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 .
DETAILED ACTION
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to the pending claims have been considered but are moot because of the new ground of rejection below.
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 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.
Claim(s) 1-3, 5-9, 11-13, 15-19 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Cosky (US 2008/0095338 A1) in view of Bean (US 2024/0033640 A1).
1. Cosky discloses a method comprising:
receiving, by at least one processor, a plurality of communications for a player during gameplay of a video game by the player (receiving multiple overlapping messages from speakers in multiplayer games during gameplay), [0011], [0012], [0049], (86: Fig. 9);
in response to the plurality of communications being received at substantially similar times, analyzing, by the at least one processor, the plurality of communications to determine their content (analyzes received messages for overlap/similar times, determining content attributes such as timestamps, priorities, and relation to game status), (Fig. 9), [0013], [0055];
based on the content of the plurality of communications, rendering, by the at least one processor, a first communication of the plurality of communications to the player in substantial real-time, and delaying rendering, by the at least one processor, a second communication of the plurality of communications to the player (renders higher-priority messages in real-time while delaying/buffering lower-priority ones for sequential playback based on content-determined priority), (Fig. 10), [0013], [0041], [0063].
Cosky does not expressly disclose analyzing, by the at least one processor, a sentiment of the player during the gameplay based on sensor data received from at least one sensor communicatively coupled with the at least one processor; and based on the sentiment of the player (in addition to content).
Bean teaches analyzing a sentiment of the player during gameplay based on sensor data (gaze detector and other sensor/user data) received from at least one sensor, and using that sentiment to automatically generate or modify in-game effects/presentation, [0034], [0041]-[0042].
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Cosky’s content and priority based real-time versus delayed rendering of overlapping game communications to further base the rendering decision on an analyzed player sentiment derived from sensor data, as taught by Bean. Both references address real-time adaptation of game-related presentation to the player’s current state during gameplay. Incorporating Bean’s sensor-based sentiment analysis into Cosky’s communication-management system would allow the priority/delay decision to account for the player’s current receptivity or emotional state (e.g., stress or focus level), thereby reducing sensory overload and improving the player’s experience.
2. Cosky and Bean discloses the method of claim 1, wherein analyzing the plurality of communications includes determining a relevance of content of respective communications of the plurality of communications to the gameplay of the video game, and wherein the first communication of the plurality of communications is determined to have greater relevance to the gameplay than the second communication of the plurality of communications (determines relevance via priority tied to gameplay elements, e.g., higher-priority channels/speakers have greater relevance during active gameplay), Cosky [0010], [0042], [0061].
3. Cosky and Bean discloses the method of claim 2, further comprising: analyzing game state data of the video game to identify events occurring in the gameplay; wherein analyzing the plurality of communications includes determining the relevance of the content of the respective communications to the events occurring in the gameplay (analyzes game state data, e.g., high action levels, quests, number of overlapping messages, to identify events and determine message relevance/priority), Cosky [0011], [0046].
5. Cosky and Bean discloses the method of claim 1, further comprising: determining that the plurality of communications are received at substantially similar times based on the plurality of communications being received within a predefined time period or receipt of individual communications of the plurality of communications overlapping in time (i.e. overlapped messages within time windows), Cosky [0012], [0049].
6. Cosky and Bean discloses the method of claim 1, wherein the second communication is among a subset of communications of the plurality of communications and the method further comprising: determining that content of the subset of communications are similar to one another, and wherein the delaying rendering includes displaying the subset of communications in a layered or stacked or collapsed format such that at least some of the subset of communications are hidden and unhidden when selected by the player to enable viewing of the subset of communications (Cosky buffers and sequentially presents delayed messages; presenting multiple delayed items in a manageable/queued format that can be selectively accessed is an obvious variation of Cosky’s sequential playback to avoid overload).
7. Cosky and Bean discloses the method of claim 1, wherein the plurality of communications include one or more of voice communications and text communications (includes voice audio and/or text messages), Cosky [0003], [0029], [0052].
8. Cosky and Bean discloses the method of claim 1, wherein analyzing the sentiment of the player comprises: when the at least one sensor includes a camera and the sensor data includes video data, analyzing video of the player captured by the camera; or when the at least one sensor includes a microphone and the sensor data includes audio data, analyzing audio of the player captured by the microphone (Bean utilizes sensor data including gaze and related visual/audio cues obtainable from camera or microphone to determine sentiment, [0068]; Cosky already handles voice audio, making the combination of conventional camera/microphone sensors for sentiment straightforward and obvious).
9. Cosky and Bean discloses the method of claim 1, wherein the first and second communications are voice audio communications, and the delaying rendering of the second communication includes converting voice audio of the second communication to a text format and displaying text of the text format to the player (converts delayed voice audio messages to text for lower-priority rendering), Cosky (Fig. 8), [0052].
11-13, 15-19. Cosky and Bean discloses a non-transitory computer-readable medium having program instructions embodied thereon that, when executed by at least one processor, cause said at least one processor to receive a plurality of communications for a player during gameplay of a video game by the player; in response to the plurality of communications being received at substantially similar times, analyze the plurality of communications to determine their content; analyze a sentiment of the player during the gameplay based on sensor data received from at least one sensor communicatively coupled with the at least one processor; and based on the content of the communications and the sentiment of the player, render a first communication of the plurality of communications to the player in substantial real-time, and delay rendering of a second communication of the plurality of communications to the player as similarly discussed above.
Claim(s) 4, 10, 14, 20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Cosky (US 2008/0095338 A1) and Bean (US 2024/0033640 A1) as applied above and further in view of Azmandian (US 2023/0386452 A1).
4. Cosky and Bean discloses the method of claim 1, but does not expressly teach wherein analyzing the plurality of communications includes using an artificial intelligence (AI) model to understand a semantic meaning of each communication of the plurality of communications. Azmandian teaches using AI/machine-learning models for contextual/semantic analysis of voice communications in games to determine relevance and content, [0037], [0042], [0051]. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to further modify the Cosky/Bean combination to incorporate an AI model for semantic analysis of the communications, as taught by Azmandian. All three references concern real-time management of communications or presentation in interactive gaming environments. Using a trained AI model would improve accuracy in determining content and relevance (and therefore the subsequent prioritization that already incorporates sentiment), reducing misinterpretations and optimizing communication flow.
10. Cosky and Bean discloses the method of claim 1, but does not expressly disclose wherein delaying rendering the second communication includes generating a summary of the second communication, and presenting the summary to the player (applying time-compression to delayed messages by removing silences or subsets, effectively summarizing content) [0013], which obviously involves AI-like models for generating condensed versions, as such summarization techniques were common for managing delayed audio in games. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to use AI for summarization in Cosky to efficiently present delayed content without losing key information.
Alternatively, Azmandian teaches using AI to summarize or rephrase delayed or low-confidence communications for clarity before presentation, including delaying rendering based on game context [0037], [0042]. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to modify Cosky to incorporate the AI summarization teachings of Azmandian for delayed communications, as this would allow for efficient presentation of queued content without overwhelming the player, using intelligent rephrasing to maintain key information while adapting to gameplay context for better immersion.
14. Cosky, Bean and Azmandian discloses the non-transitory computer-readable medium of claim 11, wherein the analysis of the plurality of communications includes use of an artificial intelligence (AI) model as similarly discussed above.
20. Cosky, Bean and Azmandian discloses the non-transitory computer-readable medium of claim 11, wherein, to delay the rendering of the second communication, the instructions, when executed by the at least one processor, cause said at least one processor to: apply an AI model to generate a summary of the second communication, and present the summary to the player as similarly discussed above.
Filing of New or Amended Claims
The examiner has the initial burden of presenting evidence or reasoning to explain why persons skilled in the art would not recognize in the original disclosure a description of the invention defined by the claims. See Wertheim, 541 F.2d at 263, 191 USPQ at 97 (“[T]he PTO has the initial burden of presenting evidence or reasons why persons skilled in the art would not recognize in the disclosure a description of the invention defined by the claims.”). However, when filing an amendment an applicant should show support in the original disclosure for new or amended claims. See MPEP § 714.02 and § 2163.06 (“Applicant should specifically point out the support for any amendments made to the disclosure.”). Please see MPEP 2163 (II) 3. (b)
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.
Correspondence
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to SENG H LIM whose telephone number is (571)270-3301. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday (9-5).
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, Xuan Thai can be reached at (571) 272-7147. 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.
/Seng H Lim/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3715
Prosecution Insights