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 .
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.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to claims 1 and 3 have been considered but are moot because the new ground of rejection does not rely on any reference applied in the prior rejection of record for any teaching or matter specifically challenged in the argument.
Applicant's arguments filed 07/29/26, regarding claim 4, have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
It is noted that applicant’s arguments regarding amended claim 1 do not apply to claim 4.
Claim 4 is directed to a message receiving apparatus and not the message transmitting apparatus of claim 1. The specific claimed functionality of the message transmitting apparatus does not change or alter the functionality of the receiving apparatus. The particular method used to create a signal prior to its arrival at the receiving apparatus is not limiting upon the receiving apparatus itself.
Thus, this claim is still anticipated by Anderson.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
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 4 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Anderson (US 2013/0293584) (of record).
As to claim 4, Anderson discloses a message receiving apparatus (local receiving device receiving message, paragraph 30, 37; Fig. 8) comprising:
a reception controller configured to cause a communication device to receive the transmission information transmitted by the message transmitting apparatus according to claim 1 (data communication module, 825; paragraph 33, 39, 71).
imagery generator configured to generate imagery in which a virtual object moves in a virtual space (virtual object behavior module, 804; paragraph 68, 72) in accordance with the movement track information included in the transmission information (paragraph 34-36, 39); and
a display controller configured to cause a display for a user who is the recipient to display the generated imagery (Screen Rendering Module, 821; paragraph 35, 68).
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 1 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Anderson (US 2013/0293584) (of record) in view of Jang (US 2016/0265934).
As to claim 1, while Anderson discloses a message transmitting apparatus (local sender device sending message, paragraph 30, 37; Fig. 4, 8) comprising:
processing circuitry (Fig. 9, paragraph 66, 82-85) configured to:
a movement track information generator (user input and gesture recognition system, 822; paragraph 22, 44, 69) configured to,
when a virtual object corresponding to a message is moved in a virtual space in accordance with an operation by a user who is a sender, generate movement track information on a movement track of the virtual object (user input designing virtual path or trajectory message will follow; paragraph 39, 44-45);
generate transmission information (paragraph 37-41) including:
the movement track information (paragraph 39, 46, 60); and
message information indicative of the message (paragraph 37-39, 42-43); and
cause a communication device to transmit the transmission information to a recipient specified by the user (data communication module, 825; paragraph 71).
wherein the operation by the user who is the sender includes:
a first operation in which the user who is the sender selects, as one or more movement tracks of the virtual object, one or more movement tracks from among a plurality of movement tracks prepared in advance (path or trajectory of the virtual object determined by the sender's device based upon the selected virtual object, with an airplane having a different route from a car; paragraph 44, 46); and
a second operation in which the user who is the sender moves the virtual object in the virtual space (sender may influence the path based upon the way the message is launched; via particular touch screen or air gesture; paragraph 44),
wherein the processing circuitry is configured to, before the transmission information is transmitted to the recipient, generate, as the movement track information, information indicative of a movement track obtained by combining the one or more movement tracks selected in the first operation with a movement of the virtual object specified in the second operation (paragraph 44-45),
they fail to specifically disclose a movement track specified in the second operation.
In an analogous art, Jang discloses an object routing system (Fig. 3-4; paragraph 45); paragraph 56-62) which will receive a first input in which the user selects a movement track prepared in advance (Fig. 6-7, input of start and destination to determine generated path; paragraph 60-61) and a second operation in which the user moves the virtual object in the virtual space to specify a different movement track (user drag/drop input to modify the original route; Fig. 4, 8-9; paragraph 48-50, 62-63) so as to enable the user to verify and review that the correct desired position was selected when navigating a touch screen (paragraph 47-50).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Anderson’s system to include a movement track specified in the second operation, as taught in combination with Jang, for the typical benefit of enabling the user to verify and review that the correct desired position was selected when navigating a touch screen (paragraph 47-50).
Claim 2 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Anderson and Jang and further in view of Hall et al. (Hall) (US 2017/0228025) (of record).
As to claim 2, while Anderson discloses wherein the movement track represents a change in a location of the virtual object in the virtual space over time (flight path of virtual object traveling to destination over time; paragraph 35, 39, 46-55, 60),
Anderson fails to specifically disclose wherein the processing circuitry is configured to generate the movement track information by executing processing on the movement track, the processing being processing to remove a noise component caused by the operation by the user.
In an analogous art, Hall discloses an input system for a virtual reality system (Fig. 3; paragraph 56-62) wherein the user input is processed to remove a noise component caused by the operation by the user (paragraph 3, 38, 64-69) so as to suppress and minimize the effects of rhythmic motion and/or other inadvertent input characteristics due to medical conditions, such as Parkinson’s disease (paragraph 3), and provide enhanced user experience in an interactive system, such as a 3D interactive system or any virtual or augmented reality environment (paragraph 3).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Anderson’s system to include wherein the movement track information generator is configured to generate the movement track information by executing processing on the movement track, the processing being processing to remove a noise component caused by the operation by the user, as taught in combination with Hall, for the typical benefit of suppressing and minimizing the effects of rhythmic motion and/or other inadvertent input characteristics due to medical conditions, such as Parkinson’s disease (paragraph 3), and providing enhanced user experience in an interactive system, such as a 3D interactive system or any virtual or augmented reality environment (paragraph 3).
Conclusion
THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. 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 James R Sheleheda whose telephone number is (571)272-7357. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 8 am-5 pm CST.
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, Benjamin Bruckart can be reached at (571) 272-3982. 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.
/James R Sheleheda/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2424
Prosecution Insights