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.
Claim Interpretation
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(f):
(f) Element in Claim for a Combination. – An element in a claim for a combination may be expressed as a means or step for performing a specified function without the recital of structure, material, or acts in support thereof, and such claim shall be construed to cover the corresponding structure, material, or acts described in the specification and equivalents thereof.
The following is a quotation of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph:
An element in a claim for a combination may be expressed as a means or step for performing a specified function without the recital of structure, material, or acts in support thereof, and such claim shall be construed to cover the corresponding structure, material, or acts described in the specification and equivalents thereof.
The claims in this application are given their broadest reasonable interpretation using the plain meaning of the claim language in light of the specification as it would be understood by one of ordinary skill in the art. The broadest reasonable interpretation of a claim element (also commonly referred to as a claim limitation) is limited by the description in the specification when 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is invoked.
As explained in MPEP § 2181, subsection I, claim limitations that meet the following three-prong test will be interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph:
(A) the claim limitation uses the term “means” or “step” or a term used as a substitute for “means” that is a generic placeholder (also called a nonce term or a non-structural term having no specific structural meaning) for performing the claimed function;
(B) the term “means” or “step” or the generic placeholder is modified by functional language, typically, but not always linked by the transition word “for” (e.g., “means for”) or another linking word or phrase, such as “configured to” or “so that”; and
(C) the term “means” or “step” or the generic placeholder is not modified by sufficient structure, material, or acts for performing the claimed function.
Use of the word “means” (or “step”) in a claim with functional language creates a rebuttable presumption that the claim limitation is to be treated in accordance with 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph. The presumption that the claim limitation is interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is rebutted when the claim limitation recites sufficient structure, material, or acts to entirely perform the recited function.
Absence of the word “means” (or “step”) in a claim creates a rebuttable presumption that the claim limitation is not to be treated in accordance with 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph. The presumption that the claim limitation is not interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is rebutted when the claim limitation recites function without reciting sufficient structure, material or acts to entirely perform the recited function.
Claim limitations in this application that use the word “means” (or “step”) are being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, except as otherwise indicated in an Office action. Conversely, claim limitations in this application that do not use the word “means” (or “step”) are not being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, except as otherwise indicated in an Office action.
This application includes one or more claim limitations that do not use the word “means,” but are nonetheless being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, because the claim limitation(s) uses a generic placeholder that is coupled with functional language without reciting sufficient structure to perform the recited function and the generic placeholder is not preceded by a structural modifier. Such claim limitation(s) is/are: “a first determination module”, “a first selection module”, and “a first receiving module” in claim 10.
Because this/these claim limitation(s) is/are being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, it/they is/are being interpreted to cover the corresponding structure described in the specification as performing the claimed function, and equivalents thereof.
If applicant does not intend to have this/these limitation(s) interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, applicant may: (1) amend the claim limitation(s) to avoid it/them being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph (e.g., by reciting sufficient structure to perform the claimed function); or (2) present a sufficient showing that the claim limitation(s) recite(s) sufficient structure to perform the claimed function so as to avoid it/them being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph.
Claim Objections
Claims 2-3 are objected to because of the following informalities:
Regarding claim 2, the claim recites, “wherein determining similar features corresponding to target volume grids in a target model comprises:” in lines 1-3, where the claim depends from claim 1 which already introduces the limitations. As such, proper antecedent basis should be used, and the claim should recite “wherein the determining similar features corresponding to the target volume grids in [[a]]the target model comprises:”
Regarding claim 3, the claim recites “wherein determining a target selection instruction in the preset selection instructions according to the matching features corresponding to the selection condition comprises:” in lines 1-3, where the claim depends from claim 2 which already introduces the limitation. As such, proper antecedent basis should be used, and the claim should recite, “wherein the determining [[a]]the target selection instruction in the preset selection instructions according to the matching features corresponding to the selection condition comprises:”
Appropriate correction is required.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(b):
(b) CONCLUSION.—The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph:
The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the applicant regards as his invention.
Claims 1-12 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor (or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the applicant), regards as the invention.
Claim 1 recites the limitation "the corresponding target volume grid" in lines 3-4. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
Claims 2-9 depend from claim 1 and therefore incorporate the same indefinite language.
Claims 11 and 12 incorporate claim by reference and therefore are indefinite for the same reasons as claim 1 set forth above.
Claim 10 recites the limitation "the corresponding target volume grid" in line 4. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
Claim 3 recites the limitation "the matching volume grid" in line 6. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
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.
Claim 12 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 101, based upon consideration of all the relevant factors, because the claimed invention is directed to non-statutory subject matter. Applicant does not include any language in the specification providing any further guidance or definition to the term “readable storage medium.” Therefore, the broadest reasonable interpretation of the claim covers forms of non-transitory tangible media and transitory propagating signals per se in view of the ordinary and customary meaning of readable storage medium. A signal per se is non-statutory subject matter as it is not a process, machine, manufacture, or composition of matter within the meaning of 35 U.S.C. 101. As a result, Claim 12 covers both statutory and non-statutory subject matter and fails to comply with 35 U.S.C. 101.
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 and 8-12 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over:
Fujimura et al. (US 2021/0027534 A1) in view of
Zhao et al. (US 2023/0298291 A1).
Regarding claim 10, Fujimura discloses:
A model modification apparatus, (Fujimura, Abstract and ¶20) comprising:
A first determination module configured to determine similar features corresponding to target volume grids in a target model, wherein each of the similar features is comprised in the corresponding target volume grid; (Fujimura, ¶22: 3D model represented by voxels – see Fig. 3; ¶23: a line of voxels on a surface of the three-dimensional model in which the predetermined change appears is extracted as a boundary between a component that is desired to be selected by a user and a portion that is not desired to be selected by the user; ¶52: component selection processing unit; ¶60: since the processing is performed while focusing on the surface of a three-dimensional model, a set of voxels that corresponds to a selected component is formed of only the voxels forming the surface of the three-dimensional model, that is, technically, only the surface profile of the three-dimensional model is extracted as the selected component 23; ¶63: component selection processing unit 12 successively refers to the positions of voxels arranged on a line extending in one direction away from the selected voxel 21 that is received by the receiving unit 111, where second exemplary embodiment also focuses on only voxels that form the surface of a three-dimensional model – note positional relationship is a “similar feature” as well as the voxels characterized by being located on the surface of the model – and further component selection processing unit 12 performs extraction processing for extracting, as a change point of the shape of the three-dimensional model, a line of voxels with which the predetermined change first appears on the line extending in the one direction (step 136); ¶¶29-30 discloses components as programs run by CPU)
A first selection module configured to select volume grids associated with the similar features in the target model to obtain a volume grid set, wherein the volume grid set comprises the target volume grids; (Fujimura, ¶25:
When the receiving unit 111 receives a voxel (hereinafter referred to as a “selected voxel”) on a surface of a three-dimensional model displayed on a screen, the voxel being selected by the user, the component selection processing unit 12 generates a set of voxels by using voxels that are positioned on the surface of the three-dimensional model between the selected voxel and the above-mentioned boundary between a component that is desired to be selected by the user and a portion that is not desired to be selected by the user. The generated set of voxels corresponds to the component that is desired to be selected by the user.
¶34: user selects voxel included in component that user desires to select, and when the receiving unit 111 receives the voxel selected by the user (i.e., the selected voxel 21) (step 120), the component selection processing unit 12 generates a set of voxels including the selected voxel 21 by performing processing; ¶63: component selection for extracting voxels to generate set of voxels based on location; ¶¶29-30 discloses components as programs run by CPU)
and
A first receiving module configured to receive operation instructions and execute modification operation corresponding to the operation instructions on the target volume grids in the volume grid set(Fujimura, ¶28: The component editing processing unit 14 causes the user interface unit 11 to display a predetermined editing screen in accordance with a user operation and allows the user to edit the set of voxels generated by the component selection processing unit 12 on this editing screen so as to provide an editing function of making a fine adjustment of the shape of the selected component; ¶¶29-30 discloses components as programs run by CPU)
Fujimura does not explicitly disclose the operation instructions update the target model itself (i.e. edit the target model). User edits to 3D voxel models based on voxel selection, however, where known before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Zhao discloses:
receive operation instructions and execute modification operation corresponding to the operation instructions on the target volume grids in the volume grid set to update the target model (Zhao, Abstract: A voxel-based design approach enables the creating and modifying of a design model comprising a 3D grid of discrete voxels that is represented by a voxel data structure; Fig. 7 and ¶118: In operation, each persona can add and/or delete one or more block items within the grid representing the shared design model 120, where design model editor 114 receives one or more persona edits 410 that are associated with placing, modifying (e.g., enhancing), and/or removing block items 702, 704 from the grid; ¶173: the shared design model 120 comprises an arrangement of predefined, individually selectable voxels of different types within a 3D voxel grid 700, where during a real-time collaboration session including a plurality of users/participants, the design model editor 114 receives inputs (such as persona edits 410) from the users and modifies/updates the shared design model 120 by adding, modifying, and/or removing voxels of the shared design model 120 based on the received inputs)
Both Fujimura and Zhao are directed to user interfaces for interacting with 3D models formed from voxel/volume grids. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention and with a reasonable expectation of success, to modify the user interface for selection and interaction with a 3D volume grid model as provided by Fujimura, by allowing modification and editing of the 3D volume grid model based on user input as provided by Zhao, using known electronic interfacing and programming techniques. The modification results in an improved user interface for interacting with a 3D model design by allowing a user greater control over the data and providing additional useful functionality for interacting with the 3D model.
Regarding claim 1, the apparatus of claim 10 performs the method of claim 1 and as such claim 1 is rejected based on the same rationale as claim 10.
Regarding claim 11, Fujimura discloses:
An electronic device comprising a memory, a processor, and a computer program stored on the memory and capable of running on the processor, wherein the computer program implements the model modification method of claim 1 when executed by the processor (Fujimura, ¶¶29-30 discloses processing apparatus 10 including CPU and memory storing application for processing 3D model and executed by CPU);
The claim is further rejected based on the same rationale as claim 1 set forth above)
Regarding claim 12, Fujimura further discloses:
A readable storage medium on which a computer program is stored, wherein the computer program implements the model modification method of claim 1 when executed by a processor (Fujimura, ¶¶29-30 discloses processing apparatus 10 including CPU and memory storing application for processing 3D model and executed by CPU;
The claim is further rejected based on the same rationale as claim 1 set forth above)
Regarding claim 8, Fujimura further discloses:
wherein selecting volume grids associated with the similar features in the target model to obtain a volume grid set comprises: determining volume grids where the similar features are located for each of the similar features; and selecting all the volume grids to obtain the volume grid set. (Fujimura, ¶25:
When the receiving unit 111 receives a voxel (hereinafter referred to as a “selected voxel”) on a surface of a three-dimensional model displayed on a screen, the voxel being selected by the user, the component selection processing unit 12 generates a set of voxels by using voxels that are positioned on the surface of the three-dimensional model between the selected voxel and the above-mentioned boundary between a component that is desired to be selected by the user and a portion that is not desired to be selected by the user. The generated set of voxels corresponds to the component that is desired to be selected by the user.
Fig. 3 and ¶33: selected component 23 and boundary 25 between selected component 23 and other portion 24; ¶60: since the processing is performed while focusing on the surface of a three-dimensional model, a set of voxels that corresponds to a selected component is formed of only the voxels forming the surface of the three-dimensional model, that is, technically, only the surface profile of the three-dimensional model is extracted as the selected component 23; ¶63: component selection processing unit 12 successively refers to the positions of voxels arranged on a line extending in one direction away from the selected voxel 21 that is received by the receiving unit 111, where second exemplary embodiment also focuses on only voxels that form the surface of a three-dimensional model, and further component selection processing unit 12 performs extraction processing for extracting, as a change point of the shape of the three-dimensional model, a line of voxels with which the predetermined change first appears on the line extending in the one direction (step 136) – see Fig. 25)
Regarding claim 9, Fujimura modified by Zhao further discloses:
wherein the operation instruction comprises a delete instruction, a copy instruction and a move instruction, and executing modification operation corresponding to the operation instruction on the target volume grids in the volume grid set comprises: deleting, copying or moving the volume grids comprised in the volume grid set (Zhao, Abstract: A voxel-based design approach enables the creating and modifying of a design model comprising a 3D grid of discrete voxels that is represented by a voxel data structure; Fig. 7 and ¶118: In operation, each persona can add and/or delete one or more block items within the grid representing the shared design model 120, where design model editor 114 receives one or more persona edits 410 that are associated with placing, modifying (e.g., enhancing), and/or removing block items 702, 704 from the grid; ¶173: the shared design model 120 comprises an arrangement of predefined, individually selectable voxels of different types within a 3D voxel grid 700, where during a real-time collaboration session including a plurality of users/participants, the design model editor 114 receives inputs (such as persona edits 410) from the users and modifies/updates the shared design model 120 by adding, modifying, and/or removing voxels of the shared design model 120 based on the received inputs)
Both Fujimura and Zhao are directed to user interfaces for interacting with 3D models formed from voxel/volume grids. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention and with a reasonable expectation of success, to modify the user interface for selection and interaction with a 3D volume grid model as provided by Fujimura, by allowing modification and editing of the 3D volume grid model based on user input as provided by Zhao, using known electronic interfacing and programming techniques. The modification results in an improved user interface for interacting with a 3D model design by allowing a user greater control over the data and providing additional useful functionality for interacting with the 3D model.
Claim(s) 7 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over:
Fujimura et al. (US 2021/0027534 A1) in view of
Zhao et al. (US 2023/0298291 A1) and in further view of
Ramani et al. (US 2004/0249809 A1).
Regarding claim 7, the limitations included from claim 1 are rejected based on the same rationale as claim 1 set forth above. Further regarding claim 7, Fujimura modified by Zhao further discloses:
wherein the target model is a (Fujimura, ¶33: A component is formed on a body or on another component, and in the first exemplary embodiment, a semicylindrical portion projecting from a body of the three-dimensional model will be described as the component that is desired to be selected by the user; ¶63: component selection processing unit 12 successively refers to the positions of voxels arranged on a line extending in one direction away from the selected voxel 21 that is received by the receiving unit 111, where second exemplary embodiment also focuses on only voxels that form the surface of a three-dimensional model, and further component selection processing unit 12 performs extraction processing for extracting, as a change point of the shape of the three-dimensional model, a line of voxels with which the predetermined change first appears on the line extending in the one direction (step 136) – see Fig. 25)
taking a surface grid on the outer surface of the (ujimura, ¶22: 3D model represented by voxels – see Fig. 3; ¶23: a line of voxels on a surface of the three-dimensional model in which the predetermined change appears is extracted as a boundary between a component that is desired to be selected by a user and a portion that is not desired to be selected by the user; ¶52: component selection processing unit; ¶60: since the processing is performed while focusing on the surface of a three-dimensional model, a set of voxels that corresponds to a selected component is formed of only the voxels forming the surface of the three-dimensional model, that is, technically, only the surface profile of the three-dimensional model is extracted as the selected component 23; ¶63: component selection processing unit 12 successively refers to the positions of voxels arranged on a line extending in one direction away from the selected voxel 21 that is received by the receiving unit 111, where second exemplary embodiment also focuses on only voxels that form the surface of a three-dimensional model – note positional relationship is a “similar feature” as well as the voxels characterized by being located on the surface of the model – and further component selection processing unit 12 performs extraction processing for extracting, as a change point of the shape of the three-dimensional model, a line of voxels with which the predetermined change first appears on the line extending in the one direction (step 136); ¶¶29-30 discloses components as programs run by CPU)
The only limitation not explicitly taught by Fujimura modified by Zhao is that the shape used is tubular. Examiner notes that the references teach a similar shape in the form of a semicylindrical shape (e.g. Fujimura, ¶33) as an exemplary 3D model shape. A tubular voxel shape was a known 3D model shape type before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Ramani discloses:
wherein the target model is a tubular model and the target volume grid is an outer surface volume grid, and determining similar features corresponding to the target volume grid in a target model (Ramani, Fig. 22 and ¶39: example tubular parts; ¶219: Voxelization is the process of converting 3D geometric objects from their continuous geometric representation into a set of voxels that best approximates the continuous object in a 3D discrete space; ¶287: Tubular model is defined as a 3D geometry model which includes one or more tube structure; See figs. 22-23 and ¶¶287-288 disclosing tubular 3D geometry models formed of voxels, and identifying portions of the voxel model including classifications of different parts of model)
Fujimura, Zhao and Ramani are directed to user interfaces for interacting with 3D models formed from voxel/volume grids. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention and with a reasonable expectation of success, to modify the user interface for selection and interaction with a 3D volume grid model as provided by Fujimura, allowing modification and editing of the 3D volume grid model based on user input as provided by Zhao, by using a known voxel model shape as provided by Ramani, using known electronic interfacing and programming techniques. The modification merely substitutes one known voxel shape for another, yielding predictable results of identifying regions of an interactive shape for editing using a different known voxel shape such as tubular shapes. The modification also provides an improved 3D modeling system by allowing different types of shapes for analysis and editing.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to WILLIAM A BEUTEL whose telephone number is (571)272-3132. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 9:00 AM - 5:00 PM (EST).
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, DANIEL HAJNIK can be reached at 571-272-7642. 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.
/WILLIAM A BEUTEL/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2616
Prosecution Insights