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 .
Priority
Priority is acknowledged of certified copies of papers required by 37 CFR 1.55.
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement (IDS) was filed on 4/3/2021. The submission is in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statement is being considered by the examiner.
Drawings
The drawings filed 6/7/2024 were accepted.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
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 the appropriate paragraphs of 35 U.S.C. 102 that form the basis for the rejections under this section made in this Office action:
A person shall be entitled to a patent unless –
(a)(1) the claimed invention was patented, described in a printed publication, or in public use, on sale, or otherwise available to the public before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claim(s) 1-3 and 5-8 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Birnbaum et al (US20130201141A1; filed 3/15/2013; hereinafter Birnbaum).
With regards to claim 1, Birnbaum et al discloses a system for assessing one or more surface coverings, comprising: a computing device comprising: a display screen (Birnbaum, paragraph 16: “The messaging device comprises a display, a user interface device, memory, and a processor in communication with each of these elements.”), a haptic controller (Birnbaum, paragraph 4: “modes of haptic feedback”), a gyroscopic accelerometer (Birnbaum, paragraph 17: “The processor may receive the first signal from a sensor, such as a gyroscope or an accelerometer in the housing of the messaging device.”), a processor in communication with the display screen, the haptic controller and the gyroscopic accelerometer (Birnbaum, paragraph 17: “The processor may receive the first signal from a sensor, such as a gyroscope or an accelerometer in the housing of the messaging device.”), and a memory in communication with the processor (Birnbaum, paragraph 16: “The messaging device comprises a display, a user interface device, memory, and a processor in communication with each of these elements”);
a library of surface coverings comprising for each surface covering: a topology file, and a friction coefficient file (Birnbaum, paragraph 23: “The virtual physical parameter may also include the object's texture and friction profiles. The texture profile is a data store comprising parameters that define the object's reaction to user interaction in the passive mode of interaction. The texture profile may further define the virtual object's surface features;” the texture profile is interpreted as the topology file, and the friction profile is the friction coefficient file); and
a coordinating module, stored in the memory and implemented by the processor, for displaying an image of a selected surface covering on the display screen (Birnbaum, paragraph 55: “As shown in FIG. 3, the graphical user interface 310 comprises one virtual object 312 in the form of a ball”),
displaying an image of a surface characterizing object on the display of the selected surface covering,
sensing the movement of the computing device in response to output from the gyroscopic accelerometer, moving the image of the surface characterizing object with respect to the display of the selected surface covering, and (Birnbaum, paragraph 64: “However, in an active mode of interaction, accelerometer signals may still affect other virtual objects in the user interface 410 (not shown in FIG. 4)”)
generating a visceral response to the movement of the image of the surface characterizing object with respect to the display of the selected surface covering by selectively actuating the haptic controller by reference to the topology file (Birnbaum, paragraph 18: “touching a virtual object, may cause the processor to generate a haptic signal simulating the virtual object's surface features, such as its texture. The simulation of the surface may take the form of a vibration or other haptic feedback effect”) and the friction coefficient file (Birnbaum, paragraph 29: “Like other virtual objects, virtual message objects may have both a texture profile and a friction profile, which may be used to calculate haptic effects;” paragraph 55: “The processor may determine a haptic effect based, at least in part, on a friction profile and/or a texture profile of a virtual object.”).
With regards to claim 2, which depends on claim 1, Birnbaum discloses wherein the computing device further comprises an audio speaker, and wherein generating a visceral response to the movement of the image of the surface characterizing object with respect to the display of the selected surface covering further comprises selectively generating an audible output from the audio speaker by reference to the topology file and the friction coefficient file (Birnbaum, paragraph 21: “A modern handheld device may include the capability to include multiple modes of feedback. These modes may be movement based “active modes” or texture based “passive modes.” The modes of feedback may be output to the user visually through the display, audibly using speakers, or haptically using actuators.”).
With regards to claim 3, which depends on claim 1, Birnbaum discloses wherein the computing device comprises a smartphone (Birnbaum, paragraph 15: “One illustrative embodiment of the present invention comprises a messaging device, such as a mobile phone;” fig. 3-7: all show a mobile device with a touch screen and messaging capabilities, which are interpreted as a “smartphone;” paragraphs 32-33 also describe additional details regarding connecting the phone to a network or the internet).
With regards to claim 5, which depends on claim 1, Birnbaum discloses wherein the surface characterizing object is projected as a flat or a three-dimensional object (Birnbaum, paragraph 23: “Each virtual object comprises a virtual physical parameter which defines one or more of the object's size, mass, shape, collision behavior, and texture… For example, a ball could have a friction profile which causes the ball to respond to interaction by bouncing while another ball may respond by rolling;” the ball is interpreted as a three-dimensional object in this example).
With regards to claim 6, which depends on claim 1, Birnbaum discloses wherein the surface characterizing object is projected as a ball or a polyhedron (Birnbaum, paragraph 23: “Each virtual object comprises a virtual physical parameter which defines one or more of the object's size, mass, shape, collision behavior, and texture… For example, a ball could have a friction profile which causes the ball to respond to interaction by bouncing while another ball may respond by rolling”).
With regards to claim 7, which depends on claim 1, Birnbaum discloses wherein the surface characterizing object comprises plural objects (Birnbaum, paragraph 23: “Each virtual object comprises a virtual physical parameter which defines one or more of the object's size, mass, shape, collision behavior, and texture.” Paragraph 25: “The user may then define additional characteristics, such as the ball's size and color.” The characteristics of the object are interpreted as objects because they are stored in data as data objects).
With regards to claim 8, which depends on claim 1, Birnbaum discloses wherein two or more candidate surface coverings can be displayed simultaneously, thereby allowing a user to move the object across one surface and then another for comparison purposes (Birnbaum, paragraph 22: “In such a mode, tilting the messaging device may cause virtual objects displayed on a graphical user interface to appear to roll around. In response to the movement of the virtual objects, the device may generate haptic feedback representing friction and impacts between the virtual objects and other surfaces;” the impacts between the objects requires them to be displayed simultaneously; having two objects simultaneously, which have been described as having the simulation feedback, would enable a user to interact with both for comparison purposes).
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.
Claim(s) 4 and 9-20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Birnbaum in view of Saboune et al (US20200201437A1; filed 12/21/2018; hereinafter Saboune).
With regards to claim 4, which depends on claim 1, Birnbaum discloses an accessible topology and coefficient of friction files for various surface coverings (Birnbaum, paragraph 29: “Like other virtual objects, virtual message objects may have both a texture profile and a friction profile, which may be used to calculate haptic effects”).
However, Birnbaum does not disclose wherein the library of surface coverings is remotely stored and accessible by a data communications interface for selectively receiving remotely stored.
Saboune teaches wherein the library of surface coverings is remotely stored and accessible by a data communications interface for selectively receiving remotely stored (Saboune, paragraph 28: "For example, haptic feedback determined at haptic effect generation module 128 may be transmitted to one or more remote devices (e.g., a user's mobile phone, smartphone, tablet, wearable watch, smart eyeglasses, and/or other peripheral device) for rendering to the user").
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to have combined Birnbaum and Saboune such that the data is transmitted to the local device from remote storage. This would have enabled the invention to provide the interaction feedback to a user device from a public source (Saboune, paragraph 37: “In some instances the billboard content also may be provided directly on the remote devices. In other words, the advertisement and the haptic feedback may be provided at the electronic billboard, the remote devices, or any combination thereof”).
With regards to claim 9, which depends on claim 1, Birnbaum does not disclose wherein the surface covering comprises carpet, hardwood, resilient, tile, stone, or wallpaper.
However, Saboune teaches wherein the surface covering comprises carpet, hardwood, resilient, tile, stone, or wallpaper (Saboune, paragraph 58: “The surface on which an overlay is provided may be any size, shape, or material (e.g., fabric, plastic, metal, wood, etc.).”).
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to have combined Birnbaum and Saboune such that the surface textures can include a variety of textures. This would have enabled a user to “feel” and visualize more objects (Saboune, paragraph 58: “enable a customer user to visualize a wider array of product offerings”).
With regards to claim 10, which depends on claim 1, Birnbaum discloses a method of remotely assessing at least one quality of a candidate surface covering, comprising… displaying an image of the chosen surface covering on a display of the computing device (Birnbaum, paragraph 55: “As shown in FIG. 3, the graphical user interface 310 comprises one virtual object 312 in the form of a ball”);
displaying a virtual surface characterizing object with respect to the image of the chosen surface covering on the display of the computing device (Birnbaum, paragraph 55: “As shown in FIG. 3, the graphical user interface 310 comprises one virtual object 312 in the form of a ball”);
manipulating the computing device; calculating and displaying movement of the virtual surface characterizing object with respect to the image of the… surface… on the display of the computing device in response to the computing device manipulation (Birnbaum, paragraph 23: “When the user interacts with the virtual object or the virtual object interacts with other features on the graphical user interface, its movement and the haptic feedback in response to the interaction will be based, at least in part, on the virtual object's friction profile.”);
referencing topology and coefficient of friction files for the… surface covering stored in conjunction with the computing device; and generating visceral feedback, by the computing device, in response to the calculated movement of the virtual surface characterizing object and the topology (Birnbaum, paragraph 18: “touching a virtual object, may cause the processor to generate a haptic signal simulating the virtual object's surface features, such as its texture. The simulation of the surface may take the form of a vibration or other haptic feedback effect”) and coefficient of friction files for the… surface… (Birnbaum, paragraph 29: “Like other virtual objects, virtual message objects may have both a texture profile and a friction profile, which may be used to calculate haptic effects;” paragraph 55: “The processor may determine a haptic effect based, at least in part, on a friction profile and/or a texture profile of a virtual object.”)
However, Birnbaum does not disclose accessing a library of surface covering categories stored in a computing device; choosing a candidate surface covering from among the library;… chosen surface covering… chosen surface… chosen surface covering.
Saboune teaches accessing a library of surface covering categories stored in a computing device; choosing a candidate surface covering from among the library;… chosen surface covering… chosen surface… chosen surface covering (Saboune, paragraph 28: "For example, haptic feedback determined at haptic effect generation module 128 may be transmitted to one or more remote devices (e.g., a user's mobile phone, smartphone, tablet, wearable watch, smart eyeglasses, and/or other peripheral device) for rendering to the user;" the calculation of the haptic feedback values requires data regarding the surfaces to make the calculation, which must be stored one some device).
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to have combined Birnbaum and Saboune such that the selected surface covering are accessed for the user. This would have enabled the haptic feedback to help simulate different object surfaces for the user (Saboune, paragraph 58: “alternate reality and haptic feedback enables the simulation different product offerings by changing the friction on the overlay table (e.g., simulate shiny or matte varnish)”).
With regards to claim 11, which depends on claim 10, Birnbaum discloses wherein the step of generating visceral feedback comprises selectively actuating a haptic controller of the computing device in response to the calculated movement of the virtual surface characterizing object and the topology (Birnbaum, paragraph 18: “touching a virtual object, may cause the processor to generate a haptic signal simulating the virtual object's surface features, such as its texture. The simulation of the surface may take the form of a vibration or other haptic feedback effect”) and coefficient of friction files for the chosen surface covering (Birnbaum, paragraph 29: “Like other virtual objects, virtual message objects may have both a texture profile and a friction profile, which may be used to calculate haptic effects;” paragraph 55: “The processor may determine a haptic effect based, at least in part, on a friction profile and/or a texture profile of a virtual object.”).
Claims 12-19 are dependent claims to claim 10 that add substantially similar limitations to dependent claims 2-9 respectively, which are dependent on claim 1, and thus the added limitations of the dependent claims12-19 are rejected along the same rationales with regards to Birnbaum.
With regards to claim 20, which depends on claim 10, Birnbaum does not disclose wherein the surface covering comprises a textile surface or a furniture surface.
However, Saboune teaches wherein the surface covering comprises a textile surface or a furniture surface (Saboune, Paragraph 58: "In addition, the surface may be a dedicated object for one or more overlays or it can be any piece of furniture in the user's alternate reality environment (e.g., desk, chair, table, wall, etc.). For example, in a furniture showroom, a standard neutral dining table may be provided with different overlays of visual materials (e.g., different species of wood, metal, glass, different colors, different finishes, etc.) that enable a customer user to visualize a wider array of product offerings. Here, alternate reality and haptic feedback enables the simulation different product offerings by changing the friction on the overlay table (e.g., simulate shiny or matte varnish)").
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to have combined Birnbaum and Saboune such that the selected surface covering are accessed for the user. This would have enabled the haptic feedback to help simulate different object surfaces for the user (Saboune, paragraph 58: “alternate reality and haptic feedback enables the simulation different product offerings by changing the friction on the overlay table (e.g., simulate shiny or matte varnish)”).
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to BRODERICK C ANDERSON whose telephone number is (313)446-6566. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Tuesday, Thursday-Saturday 9-5 PST.
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, Stephen Hong can be reached at 5712724124. 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.
/B.C.A/Examiner, Art Unit 2178 /STEPHEN S HONG/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2178
Prosecution Insights