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 .
This communication is to response to Application No. 18/716,957 filed on 06/6/2024.
Claims 1-8 and 10-21 are currently pending and has been examined. Claim 9 is cancelled.
Information Disclosure Statement
IDSs are considered.
The drawings filed on 06/06/2024 are noted.
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.
7. Claims 1, 10, 11, and all dependent claims are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 101 because the claimed invention is directed to an abstract idea without significantly more. The claims recite the limitation of: “preventing model penetration and determining a target sub-model of a model to be rendered”.
The limitation of preventing model penetration and determining a target sub-model of a model to be rendered, as drafted, is a process that, under its broadest reasonable interpretation, covers performance of the limitation in the mind. That is, nothing in the claims preclude the steps from practically being performed in the mind. If a claim limitation, under its broadest reasonable interpretation, covers performance of the limitation in the mind, then it falls within the “Mental Processes” grouping of abstract ideas. Accordingly, claims 1-8 and 10-21 recite an abstract idea.
This judicial exception is not integrated into a practical application. In particular, the claims only recite one additional element – using a processor to prevent model penetration; determining a target sub-model of a model to be rendered, wherein the model to be rendered comprises a plurality of sub-models, each of the plurality of sub-models comprises a layer level, the target sub-model is one of the plurality of sub-models, and a layer level number of the target sub-model is a target layer level number to perform both preventing and determining steps. The processor in both steps is recited at a high-level of generality (i.e., as a generic computer to prevent penetration of clothing of a character model) such that it amounts no more than mere instructions. Accordingly, this additional element does not integrate the abstract idea into a practical application because it does not impose any meaningful limits on practicing the abstract idea. The claims are directed to an abstract idea.
In the instant case, the claims do not include additional elements that are sufficient to amount to significantly more than the judicial exception. As discussed above with respect to integration of the abstract idea into a practical application, the additional element of performing rendering on the target sub-model, and storing a display position of a front pixel point corresponding to the target sub-model into a buffer area; and removing, during performing rendering on a first sub-model in the model to be rendered, a pixel point of the first sub-model, wherein the pixel point of the first sub-model is one of pixel points corresponding to the first sub-model, a display position corresponding to the pixel point of the first sub-model is the same as the display position stored in the buffer area, and the sub-model is one of the plurality of sub-models and is different from the target sub-model. Thus, taken alone, the additional element fails to ensure the claims as a whole amount to significantly more than the judicial exception itself. Accordingly, claims 1-8 and 10-21 are ineligible under 35 U.S.C. 101.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant’s disclosure.
US 2022/0292791 Makeev, Sergei et al.
This patent teaches a layered clothing of avatar that confirms to an underlying body and/or clothing layer.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the Examiner should be directed to PIERRE E ELISCA whose telephone number is (571) 272-6706. The Examiner can normally be reached on Monday -Thursday; 6:30AM- 7:30PM. Hoteler.
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, Hu Kang can be reached on 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 an application may be obtained from the Patent Application Information Retrieval (PAIR) system. Status information for published applications may be obtained from either Private PAIR or Public PAIR. Status information for unpublished applications is available through Private PAIR only. For more information about the PAIR system, see http://pair-direct.uspto.gov. Should you have questions on access to the Private PAIR system, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative or access to the automated information system, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000.
/PIERRE E ELISCA/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3715
Prosecution Insights