DETAILED ACTIONNotice 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) 1-3 and 5-20 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 and 5-20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Cao (2018/0043263) in view of WINN et al (2017/0359560) (herein “WINN”). In regards to claims 1, 19 and 20, Cao teaches a data display method, comprising: displaying a real-time image acquired by a mobile terminal (See; Fig. 2 for a real time person 12), a preset positioning mark (See; Fig. 2 for target reticle 11), and a preset virtual object in a target page of the mobile terminal (See; Fig. 2 for CGI object 8), wherein a first display region corresponding to the preset positioning mark is fixed in the target page (See; p[0022] for the reticle is used for fine aiming and is fixed on the display); adjusting a second display region corresponding to the preset virtual object in the target page in response to movement of the mobile terminal, wherein the preset virtual object is displayed in the second display region (See; p[0016] where the CGI objects are geo-registered and have an actual position in 3D space, these spaces can be considered the second display region. Since these objects are geo registered, the second display region will adjust as the user moves around them, based on the user’s perspective with regards to the objects); and in response to a relationship between the second display region and the first display region being determined as meeting a preset condition, displaying interaction information (See; p[0022] where when the reticle is lined up with the object the user wishes to interact with, the interaction is successful and information is displayed such as in Figs. 2 and 3); wherein the relationship between the second display region and the first display region meeting the preset condition comprises: an area of an overlapping region between the second display region and the first display region is larger than or equal to a preset area threshold (See; p[0022] when the stationary circular reticle 11 (first display region) overlaps with a CGI object (second display region) a preset condition occurs. The preset area threshold is whatever amount of overlap is required for the preset condition to occur, where this would be the middle dot part of the reticle overlaps with the virtual object). Cao fails to explicitly teach displaying interaction information related to a target user logging in the target page. However, Cao teaches displaying interaction information related to the object the reticle is overlapping with (See; Fig. 2 where when the reticle 11 is overlapping object 12 an AR interface 4 is initiated and further information such as in Fig. 3 may be displayed when hovering over the CGI object 8. This could in the broadest sense be considered logging in to a page associated with the CGI object). Further since the disclosure offers no criticality and no unexpected results from having the interaction information relate to a target user logging in the target page then it is deemed a design choice. Therefore it would have obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of filing to display information related to a target user logging in the target page as a mere design choice based on the specific device that it will be used for. Cao further fails to explicitly teach and the preset virtual object completely falls into the first display region. While, Cao does not explicitly show the preset virtual object completely falls into the first display region in Fig. 2, however, Cao implicitly teaches that a CGI object such as the ghost (8) would completely fall within the first display region comprised of the reticle 11, since the reticle is larger than the ghost. However, for the sake of compact prosecution, a new reference in WINN is introduced that explicitly teaches a preset virtual object completely falls into the first display region corresponding to a positioning mark (See; p[0068] for reticle 427 that moves as the mobile device 428 moves. See Figs. 4A-4B and p[0064] where the reticle 427 is moved to surround or overlap the objects 429a-d on display. Further see Figs. 5B-5F which explicitly show the virtual objects 502 completely within the first display region of the reticle 503). Therefore it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of filing to modify Cao to show a preset virtual object completely falling into the first display region corresponding to a positioning mark as a mere design choice based on the graphic user interface currently executed, for example, having virtual objects completely fall within the positioning mark would better show which object is being selected by the user. In regards to claim 19, Cao additionally teaches a mobile terminal (See; p[0007] for using a mobile phone) comprising at least one memory, at least one processor, and at least one computer program stored in the at least one memory and executable on the at least one processor (See; p[0013]). In regards to claims 2 and 18, Cao teaches wherein before adjusting the second display region corresponding to the preset virtual object in the target page, the method further comprises: establishing an association relationship between the second display region corresponding to the preset virtual object and a target real object in the real-time image, wherein the adjusting the second display region corresponding to the preset virtual object in the target page in response to movement of the mobile terminal comprises: in response to the movement of the mobile terminal, adjusting at least one of a position and a size of the second display region corresponding to the preset virtual object in the target page according to at least one of an imaging position change and an imaging size change of the target real object in the real-time image (See; Fig. 2, p[0016] and p[0020] where the CGI objects are geo-registered and have an actual position in 3D space. Thus when the user moves in relation to the locked CGI object, the user’s perspective of the object will change in turn. For example if the user moves closer to the object it will get larger, if the user moves further from the object it will get smaller and the user can place the object at any location on their display device based on how the user moves around the object).
In regards to claim 3, Cao teaches wherein the adjusting the second display region corresponding to the preset virtual object in the target page in response to movement of the mobile terminal comprises: in response to the movement of the mobile terminal, obtaining movement data of the mobile terminal, and adjusting at least one of a position and a size of the second display region corresponding to the preset virtual object in the target page according to the movement data (See; Fig. 2, p[0016] and p[0020] where the CGI objects are geo-registered and have an actual position in 3D space. Thus when the user moves in relation to the locked CGI object, the user’s perspective of the object will change in turn. For example if the user moves closer to the object it will get larger, if the user moves further from the object it will get smaller and the user can place the object at any location on their display device based on how the user moves around the object. The orientation of the user’s device is determined using accelerometers and is used to manipulate the objects on display).
In regards to claim 5, Cao teaches further comprising: displaying a preset control associated with the preset virtual object in the target page; and in response to the preset control being triggered, automatically adjusting the second display region corresponding to the preset virtual object in the target page within a preset duration, so that the relationship between the second display region and the first display region meets the preset condition (See; Fig. 2 where when the reticle 11 is overlapping object 12 an AR interface 4 is initiated and further information such as in Fig. 3 may be displayed when hovering over the CGI object 8).
In regards to claim 6, Cao teaches wherein a count of the preset virtual objects is at least one; in a case where the count of the preset virtual objects is at least two, a count of pieces of the interaction information is at least two, and the interaction information corresponding to different preset virtual objects is different; and the interaction information comprises specified interaction information of a preset theme, and the preset virtual object is associated with the preset theme (See; Fig. 2 for various CGI objects which have different information associated with a theme).
In regards to claim 7, Cao teaches further comprising: displaying preset prompt information in the target page (See; Fig. 2 where when the reticle 11 is overlapping object 12 an AR interface 4 is initiated and further information such as in Fig. 3 may be displayed when hovering over the CGI object 8). Cao fails to explicitly teach wherein the preset prompt information is used to prompt a user to control the movement of the mobile terminal to trigger display of the interaction information. However since the disclosure offers no criticality and no unexpected results from having the preset prompt information be used to prompt a user to control the movement of the mobile terminal to trigger display of the interaction information then it is deemed a design choice. Therefore it would have obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of filing to modify the prompt information as a mere design choice based on the specific needs of the device that it will be used for.
In regards to claims 8 and 12-17, Cao teaches wherein the preset virtual object comprises a preset virtual figure; and the method further comprises: controlling the preset virtual figure to complete a preset action in response to the relationship between the second display region and the first display region meeting the preset condition (See; Fig. 2 where if the reticle 11 is overlapping CGI object 8 an action of displaying further information may be initiated such as in Fig. 3).
In regards to claims 9-11, Cao teaches displaying preset prompt information in the target page (See; Fig. 2 where when the reticle 11 is overlapping object 12 an AR interface 4 is initiated and further information such as in Fig. 3 may be displayed when hovering over the CGI object 8). Cao fails to explicitly teach wherein the preset prompt information is used to prompt a user to control the movement of the mobile terminal to trigger display of the interaction information. However since the disclosure offers no criticality and no unexpected results from having the preset prompt information be used to prompt a user to control the movement of the mobile terminal to trigger display of the interaction information then it is deemed a design choice. Therefore it would have obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of filing to modify the prompt information as a mere design choice based on the specific needs of the device that it will be used for.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to JONATHAN A BOYD whose telephone number is (571)270-7503. The examiner can normally be reached Mon - Fri 8:00 - 5:00.
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, Ke Xiao can be reached at (571) 272-7776. 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.
/JONATHAN A BOYD/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2627