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 § 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 21-40 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 101 because the claimed invention is directed to a judicial exception (i.e., a law of nature, a natural phenomenon, or an abstract idea) without significantly more.
The claims are directed to determining and providing data (mental processes and organizing methods of human activity) involving:
data indication a user selection of a particular operation member of a particular category of operation members (collecting data related to button, trigger, control stick selections);
determining that an alternative input request has been accepted that specifies that user selections of the particular operation member of the particular category of operation members are associated with generating operation data for a different category of operation members (person makes a modification request to different buttons, triggers, control sticks);
generating particular operation data for the different category of operation members (tracking data button, trigger, control stick selections)
Claims 21, 28, and 35 do not integrate the abstract ideas into a practical application.
The claim does not improve the functioning of the computer itself or another technology; rather, it uses the computer components as tools to implement the abstract idea of determining and providing operation data.
No particular machine beyond generic components. Claims 28 and 35 recite “processor”, “non-transitory computer-readable medium”; yet, these are generic computing elements. See MPEP 2106.05(b), (f).
The additional elements (controller) are generally linking the use of a judicial exception to a particular technological environment or field of use and do not impose a meaningful limit on the abstract idea.
Accordingly, the claim does not integrate the abstract idea into a practical application under MPEP § 2106.04(d).
Considered individually and as an ordered combination, the claims do not recite an inventive concept (“significantly more”) beyond the abstract ideas.
Generic computer components and environments (processor, non-transitory computer-readable medium) performing data receiving, determining, and providing are well-understood, routine, and conventional (WURC) activities in the field of computer gaming.
Under Berkheimer v. HP, 881 F.3d 1360, absent evidence in the record that any claimed element or arrangement is not WURC, it is proper to treat generic processors, memories, and data receiving/determining/providing as conventional. The claims do not recite non-conventional computer functionality or architecture.
No specific algorithm, data structure, or hardware improvement is claimed that would transform the abstract idea into patent-eligible subject matter.
Therefore, claims 21-40 are ineligible under 35 U.S.C. § 101. The claims are directed to judicial exceptions—mental process and organizing methods of human activity —and do not integrate those exceptions into a practical application. The additional elements, viewed individually and in combination, amount to no more than the abstract idea of determining and providing data, implemented on a generic computer, and therefore do not add “significantly more.”
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.
Claims 21, 23, 25-28, 30, 32-35, 37, 39, and 40 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Steam video game system as evidence provided by YouTube video, “Steam Controller Tutorial” - https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SvkX1mpEUlg to GeniusPieTrap (herein referred to as Steam).
Claims 21, 28, and 35. Steam discloses a system comprising:
(as required by claim 28) one or more processors; and
(as required by claims 28, 35) one or more non-transitory computer-readable media that store instructions which, when executed by the one or more processors (the Steam video game system comprise of different video game programs in connection with control circuitry to execute the video game programs), cause the one or more processors to perform operations comprising:
receiving, by a controller that includes two or more of (i) one or more operation members of a button category of operation members, (ii) one or more operation members of a joystick category of operation members, and (iii) one or more operation members of a trigger category of operation members, data indication a user selection of a particular operation member of a particular category of operation members (at 5:39-7:26 under settings option “Controller”, “Steam Controller”, user touch different buttons, triggers, joysticks);
determining that an alternative input request has been accepted that specifies that user selections of the particular operation member of the particular category of operation members are associated with generating operation data for a different category of operation members (at 8:30-9:50, specifically see at 8:48-9:00, “Left trigger”, “Trigger Analog output”; at 9:22-9:30 “Gamepad”, “style of input”, “the physical inputs of the controller can be programmed to act like different types of devices”, e.g., the buttons “A”, “B”, “X”, “Y” can act as directional pad buttons or joystick moves; at 9:41-9:50 the left dpad, “Controller configuration”, “style of input” can act as another controller input); and
based at least on (i) receiving the data indicating the user selection of the particular operation member of the particular category of operation members and (ii) determining that the alternative input request has been accepted that specifies that user selections of the particular operation member of the particular category of operation members are associated with generating operation data for a different category of operation members, generating particular operation data for the different category of operation members (at 8:30-10:10 buttons, pads, joysticks generates different associated outputs according to the user’s desired configuration, also see at 10:10 “Mode shifting”, “Mode shifting allows an input style on the controller to be ‘shifted’ into another mode while a button is being held… the mode will change back to its normal mode. This allows additional buttons to be mapped or settings to be changed between modes. You can define what mode this input shifts into, as well as what button shifts it…”); and
providing the generated operation data for the different category of operation members, for output (at 8:30-10:10, 11:37-12:03 shows different “Controller configurations”, controller binding templates available for use during different video game play).
PNG
media_image1.png
1022
1350
media_image1.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image2.png
1020
1348
media_image2.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image3.png
1028
1352
media_image3.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image4.png
1036
1350
media_image4.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image5.png
1022
1352
media_image5.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image6.png
1018
1348
media_image6.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image7.png
1020
1350
media_image7.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image8.png
1022
1356
media_image8.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image9.png
1022
1348
media_image9.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image10.png
1022
1352
media_image10.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image11.png
1028
1346
media_image11.png
Greyscale
Claims 23, 30, and 37. Steam discloses wherein generating particular operation data for the different category of operation members comprises:
generating button operation data for a user selection of one or more operation members of the trigger category of operation members or one or more operation members of the joystick category of operation members (at 8:30-10:10 the right/left joystick on the gamepad is modified to output button commands).
Claims 25, 32, and 39. Steam discloses wherein generating particular operation data for the different category of operation members comprises:
generating tilt angle or direction operation data when the particular operation member comprises an operation member of the button category (at 8:30-10:10 the button pad on the gamepad is modified to output directional pad commands).
Claims 26, 33, and 40. Steam discloses wherein generating particular operation data for the different category of operation members comprises:
generating trigger squeeze magnitude data when the particular operation member comprises an operation member of the button category (at 7:00-7:08 shows how much pressure is applied to triggers).
PNG
media_image12.png
960
1232
media_image12.png
Greyscale
Claims 27 and 34. Steam discloses wherein generating particular operation data for the different category of operation members comprises:
generating trigger squeeze magnitude data when the particular operation member comprises an operation member of the joystick category (at 7:00-7:08 shows how much pressure is applied to triggers).
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.
The factual inquiries for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized as follows:
1. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art.
2. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue.
3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art.
4. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness.
Claims 22, 24, 29, 31, 36, and 38 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Steam video game system as evidence provided by YouTube video, “Steam Controller Tutorial” - https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SvkX1mpEUlg to GeniusPieTrap (herein referred to as Steam) in view of YouTube video, Most Useful Index Controller Bindings, Simplified - Natural Grabbing, Dual Stage Triggers + more - https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ke_kfTAVN2I to Liam2349 (herein referred to as Liam) and further evidence How to Remap Your Gaming Controller's Buttons on Any Platform | Lifehacker, Wayback Machine - https://lifehacker.com/how-to-remap-your-gaming-controllers-buttons-on-any-pla-1846783156 to Hesse.
Claims 22, 29, and 36. Steam fails to explicitly disclose limitations of claims 22, 29, and 36.
Liam teaches generating joystick operation data for a user selection of one or more operation members of the trigger category of operation members or one or more operation members of the button category of operation members (see Liam at 2:17-3:19, 4:07-4:25, 8:12-8:28 discusses bind joystick or control stick to buttons or triggers, as further as evidence see Hesse which discusses remap controls, customizable controls/inputs, “change your controller’s “X” button to be the “R1” trigger”, “modifying the system controller settings”). The gaming system of Steam would have motivation to use the teachings of Liam in view of Hesse in order to customize the video game controller input commands to a preferred layout of the user in doing so would provide additional options to modify video game controller as person wishes which would provide a better gaming experience.
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the gaming system of Steam with the teachings of Liam in view of Hesse in order to customize the video game controller input commands to a preferred layout of the user in doing so would provide additional options to modify video game controller as person wishes which would provide a better gaming experience.
PNG
media_image13.png
784
1382
media_image13.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image14.png
776
1386
media_image14.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image15.png
784
1384
media_image15.png
Greyscale
Claims 24, 31, and 38. Steam in view of Liam and Hesse teaches wherein generating particular operation data for the different category of operation members comprises:
generating trigger operation data for a user selection of one or more operation members of the joystick category of operation members or one or more operation members of the button category of operation members (see Liam at 2:17-3:19, 4:07-4:25, 8:12-8:28 discusses bind joystick or control stick to buttons or triggers, as further as evidence see Hesse which discusses remapping video game controller’s buttons).
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to DAMON J PIERCE whose telephone number is (571)270-1997. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 8am-5pm.
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.
/DAMON J PIERCE/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3715
Prosecution Insights