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 1-20 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 providing prompt information (mental processes and organizing methods of human activity) involving:
receiving a control operation;
triggering an interaction function;
transmitting object prompting information
Claims 1, 8, and 15 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 providing prompt information.
No particular machine beyond generic components. Claims 1, 8, and 15 recite “electronic device”; Claims 8 and 15 recite “computer program”; Claim 8 recites “processor”, “memory”; claim 15 “non-transitory computer-readable storage medium”; yet, these are generic computing elements. See MPEP 2106.05(b), (f).
The additional elements (virtual scene, target virtual object, first virtual character, second virtual character) 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 (electronic device, processor, memory, computer program, non-transitory computer-readable storage medium) performing information prompts 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 servers, processors, memories, programs, and information prompts 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 1-20 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 providing prompt information, implemented on a generic computer, and therefore do not add “significantly more.”
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 1-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over US Pub. 20190275429 to Yang et al (Yang) in view of PUBG mobile video game as evidence provided by YouTube video titled “Map Control tips for Miramar! PUBG MOBILE” - https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-HAsj9UcsCM&t=3s to PUBG mobile, and US Pub. 20210031106 to Alderman et al (Alderman).
Claims 1, 8, and 15. Yang discloses an electronic device, comprising a memory and a processor, the memory having a computer program stored therein (¶11), and the processor being configured to perform an information prompting method including:
displaying a virtual scene, the virtual scene, a first virtual character controlled by a first terminal and a second virtual character controlled by a second terminal (Fig. 1, and ¶¶40-43);
receiving a control operation for the first virtual character (¶¶3-4, and 56);
in response to the control operation, triggering an interaction function corresponding to the virtual scene (¶¶3-4, and 56); and
in response to the interaction function, transmitting object prompting information to the second terminal (¶¶58-63 “broadcast notification”).
However, Yang fails to explicitly disclose the virtual scene including a target virtual object;
receiving a control operation for the first virtual character when a distance between the first virtual character and the target virtual object is less than a first preset threshold;
in response to the control operation, triggering an interaction function corresponding to the target virtual object of the virtual scene;
in response to the interaction function, transmitting object prompting information associated with the target virtual object to the second terminal, the object prompting information prompting the second virtual character to interact with the target virtual object (emphasis added).
PUBG mobile teaches the virtual scene including a target virtual object (at 0:46-1:29 there are a plurality of items within the video game for a player character to pick up and add to their inventory);
receiving a control operation for the first virtual character when a distance between the first virtual character and the target virtual object is less than a first preset threshold (at 0:46-1:30 a user press associated buttons to move the player character in close proximity to different items within the video game and nearby prompts are displayed for the opportunity for the player to gather different items);
in response to the control operation, triggering an interaction function corresponding to the target virtual object of the virtual scene (at 0:46-1:30 the user of the video game presses associated button/icon to pick up nearby items with the video game screen).
PNG
media_image1.png
1036
1380
media_image1.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image2.png
1042
1378
media_image2.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image3.png
1044
1380
media_image3.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image4.png
1040
1380
media_image4.png
Greyscale
The gaming system of Yang would have motivation to use the teachings of PUBG mobile in order to provide many opportunities for game players to collect a large variety different weapons, armor, skills, or the like in doing so would make the game more fun and interesting because having a variety of items to use allow game players to play longer to obtain desired items and become more strategic in which items to collect and use during different game situations.
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 Yang with the teachings of PUBG mobile in order to provide many opportunities for game players to collect many different weapons, armor, skills, or the like in doing so would make the game more fun and interesting.
Alderman teaches transmitting object prompting information associated with the target virtual object; and prompting the second virtual character to interact with the target virtual object (Figs. 3A+B, and ¶¶30, 69, 83). The gaming system of Yang in view of PUBG mobile would have motivation to use the teachings of Alderman in order to provide teammates with specific and precise information during game play action in doing so would improve communication abilities between users playing the same online video game.
It would have been further 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 Yang in view of PUBG mobile with the teachings of Alderman in order to improve communication abilities between users playing the online same video game.
Claims 2, 9, and 16. Yang, PUBG mobile, and Alderman teaches wherein the method further comprises:
causing a display of the object prompting information near the target virtual object in the virtual scene at the second terminal, the object prompting information including identity information of the target virtual object (see Alderman Fig. 9, and ¶¶4, 50, 52, “first visual marker as displayed to the second user”, “game state information”).
Claims 3, 10, and 17. Yang, PUBG mobile, and Alderman teaches wherein the method further comprises:
causing a display of an interaction result between the second virtual character and the target virtual object in the virtual scene at the first terminal (see Alderman ¶¶77, 81 “acknowledgement or confirmation communication action”).
Claims 4, 11, and 18. Yang, PUBG mobile, and Alderman teaches wherein the method further comprises:
displaying virtual identifiers of a plurality of candidate virtual objects;
determining a target virtual identifier from the virtual identifiers of the candidate virtual objects in accordance with the control operation for the first virtual character; and
determining a candidate virtual object corresponding to the target virtual identifier as the target virtual object (see Alderman Figs. 5B, 6, 9, and ¶¶30, 61, 122).
Claims 5 and 12. Yang, PUBG mobile, and Alderman teaches wherein the method further comprises at least one of the following:
causing a display of first text information at the first terminal, the first text information comprising object text information corresponding to a first candidate virtual object; and
determining the first candidate virtual object as the target virtual object when the first text information indicates that the second virtual character interacts with the first candidate virtual object (see PUBG mobile at 2:07, 3:22, 3:43 messages indicating items that other players has gathered or used).
PNG
media_image5.png
1032
1374
media_image5.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image6.png
910
1378
media_image6.png
Greyscale
Claims 6, 13, and 19. Yang, PUBG mobile, and Alderman teaches wherein the triggering an interaction function corresponding to the target virtual object of the virtual scene comprises:
controlling the first virtual character to move in the virtual scene; and
triggering the interaction function when a distance between the first virtual character and the target virtual object is greater than a second preset threshold, the second preset threshold being greater than or equal to the first preset threshold (see Alderman Fig. 3A, element 313, and ¶¶94-95 there are varying distance ranges associated with communication actions).
Claims 7, 14, and 20. Yang, PUBG mobile, and Alderman teaches wherein the method further comprises:
causing a removal of the object prompting information from the second terminal after the second virtual character interacts with a first virtual object, the first virtual object having an object type similar to an object type of the target virtual object (see Alderman ¶¶81-82).
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