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 .
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to claim(s) 1 and 2 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.
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.
Claim(s) 1-3, 5, 9, 11, 13, and 17 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Lake et al (pub # 20190392163) in view of Reyes et al (pub # 20200007672).
Consider claim 1. Lake et al teaches A system, the system comprising:
a headset configured to cover at least a portion of a user's eye, (Fig. 1 and paragraph 0027, HMD 110).
the headset comprising:
a sensor configured to detect a gaze direction of at least one eye of the user; (paragraph 0072, an eye tracker (e.g., 117) of the first HMD (304) detects that the first user (301) is gazing at particular information when the selection operation is received from the portable interface device (320)).
and at least one display configured to display a media selection; (Fig. 1 and paragraph 0028, The HMD 110 includes at least one display 111 (two such displays illustrated in FIG. 1) positioned to display information in the field of view of at least one eye of a user when HMD 110 is worn on the user's head).
wherein the front of the headset is opposite a rear of the headset, (Fig. 4 and paragraph 0064 second hologram 432 located at the front of the headset 400 is opposite to first hologram 431 that is located at a rear of headset 400).
and wherein the rear of the headset is nearer the user's eye than the front of the headset (Fig. 4, hologram 431 is nearer the user’s eye than hologram 432).
and a processor configured to:
determine one or more media presentations to provide as options to the user on the at least one display; (paragraph 0070, If the first user (301) is authorized to view the information (115) first HMD (304), at 502, displays information (115) to an eye of a first user (301) wearing the first HMD (304), thus after the user is authenticated the system determines to present information 115 to the user).
and receive the users selection of one media presentation, based on the gaze direction of the user, from the one or more media presentations. (paragraph 0072, The first HMD (304) utilizes information obtained or measured by the eye tracker (117) to determine where in the information the user is gazing. Based on the gazing position and the known location of a plurality of different particular information objects, the particular information that the user is gazing at is determined. For example, the information (115) may be a virtual keyboard. The first HMD (304) determines that, based on the gazing position and the known position of the letter “T” on the virtual keyboard, the user is gazing at the letter “T” when the selection operation is received from the wireless portable interface device (320)).
Lake et al does not specifically disclose a camera configured to capture images from a front of the headset. However Reyes et al in at least Fig. 1C and paragraph 0104 discloses a headset 170 that comprises a camera 182 located on a front of the headset to capture images. Therefore it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the camera of Reyes et al with the headset of Lake et al in order to provide a mixed reality environment wherein the user can observe the real world around them as well as the virtual media presented to them on the display.
Consider claim 2. Lake et al teaches A method of providing media presentations to a user, (abstract).
the method comprising:
receiving an identity or an estimated identity of the user; (paragraph 0067, first HMD (304) authenticates the first user (301). Paragraph 0068, Such user authentication may include a password or passcode that is entered via a similar interface).
determining one or more media presentations to present to a user; (paragraph 0070, If the first user (301) is authorized to view the information (115) first HMD (304), at 502, displays information (115) to an eye of a first user (301) wearing the first HMD (304), thus after the user is authenticated the system determines to present information 115 to the user).
providing one or more media presentations as options for selection by the user; (paragraph 0070, If the first user (301) is authorized to view the information (115) first HMD (304), at 502, displays information (115) to an eye of a first user (301) wearing the first HMD (304), thus after the user is authenticated the system determines to present information 115 to the user).
receiving a selection of the user of one media presentation from the provided one or more media presentations; (paragraph 0072, The first HMD (304) utilizes information obtained or measured by the eye tracker (117) to determine where in the information the user is gazing. Based on the gazing position and the known location of a plurality of different particular information objects, the particular information that the user is gazing at is determined. For example, the information (115) may be a virtual keyboard. The first HMD (304) determines that, based on the gazing position and the known position of the letter “T” on the virtual keyboard, the user is gazing at the letter “T” when the selection operation is received from the wireless portable interface device (320)).
and transmitting the selected one media presentation to a display of a headset. (paragraph 0075, a transmitter (118) of the first HMD (304) transmits the message to the second HMD (306) being worn by the second user (302)).
the headset configured to cover at least a portion of an eye of the user, (Fig. 2, HMD 210 covers the user’s eyes).
the headset comprising:
a sensor configured to detect a gaze direction of the eye of the user; (paragraph 0037, HMD 110 further includes an eye-tracker 117 that is operative to detect the eye position and/or gaze direction of at least one eye of the user and is communicatively coupled to processor 112).
at least one display configured to display a media selection (paragraph 0028, The HMD 110 includes at least one display 111 (two such displays illustrated in FIG. 1) positioned to display information in the field of view of at least one eye of a user when HMD 110 is worn on the user's head).
wherein the front of the headset is opposite a rear of the headset, (Fig. 4 and paragraph 0064 second hologram 432 located at the front of the headset 400 is opposite to first hologram 431 that is located at a rear of headset 400).
and wherein the rear of the headset is nearer the user's eye than the front of the headset. (Fig. 4, hologram 431 is nearer the user’s eye than hologram 432).
Lake et al does not specifically disclose and a camera configured to capture images from a front of the headset. However Reyes et al in at least Fig. 1C and paragraph 0104 discloses a headset 170 that comprises a camera 182 located on a front of the headset to capture images. Therefore it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the camera of Reyes et al with the headset of Lake et al in order to provide a mixed reality environment wherein the user can observe the real world around them as well as the virtual media presented to them on the display.
Consider claims 3 and 11. Lake et al does not specifically disclose The system of claim 1, wherein the at least one display is configured to display images captured by the camera. However Reyes et al in at least Fig. 1C and paragraph 0104 discloses a headset 170 that comprises a camera 182 located on a front of the headset to capture images. Therefore it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the camera of Reyes et al with the headset of Lake et al in order to provide a mixed reality environment wherein the user can observe the real world around them as well as the virtual media presented to them on the display.
Consider claims 5 and 13. Lake et al does not specifically disclose The system of claim 1, wherein the system further comprises one or more physiological sensors selected from the group consisting of a heart rate monitor, a blood pressure monitor, a pulse monitor, a respiration rate sensor, a blood oxygen sensor, a temperature sensor, and a glucose sensor. However Reyes et al in at least paragraph 0131 discloses a system 300 which is an embodiment of the head mounted device shown in Fig. 1C that can include plurality of input sensors such as a blood pressure sensor. Therefore it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to combine the sensors of Reyes et al with the system of Lake et al in order to determine a current activity of the user and to then generate content based on said activity in order to provide a more personalized experience.
Consider claims 9 and 17. Lake et al further teaches The system of claim 1, wherein the processor is configured to access an identity database, (paragraph 0040, The enrollment process further includes extracting biometric identification data from the at least one image of at least a portion of an eye of the subject user (“reference biometric identification data”), and storing, or otherwise associating, the reference biometric identification data with the wearable heads-up display.).
wherein the identity database comprises a history of selected media presentations by the user and physiological data of the user before, during and after selection of the selected media presentations. (paragraph 0070, If the first user (301) is authorized to view the information (115) first HMD (304), at 502, displays information (115) to an eye of a first user (301) wearing the first HMD (304).).
Claim(s) 4 and 12 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Lake et al (pub # 20190392163) in view of Reyes et al (pub # 20200007672) and further in view of Vaziri (U.S. Pat # 11,450,113).
Consider claim 4. Lake et al in view of Reyes et al does not specifically disclose The system of claim 1, wherein the headset further comprises a status light, wherein the status light is configured to illuminate according to output from the processor. However Vaziri in at least Figs. 6 and 7 as well as col. 7 lines 12-37 discloses a wearable device comprising a status LED 604 for communicating a message or alarm to the user. Therefore it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the status LED of Vaziri with the system of Lake et al in view of Reyes et al in order to improve the system by providing a means of communicating an operating status of the device to the user.
Consider claim 12. Lake et al in view of Reyes et al does not specifically disclose The method of claim 2, wherein the headset further comprises a status light, wherein the method further comprises a step of illuminating the status light to indicate a viewing status of the headset. However Vaziri in at least Figs. 6 and 7 as well as col. 7 lines 12-37 discloses a wearable device comprising a status LED 604 for communicating a message or alarm to the user. Therefore it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the status LED of Vaziri with the system of Lake et al in view of Reyes et al in order to improve the system by providing a means of communicating an operating status of the device to the user.
Claim(s) 6, 7, 14, and 15 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Lake et al (pub # 20190392163) in view of Reyes et al (pub # 20200007672) and further in view of Kim et al (pub # 20150156196).
Consider claims 6 and 14. Lake et al in view of Reyes et al does not specifically disclose The system of claim 1, wherein the processor is configured to estimate an age of the user based on one or more images of the user's eye that are collected during use of the headset. However Kim et al in at least paragraph 0161 discloses a wearable electronic device 300 comprising a control unit 310 that may predict an age of the user wearing the device 300 based on bio-information of the user, such as a pupil or an iris. Therefore it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the system and method of Kim et al with the system of Lake et al in view of Reyes et al so as to to provide a user-based view restricted service or a customized service by performing a user authentication based on bio-information about a user of a wearable electronic device and by controlling a function of the wearable electronic device based on a result of the user authentication (Kim et al paragraph 0009).
Consider claims 7 and 15. Kim et al further teaches The system of claim 6, wherein the processor is configured to determine one or more media presentations to provide to the user based on the estimated age of the user. (paragraph 0162, when an adult authentication of the user is successfully completed, an object 345 indicating that the adult authentication is successfully completed may be displayed using the display unit 340 of the wearable electronic device 300 and the user may view the adult content being played back on the screen 411 of the display device 410 through the wearable electronic device 300.).
Claim(s) 8, 10, 16, and 18 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Lake et al (pub # 20190392163) in view of Reyes et al (pub # 20200007672) and further in view of Kim et al (pub # 20190384389).
Consider claims 8 and 16. Lake et al in view of Reyes et al does not specifically disclose The system of claim 1, wherein the one or more media presentations to provide are determined based on physiological measurements of other similar users of the headset. However Kim et al in at least paragraph 0371 discloses a processor 1670 of a wearable XR device that “may store device use history information about a user in the memory 1650 (S1710). The device use history information may include information about the name, category, and contents of content provided to the user, information about a time at which a device has been used, information about a place in which the device has been used, time information, and information about use of an application installed in the device.” Further paragraph 0372 discloses “the learning processor 1670 may acquire device use pattern information about the user by analyzing the device use history information (S1720). For example, when the XR device 1600 provides specific content A to the user, the learning processor 1670 may learn information about a pattern of the device used by the user using the corresponding terminal by combining specific information about content A (e.g., information about the ages of users that generally use content A, information about the contents of content A, and content information similar to content A), and information about the time points, places, and number of times in which the user using the corresponding terminal has consumed content A”, thus the media presentations are determined based on physiological measurements (user’s age) of other similar user’s of the headset. Therefore it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the system and method of Kim et al with the system and method of Lake et al in view of Reyes et al in order to provide content that the user may be interested in and improve user experience.
Consider claims 10 and 18. Lake et al in view of Reyes et al does not specifically disclose The system of claim 1, wherein the processor is configured to access an identity database, wherein the identity database comprises a history of selected media presentations by other users of the same, or nearly the same, estimated age as the user. However Kim et al in at least paragraph 0371 discloses a processor 1670 of a wearable XR device that “may store device use history information about a user in the memory 1650 (S1710). The device use history information may include information about the name, category, and contents of content provided to the user, information about a time at which a device has been used, information about a place in which the device has been used, time information, and information about use of an application installed in the device.” Further paragraph 0372 discloses “the learning processor 1670 may acquire device use pattern information about the user by analyzing the device use history information (S1720). For example, when the XR device 1600 provides specific content A to the user, the learning processor 1670 may learn information about a pattern of the device used by the user using the corresponding terminal by combining specific information about content A (e.g., information about the ages of users that generally use content A, information about the contents of content A, and content information similar to content A), and information about the time points, places, and number of times in which the user using the corresponding terminal has consumed content A”. Therefore it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the system and method of Kim et al with the system and method of Lake et al in view of Reyes et al in order to provide content that the user may be interested in and improve user experience.
Conclusion
Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP § 706.07(a). 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 CHAYCE R BIBBEE whose telephone number is (571)270-7222. The examiner can normally be reached Mon-Thurs 8:00-6:00.
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, Matthew Eason can be reached at 571-270-7230. 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.
/CHAYCE R BIBBEE/Examiner, Art Unit 2624
/MATTHEW A EASON/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2624