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 .
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted on 06/18/2024 has been considered. The submission is in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statement is being considered by the examiner.
Drawings
The drawings are objected to as failing to comply with 37 CFR 1.84(p)(5) because they do not include the following reference sign(s) mentioned in the description: reference character 400 mentioned in [37] is not present in Fig. 1. Corrected drawing sheets in compliance with 37 CFR 1.121(d) are required in reply to the Office action to avoid abandonment of the application. Any amended replacement drawing sheet should include all of the figures appearing on the immediate prior version of the sheet, even if only one figure is being amended. Each drawing sheet submitted after the filing date of an application must be labeled in the top margin as either “Replacement Sheet” or “New Sheet” pursuant to 37 CFR 1.121(d). If the changes are not accepted by the examiner, the applicant will be notified and informed of any required corrective action in the next Office action. The objection to the drawings will not be held in abeyance.
The drawings are objected to as failing to comply with 37 CFR 1.84(p)(5) because they include the following reference character(s) not mentioned in the description: reference character S400 of Fig. 12. Corrected drawing sheets in compliance with 37 CFR 1.121(d), or amendment to the specification to add the reference character(s) in the description in compliance with 37 CFR 1.121(b) are required in reply to the Office action to avoid abandonment of the application. Any amended replacement drawing sheet should include all of the figures appearing on the immediate prior version of the sheet, even if only one figure is being amended. Each drawing sheet submitted after the filing date of an application must be labeled in the top margin as either “Replacement Sheet” or “New Sheet” pursuant to 37 CFR 1.121(d). If the changes are not accepted by the examiner, the applicant will be notified and informed of any required corrective action in the next Office action. The objection to the drawings will not be held in abeyance.
The drawings are objected to because Figs. 3-10 are poorly scanned such that line types and text are unclear. Corrected drawing sheets in compliance with 37 CFR 1.121(d) are required in reply to the Office action to avoid abandonment of the application. Any amended replacement drawing sheet should include all of the figures appearing on the immediate prior version of the sheet, even if only one figure is being amended. The figure or figure number of an amended drawing should not be labeled as “amended.” If a drawing figure is to be canceled, the appropriate figure must be removed from the replacement sheet, and where necessary, the remaining figures must be renumbered and appropriate changes made to the brief description of the several views of the drawings for consistency. Additional replacement sheets may be necessary to show the renumbering of the remaining figures. Each drawing sheet submitted after the filing date of an application must be labeled in the top margin as either “Replacement Sheet” or “New Sheet” pursuant to 37 CFR 1.121(d). If the changes are not accepted by the examiner, the applicant will be notified and informed of any required corrective action in the next Office action. The objection to the drawings will not be held in abeyance.
Specification
The disclosure is objected to because of the following informalities:
In paragraph [70] , “Fig. 9” should read “Fig. 8”.
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.
Claim 3 is 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 3 recites “an identified scale,” earlier, Claim 3 recites “identifies a type and scale,” it is unclear whether this is a new identified scale or referring to the previous one. For the sake of further prosecution, Examiner will interpret the identified scale as the same. Claim 3 also recites “a 3D building model,” Claim 1, to which it depends, recites “a 3D building model,” it is unclear whether this is a new 3D building model or referring to the same one. For the sake of further prosecution, Examiner will interpret the 3D building models as one.
Claim 3 also recites “which is previously stored according to the type of the identified component, according to an identified scale,” this is confusing as to how the 3D element model is stored. It is not clear if the 3D element model is stored according to a type of component based on a scale or if it is stored according to the type and scale of a component. For the sake of further prosecution, Examiner will interpret “previously stored according to the type of the identified component, according to an identified scale,” as previously stored according to the type and scale of the identified component.
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 10 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 101 because the claimed invention is directed to non-statutory subject matter. The claim(s) does/do not fall within at least one of the four categories of patent eligible subject matter because Claim 10 claims a computer program recorded on a recording medium.
The broadest reasonable interpretation of a claim drawn to a recording medium typically covers forms of non-transitory tangible media and transitory propagating signals per se in view of the ordinary and customary meaning of recording medium. See MPEP 2111.01. When the broadest reasonable interpretation of a claim covers a signal per se, the claim must be rejected under 35 U.S.C. 101 as covering non-statutory subject matter. The USPTO recognizes that applicants may have claims directed to recording media that cover signals per se, which the USPTO must reject under 35 U.S.C. 101 as covering both non-statutory subject matter and statutory subject matter. A claim drawn to such a recording medium that covers both transitory and non-transitory embodiments may be amended to narrow the claim to cover only statutory embodiments to avoid a rejection under 35 U.S.C. 101 by adding the limitation "non-transitory" to the claim. Such an amendment would typically not raise the issue of new matter, even when the specification is silent because the broadest reasonable interpretation relies on the ordinary and customary meaning that includes signals per se.
Applicant’s specification in paragraph [88] recites “For instance, the recording medium includes magnetic media such as hard disks, floppy disks and magnetic tapes, optical media such as CD-ROM (Compact Disk Read Only Memory) and DVD (Digital Video Disk), magneto-optical media such as floptical disks, and hardware devices specially configured to store and execute program instructions such as ROM, RAM, flash memory, etc. ” Since Applicant’s disclosure does not limit the definition of “recording medium,” it could be a signal.
As an additional note, a non-transitory recording medium having executable programming instructions stored thereon is considered statutory as non-transitory computer readable media excludes transitory data signals.
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.
Claims 1-3 and 10 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Choi et. al (KR 10-2442141 B1), hereinafter referenced as Choi in view of Jung (US 2001/0037190 A1), hereinafter referenced as Jung.
Regarding Claim 1, Choi discloses a method for providing a virtual reality space based on a digital twin (Choi, [0021], describes a method for a virtual environment hosting a digital twin space) comprising:
creating a 3D building model based on the received design drawing, by the service providing device (Choi, [0048], describes the operations in Fig. 3 performed by a device, where these operations by the device, provide a service; Choi, [Fig. 3], step S1030 shows the received drawings which make up a blueprint <reading as design drawing> create a corresponding 3D space model);
PNG
media_image1.png
752
788
media_image1.png
Greyscale
and creating a virtual reality space by processing the created 3D building model, by the service providing device (Choi, [0048], describes the operations in Fig. 3 performed by a device, where these operations by the device, provide a service; Choi, [Fig. 3], shows in step S1010 the device creating a virtual space containing 3D building models).
Choi further teaches
receiving a design drawing for at least one building, by a service providing device (Choi, [0048], describes the operations in Fig. 3 performed by a device, where these operations by the device, provide a service; Choi, [Fig. 3], step S1020 shows receiving a floor plan, cross-section, and elevation corresponding to a building; Choi, [0055], describes an acquired building design drawing based on the acquired floor plan, cross-section, and elevation drawing);
Choi references receiving a building design drawing but does not explicitly refer to this design drawing as 2D.
However, Jung recites a
2D design drawing (Jung, [0115], “two-dimensional design drawing”)
It would have been obvious for one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to apply and/or modify the method disclosed by Choi by using a 2D design drawing as taught by Jung. One of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing of the claimed invention would have been motivated to make these modifications because a 2D design drawing, such as a blueprint, is a precise specification on how to construct a building.
Regarding Claim 10, it recites limitations that as similar in scope to Claim 1, but as a computer program recorded on a recording medium, wherein the computer program is coupled to a computing device comprising: …. As shown in the rejection, Choi discloses the limitations of Claim 1. Additionally, Choi discloses:
A computer program recorded on a recording medium, (Choi, [0085], describes the method being implemented as software recorded in a storage medium),
wherein the computer program is coupled to a computing device (Choi, [0085], describes a storage medium being a memory for example; Fig 1: shows a device including a memory, where including reads on coupled) comprising:
PNG
media_image2.png
783
602
media_image2.png
Greyscale
a memory (Choi, [0085], describes a storage medium being a memory for example; Fig. 1: shows the device comprises a memory);
a transceiver (Choi, [0047], describes the communication interface transmits and receives information on a network, this reads on a transceiver; Fig. 1: shows the device comprises the communication interface);
and a processor processing a command loaded in the memory (Choi, [0083], describes the processor of the embodiment present in the references calling at least one command from the storage medium, memory, and executing it; Fig. 1: shows the device comprises a processor),
whereby the computer program (Choi, [0082], describes the method being implemented as software, such as a program) executes:
creating a 3D building model based on the received 2D design drawing, by the processor; and creating a virtual reality space by processing the created 3D building model, by the processor (Choi, [Claim 1], describes the processor comprising operations that follow the method claimed above).
Choi further teaches
receiving a design drawing for at least one building, by a processor; (Choi, [Claim 1], describes the processor comprising operations includes obtaining a drawing for implementing the interior and exterior of a first building among the plurality of buildings; Choi, [Abs] describes the interior and exterior of a building modeled three dimensionally based on a building design drawing; Examiner is interpreting the obtained drawing from Claim 1 to be the building design drawing referenced in the Abstract);
Choi references receiving a building design drawing but does not explicitly refer to this design drawing as 2D.
However, Jung recites a
2D design drawing (Jung, [0115], “two-dimensional design drawing”)
It would have been obvious for one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to apply and/or computer program recorded on a recording medium disclosed by Choi by using a 2D design drawing as taught by Jung. One of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing of the claimed invention would have been motivated to make these modifications because a 2D design drawing, such as a blueprint, is a precise specification on how to construct a building.
Regarding Claim 2, the combination of Choi and Jung disclose the method of Claim 1. Choi and Jung further disclose wherein:
wherein the receiving receives the 2D design drawing including at least one of a plan view, a sectional view, an elevation view (Choi, [0033], describes receiving a blueprint <reads on 2D design drawing> can include a floor plan <reads on plan view>, cross-section <reads on sectional view>, and elevation <reads on elevation view>),
Choi does not explicitly disclose
and a layout drawing for an architecture book or an interior design book of the at least one building.
However, Choi, in [0033] describes the blueprint can include images of a floor plan, this can be interpreted as a layout drawing with the intended use being for an architecture book or an interior design book of the building because a floor plan describes the layout. One of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date would interpret a layout drawing as a floor plan because a floor plan is a scaled, bird’s-eye view drawing of a building’s layout.
It would have been obvious for one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to apply and/or modify method taught by Choi in view of Jung by further including the specifications of the design drawing as taught by Choi. One of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing of the claimed invention would have been motivated to make these modifications because including different views in a blueprint in a blueprint would provide more precise details of the construction as not all features are visible from all perspectives.
Regarding Claim 3, the combination of Choi and Jung the method of Claim 2. Choi and Jung further disclose wherein:
the creating of the building model identifies a type and scale of components forming the at least one building based on the 2D design drawing (Choi, [0023], describes the interior and exterior of a building are modeled with a modeling module in three dimensions based on a building blueprint, where a building blueprint reads on 2D design drawing),
and places a 3D element model, which is previously stored according to the type of the identified component, according to an identified scale (Choi, [0059], describes a 3D model loaded from a drawing information database corresponding to an object identifier in the drawing information; Choi, [0063], describes the object identifier to specify types and determine scales; Choi, [0033], describes the drawing information database can store a 3D model in which the shape corresponding to each object is implemented in 3D),
thereby generating a 3D building model (Choi, [0042], describes the modeling module being forming a three-dimensional model of the drawing information database according to specific object information in the building design drawing using a neural network module).
Claim 4 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Choi in view of Jung, in further view of Lee et. al (KR 10-2873979), hereinafter referenced as Lee.
Regarding Claim 4, the combination of Choi and Jung disclose the method of Claim 1. Choi and Jung further disclose wherein:
the creating of the virtual reality space creates a virtual solar model in the created virtual reality space (Choi, [Abs], describes devising a light source in a virtual environment having light/shade changes over time).
Choi and Jung do not disclose:
estimates solar azimuth and solar altitude by time based on a latitude and longitude corresponding to an actual location of the 3D building model, and generates real-time sunshine and shadows in the virtual reality space according to the estimated solar azimuth and solar altitude.
However, Lee teaches an apparatus for lighting a virtual object discloses:
estimates solar azimuth and solar altitude by time based on a latitude and longitude corresponding to an actual location of the 3D building model (Lee, [0112], describes receiving coordinates of a real location where a virtual object is to be positioned; Lee, [0009], describes calculating a solar azimuth and a solar altitude based on the solar declination which is derived from coordinates; see Lee Fig. 4),
PNG
media_image3.png
670
772
media_image3.png
Greyscale
and generates real-time sunshine and shadows in the virtual reality space according to the estimated solar azimuth and solar altitude (Lee, [0062-0063], describes determining lighting and shadows to provide natural virtual content using the processor to reflect lighting and shadow types based on information including solar altitude and azimuth; Fig. 2).
PNG
media_image4.png
294
336
media_image4.png
Greyscale
It would have been obvious for one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to apply and/or modify the method taught by Choi in view of Jung by using the method of solar azimuth and solar altitude calculation from coordinates for generating sunshine and shadows based on a real location taught by Lee. One of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing of the claimed invention would have been motivated to make these motivations to give users in the virtual environment a realistic experience similar to reality.
Claim 5 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Choi in view of Jung, and in further view of Porter et. al (US 2021/0398347), hereinafter referenced as Porter.
Regarding Claim 5, the combination of Choi and Jung disclose the method of Claim 1. Choi and Jung do not expressly disclose the limitations of Claim 5; however, Porter discloses wherein:
the creating of the virtual reality space receives point cloud data acquired by a lidar at a preset location in real space corresponding to the virtual reality space (Porter, [Abs], describes retrieving point cloud data from a LIDAR system of a region of interest, where region of interest reads on a real space; Porter, [0004], describes using stored data from a region of interest to generate a 3D model of a structure present in the region of interest),
and creates an outdoor environment model for the created 3D building model based on the received point cloud data (Porter, [0030], describes generating the 3D model plus a 3D wireframe model of the structure <reads on 3D building model> from the point cloud to yield a 3D building model and surrounding geometry, ground element tools and tags are utilized to indicate trees and other elements, the surrounding geometry and specific elements reads on the outdoor model; Fig 4, shows the 3D point cloud model of the region of interest, including the building and outdoor environment model).
PNG
media_image5.png
550
648
media_image5.png
Greyscale
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to apply and/or modify the method taught by Choi in view of Jung by creating an outdoor environment around the 3D building model as taught by Porter. One of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date would have been motivated to add this feature so the user can see what the outdoor environment would look like through the window of a 3D building, providing a realistic experience similar to reality.
Claims 6 and 7 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Choi in view of Jung, and in further view of Si-hyung (KR 10-2193193 B1), hereinafter referenced as Si-hyung.
Regarding Claim 6, the combination of Choi and Jung disclose the method of Claim 1. They do not expressly disclose the limitations of Claim 6; however, Si-hyung discloses wherein:
after the creating of the virtual reality space, providing a service to user equipment by placing an avatar corresponding to a user within the virtual reality space (Si-hyung, [Claim 1], describes a confirmation unit that places a 3D avatar corresponding to a user through height and weight inputs in a 3D simulated space after the avatar is created, therefore providing a service to user equipment; Si-hyung, [Fig. 2], shows that the avatar is created, step S300, after the space is created, S100).
PNG
media_image6.png
806
444
media_image6.png
Greyscale
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to apply and/or modify the method taught by Choi in view of Jung by placing an avatar corresponding to the user in the virtual reality space as taught by Si-Hyung. One of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date would have been motivated to add this feature so the user can see what they would look like within the virtual space to provide a realistic experience similar to reality.
Regarding Claim 7, the combination of Choi, Jung, and Si-hyung disclose the method of Claim 6. and further discloses wherein:
providing controls action of the avatar in the virtual reality space according to an input signal that is input from the user equipment, and implements contents corresponding to the action of the avatar in the virtual reality space (Si-hyung, [0019], describes moving the avatar according to the user’s selection order so that the user’s movement within the kitchen space can be confirmed, where user’s selection order reads on an input signal from the user equipment).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to apply and/or modify the method as taught by Choi in view of Jung and Si-Hyung by allowing the user to control the avatar within the virtual reality space as taught by Si-Hyung. One of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date would have been motivated to add this feature to provide a realistic experience similar to reality.
Claim 8 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Choi in view of Jung in further view of Si-hyung, and in further view of the YouTube video, “How to change your avatar size in VRCHAT oculus quest 2” (See attached reference, “How to change your avatar size in VRCHAT oculus quest 2.pdf”), hereinafter referenced as the avatar size tutorial.
Regarding Claim 8, the combination of Choi, Jung, and Si-hyung disclose the method of Claim 7. They do not expressly disclose the limitations of Claim 8; however, the avatar size tutorial discloses wherein:
the providing provides a front view based on eyes of the avatar within the virtual reality space (avatar size tutorial, [Image 1], shows a first-person point of view of a game within a virtual reality space),
receives the avatar's height information from the user equipment (avatar size tutorial, [Image 2, Image 4], shows user inputting height information),
and adjusts a viewpoint based on the received height information (avatar size tutorial, [Image 3, Image 5], shows user viewpoint adjusted based off of the inputted height information).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to apply and/or modify the virtual reality space as taught by Choi view of Si-hyung by adjusting a user’s viewpoint based on height input as taught by the avatar size tutorial. One of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date would have been motivated to make these modifications because provide a realistic experience similar to reality based on a user’s height input.
Claim 9 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Choi in view of Jung, in further view of Si-hyung, in further view of Mcgahan (US 2024/02063060 A1), hereinafter referenced as Mcgahan.
Regarding Claim 9, the combination of Choi, Jung, and Si-hyung disclose the method of Claim 7 and further discloses wherein:
the providing provides a user interface (UI) to change a selected component according to an input from the user equipment through the user interface (Si-hyung, [0053], describes a user terminal with an equipment type selection screen that allows a user to change the size and product options of selected virtual furniture and equipment),
when the avatar is placed inside the 3D building model (Si-hyung, [0051], describes when the user is inside the building, the model of the kitchen space is generated; Si-hyung, [0052], describes how the modeled kitchen space includes virtual furniture and equipment)
and one of the components of the 3D building model is selected from the user equipment (Si-hyung, [0053], describes a user terminal with a selection section that allows virtual furniture equipment to be selected).
Choi in view of Jung and Si-hyung does not disclose:
the providing provides a user interface (UI) to change a location or design of the selected component and changes the location or design of the selected component according to an input from the user equipment through the user interface,
However, Mcgahan discloses:
the providing provides a user interface (UI) to change a location or design of the selected component and changes the location or design of the selected component according to an input from the user equipment through the user interface (Mcgahan, [0021], describes a modeling system with a user interface responsive to user selection of a virtual object; Mcgahan, [0028], describes the user being able to change the design of the selected virtual component according to user input; Mcgahan, [0036], describes the user being able to change the location of a selected virtual component according to user input; Fig. 5).
PNG
media_image7.png
702
872
media_image7.png
Greyscale
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to apply and/or modify the method taught by Choi in view of Jung, in further view of Si-hyung by providing a user interface (UI) to change a location or design of the selected component and changes the location or design of the selected component according to an input from the user equipment through the user interface as taught by Mcgahan. One of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date would have been motivated to make these modifications because editing the virtual model is quicker and cheaper than modifying a real building and it would help users visualize the possible modifications they could make to the building before investing the time and money into the project.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant’s disclosure:
Moon (KR 20210101796 A) discloses a method and apparatus for providing information on sunlight hours of a building.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ISABELLA OCHSNER whose telephone number is (571)272-9322. The examiner can normally be reached 7:30 - 5:00 PM.
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, Devona Faulk can be reached at (571) 272-7515. 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.
/ISABELLA OCHSNER/ Examiner, Art Unit 2618
/DEVONA E FAULK/ Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2618