word prediction button (FIG. 34 illustrates an example of editing a selected word 3400 using a virtual keyboard 3410. The virtual keyboard 3410 can be controlled by user gaze inputs, gesture inputs, inputs received from a user input device, etc. [Lacey, 0342, FIG. 34]. After a word has been selected, the wearable system can present a set of possible actions in addition to or in alternative to displaying a list of suggested alternative words for replacing the selected word[Lacey, 0343]), wherein the message is displayed in the message window (a message with a header 2802 and a body 2804 [Lacey, 0322, FIG. 2B]; Examiner's Note: as illustrated);
generating, by at least one processor, at least one suggested text portion, the at least one suggested text portion being adaptive to a content of the message (in the examples of FIGS. 28D and 28E, the system may automatically present the user with an array of suggested alternatives such as alternatives 2810a and 2810b upon a selection of the word 2808. The suggested alternatives may be generated by the ASR engine or other language processing engines in the system [Lacey, 0331, FIG. 2B]; Examiner's Note: as illustrated);
displaying, via the user interface, the at least one suggested text portion in the message window of the user interface (present the user with an array of suggested alternatives such as alternatives 2810a and 2810b upon a selection of the word 2808 [Lacey, 0331, FIG. 2B]);
receiving, by the eye tracking device, at least one second gaze input from the user (FIG. 28E illustrates how the system may enable the user to select a desired alternative word, such as “corner,” with eye gaze. The wearable system may use similar techniques as those described with reference to FIG. 28C to select the alternative word [Lacey, 0332]); and
modifying, by the at least one processor, the message to add the at least one suggested text portion to the message based on receiving the at least one second gaze input from the user (user's gaze 2812 has been focused upon a particular alternative, such as alternative 2810A or “corner”, for at least a threshold time. After determining that the user's gaze 2812 was focused on an alternative for the threshold time, the system may revise the text (the message) by replacing the originally selected word with the selected alternative word 2814, as shown in FIG. 28F [Lacey, 0332]).
Lacey does not teach displaying, via the user interface, the message and the at least one suggested text portion in the message window of the user interface.
However, Lee teaches displaying, via the user interface, the message and the at least one suggested text portion in the message window of the user interface (the user may complete an input message by selecting a keyword slot of the template message 930 displayed in the chat input window 920, and inputting a word corresponding to the keyword slot without having to directly input all of an input message, such as ‘please suggest 10 ceiling items of the electronics field today’, in response to the template message 910 [Lee, 0109]).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art, before the invention was filed, to modify the eye tracking input messaging display invention of Lacey to include the message and suggestion display feature of Lee.
One would have been motivated to make this modification to display a message to a user a long with the other displayed matter. Such would be obvious to include a display of that which you are working with.
The combination of Lacey and Margot, does not teach receiving at least one second gaze input from the user comprising a selection of the suggested text portion, wherein receiving the at least one second gaze input from the user comprises: displaying a visual indication indicating a length of time remaining before the suggest text portion is selected.
However, Kristensson teaches receiving at least one second gaze input from the user comprising a selection of the suggested text portion, wherein receiving the at least one second gaze input from the user comprises: displaying a visual indication indicating a length of time remaining before the suggest text portion is selected (the method for entering text into a computing device using gaze input from a user of claim 4, wherein the termination event is a selection from a group consisting of: detection of the user's gaze in a predetermined area of the display device for a first predetermined period of time [Kristensson, Claim 5]).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art, before the invention was filed, to modify the eye tracking input messaging display invention of the combination of Lacey and Lee, to include the eye-tracking input time limit feature of Kristensson.
One would have been motivated to make this modification to improve eye-tracking input by insuring that what the user is looking at is chosen as input.
Claims 15 and 29, sharing similar deficiencies of claim 1, are likewise rejected.
Claim 2: The combination of Lacey, Lee, and Kristensson, teaches the method of claim 1. Lacey further teaches wherein when receiving the at least one second gaze input, the method further comprises: determining a location of the at least one suggested text portion in the message window; determining a location of the at least one second gaze input (the system may track the user's eyes using inward-facing imaging system 462 to determine that the user's gaze 2812 has been focused upon a particular alternative, such as alternative 2810A or “corner”, for at least a threshold time [Lacey, 0332]); determining whether the location of the at least one suggested text portion in the message window is the same as the location of the at least one second gaze input (after determining that the user's gaze 2812 was focused on an alternative for the threshold time, the system may revise the text (the message) by replacing the originally selected word with the selected alternative word 2814, as shown in FIG. 28F. In certain implementations, where the wearable system uses cone casting to select a word, the wearable system can dynamically adjust the size of the cone based on the density of the text [Lacey, 0332]); and verifying the at least one second gaze input is a confirmatory input based on determining the location of the at least one suggested text portion in the message window is the same as the location of the gaze input (FIG. 28E illustrates how the system may enable the user to select a desired alternative word, such as “corner,” with eye gaze. The wearable system may use similar techniques as those described with reference to FIG. 28C to select the alternative word. For example, the system may track the user's eyes using inward-facing imaging system 462 to determine that the user's gaze 2812 has been focused upon a particular alternative, such as alternative 2810A or “corner”, for at least a threshold time. After determining that the user's gaze 2812 was focused on an alternative for the threshold time, the system may revise the text (the message) by replacing the originally selected word with the selected alternative word 2814, as shown in FIG. 28F. In certain implementations, where the wearable system uses cone casting to select a word, the wearable system can dynamically adjust the size of the cone based on the density of the text. For example, the wearable system may present a cone with a bigger aperture (and thus with a bigger surface area at the away from the user) to select an alternative word for editing as shown in FIG. 28E because there are few available options. But the wearable system may present the cone with a smaller aperture to select the word 2808 in FIG. 28C because the word 2808 is surrounded with other words and a smaller cone can reduce the error rate of accidentally selecting another word [Lacey, 0332]).
Claims 15 and 30, sharing similar deficiencies of claim 2, are likewise rejected.
Claim 3: The combination of Lacey, Lee, and Kristensson, teaches the method of claim 2. Lacey further teaches further comprising: determining whether a length of time of the at least one second gaze input satisfies a threshold value, wherein the threshold value is based on a length of the at least one suggested text portion (user's gaze 2812 has been focused upon a particular alternative, such as alternative 2810A or “corner”, for at least a threshold time [Lacey, 0332]).
Claims 16 and 31, sharing similar deficiencies of claim 3, are likewise rejected.
Conclusion
Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP § 706.07(a). Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a).
A shortened statutory period for reply to this final action is set to expire THREE MONTHS from the mailing date of this action. In the event a first reply is filed within TWO MONTHS of the mailing date of this final action and the advisory action is not mailed until after the end of the THREE-MONTH shortened statutory period, then the shortened statutory period will expire on the date the advisory action is mailed, and any nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) pursuant to 37 CFR 1.136(a) will be calculated from the mailing date of the advisory action. In no event, however, will the statutory period for reply expire later than SIX MONTHS from the mailing date of this final action.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to SETH A SILVERMAN whose telephone number is (571)272-9783. The examiner can normally be reached Mon-Thur, 8AM-4PM MST.
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, Adam Queler can be reached at (571)272-4140. 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.
/Seth A Silverman/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2172
Prosecution Insights