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 judicial exception(s) without significantly more.
[STEP 1] The claim recites at least one step or structure. Thus, the claim is to a process or product, which is one of the statutory categories of invention (Step 1: YES).
[STEP2A PRONG I] The claim(s) 1, 17 and 20 recite(s):
An interaction processing method for a virtual scene, the method comprising:
displaying the virtual scene and at least one group control element, the virtual scene including a plurality of groups;
displaying identifiers of the plurality of groups when a first user selection operation is performed on a first group control element of the at least one group control element;
displaying, based on a first sliding operation passing through an identifier of a first group of the plurality of groups, the identifier of the first group in a selected state, the first sliding operation starting from an initial location of the first user selection operation while the first user selection operation is maintained; and
displaying a travelling route of the first group in the selected state based on a released location of the first sliding operation when the user selection operation is released, the travelling route being set through the first sliding operation.
17. An information processing apparatus for a virtual scene, the apparatus comprising:
processing circuitry configured to:
display the virtual scene and at least one group control element, the virtual scene including a plurality of groups;
display identifiers of the plurality of groups when a first user selection operation is performed on a first group control element of the at least one group control element;
display, based on a first sliding operation passing through an identifier of a first group of the plurality of groups, the identifier of the first group in a selected state, the first sliding operation starting from an initial location of the first user selection operation while the first user selection operation is maintained; and
display a travelling route of the first group in the selected state based on a released location of the first sliding operation when the user selection operation is released, the travelling route being set through the first sliding operation.
20. A non-transitory computer-readable storage medium, storing instructions which when executed by a processor cause the processor to perform:
displaying a virtual scene and at least one group control element, the virtual scene including a plurality of groups;
displaying identifiers of the plurality of groups when a first user selection operation is performed on a first group control element of the at least one group control element;
displaying, based on a first sliding operation passing through an identifier of a first group of the plurality of groups, the identifier of the first group in a selected state, the first sliding operation starting from an initial location of the first user selection operation while the first user selection operation is maintained; and
displaying a travelling route of the first group in the selected state based on a released location of the first sliding operation when the user selection operation is released, the travelling route being set through the first sliding operation.
The non-highlighted aforementioned limitation, as drafted, is a process that, under its broadest reasonable interpretation, covers performance of the limitation between people but for the recitation of generic computer components. That is, other than reciting “displaying”/ ”display”, “an information processing apparatus”, “ processing circuitry” and “a non-transitory computer-readable storage medium” nothing in the claim element precludes the step from practically being performed between people or in the mind of a user. For example, but for the recited language, the step in the context of this claim encompasses a type of game rule where the user selects a game element and move the game element along a travelling route. If a claim limitation, under its broadest reasonable interpretation, covers managing interactions between people, then it falls within the “Organization of Human Activity” or “Mental Process” grouping of abstract ideas.
Accordingly, the claim recites a judicial exception, and the analysis must therefore proceed to Step 2A Prong Two.
[STEP2A PRONG II] This judicial exception is not integrated into a practical application. In particular, the claim only recites the additional element(s) – “displaying”/ ”display”, “an information processing apparatus”, “ processing circuitry” and “a non-transitory computer-readable storage medium”.
The “displaying”/ ”display”, “an information processing apparatus”, “ processing circuitry” and “a non-transitory computer-readable storage medium” in the aforementioned steps are recited at a high-level of generality (i.e., as a generic processor performing a generic computer function) such that it amounts no more than mere instructions to apply the exception using a generic computer component.
Accordingly, the additional element(s) do(es) not integrate the abstract idea into a practical application because it does not impose any meaningful limits on practicing the abstract idea and the claim is therefore directed to the judicial exception. (Step 2A: YES).
[STEP2B] The claim does not include additional elements that are sufficient to amount to significantly more than the judicial exception.
As discussed above with respect to integration of the abstract idea into a practical application, the additional element of using a processor to perform the aforementioned steps amounts to no more than mere instructions to apply the exception using a generic computer component, which cannot provide an inventive concept (for example, see paragraph 32-33 and 47).
As noted previously, the claim as a whole merely describes how to generally “apply” the aforementioned concept in a computer environment. Thus, even when viewed as a whole, nothing in the claim adds significantly more (i.e., an inventive concept) to the abstract idea.
The claim is not patent eligible. (Step 2B: NO).
Claim(s) 2-16 and 18-19 is/are dependent on supra claim(s) and includes all the limitations of the claim(s). Therefore, the dependent claim(s) recite(s) the same abstract idea. The claim recites no additional limitations. Accordingly, the additional element(s) do(es) not integrate the abstract idea into a practical application because it does not impose any meaningful limits on practicing the abstract idea and the claim is therefore directed to the judicial exception. Looking at the limitations as an ordered combination adds nothing that is not already present when looking at the elements taken individually. There is no indication that the combination of elements improves the functioning of a computer or improves any other technology. Thus, even when viewed as a whole, nothing in the claim adds significantly more (i.e., an inventive concept) to the abstract idea.
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.
Claims 1-5 and 17-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Tan US 20190083887 and in view of Li CN 201911109908
Claims 1, 17 and 20: The Tan reference provides a teaching of an interaction processing method for a virtual scene (see abstract), the method comprising:
displaying the virtual scene (see FIG. 3 item 240) and at least one group control element (see FIG. 4 and paragraph 65 item 250 “virtual character”), the virtual scene including a plurality of groups (see paragraph 76 the scene include virtual teammate and enemy);
displaying identifiers of the plurality of groups when a first user selection operation is performed on a first group control element of the at least one group control element (see paragraph 69 showing a first identifiers at the location of the first path);
displaying a travelling route of the first group in the selected state based on a released
location of the first sliding operation when the user selection operation is released, the travelling
route being set through the first sliding operation (see paragraph 71).
The Tan reference is silent on the teaching of displaying, based on a first sliding operation passing through an identifier of a first group of the plurality of groups, the identifier of the first group in a selected state, the first sliding operation starting from an initial location of the first user selection operation while the first user selection operation is maintained.
However the Li reference provides a teaching of displaying, based on a first sliding operation passing through an identifier of a first group of the plurality of groups, the identifier of the first group in a selected state (see page 8 last paragraph), the first sliding operation starting from an initial location of the first user selection operation while the first user selection operation is maintained (see page 9 last paragraph).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the with the feature of displaying, based on a first sliding operation passing through an identifier of a first group of the plurality of groups, the identifier of the first group in a selected state, the first sliding operation starting from an initial location of the first user selection operation while the first user selection operation is maintained, as taught by the Li reference, in order to provide an intuitive gaming interface.
Claims 2 and 18: The Tan reference provide a teaching of wherein while the identifier of the first group is
displayed in the selected state, the method further comprises:
displaying a plurality of candidate routes (see FIG. 3 item 240 showing different routes that the player character can take) ;
displaying route identifiers respectively corresponding to the plurality of candidate routes (see paragraph 48 position identifier);
determining a route identifier at the released location of the first sliding operation as a target
route identifier (see paragraph 50 showing position identifier and path point based on the touch point of the user); and
determining a candidate route corresponding to the target route identifier as the travelling route of the first group (see paragraph 50 determining a first and second path point).
Claims 3 and 19: The Tan reference provides a teaching of wherein the displaying the route identifiers comprises: displaying the route identifier corresponding to each candidate route at a target location in each candidate route (see paragraph 48 and 50 position identifier and the different possible route based on the user’s action), the target location being a unique location of each candidate route (see paragraph 52).
Claim 4: The Tan reference provides a teaching of displaying the identifier of the first group in a non-selected state when no route identifier exists at the released location of the first sliding operation (see paragraph 63).
Claim 5: The Tan reference provides a teaching of using a partial trajectory of a trajectory of the first sliding operation overlapping the virtual scene as the travelling route of the first group, a starting point of the partial trajectory being a starting point of the travelling route, an ending point of the partial trajectory being an ending point of the travelling route (see paragraph 69), and a sliding direction of the first sliding operation being a travelling direction of the first group (see paragraph 65).
Claim 6 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Tan US 20190083887, in view of Li CN 201911109908 and further in view of Qiu WO 2019153824 A1
Claim 6: The Tan reference is silent on the teaching of obtaining a partial trajectory of a trajectory of the first sliding operation overlapping the virtual scene; obtaining a similarity between the partial trajectory and each preset candidate route in the virtual scene; and determining a candidate route with a highest similarity as the travelling route of the first group.
However, the Qiu reference provide a teaching of obtaining a partial trajectory of a trajectory of the first sliding operation overlapping the virtual scene (see page 11 first two paragraph); obtaining a similarity between the partial trajectory and each preset candidate route in the virtual scene (see page 13 paragraph 2); and determining a candidate route with a highest similarity as the travelling route of the first group (see page 14 second paragraph).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the Tan reference with the feature of obtaining a partial trajectory of a trajectory of the first sliding operation overlapping the virtual scene; obtaining a similarity between the partial trajectory and each preset candidate route in the virtual scene; and determining a candidate route with a highest similarity as the travelling route of the first group; as taught by the Qiu reference in order to provide an intuitive control scheme for the player.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ROBERT J UTAMA whose telephone number is (571)272-1676. The examiner can normally be reached 9:00 - 17:30 Monday - Friday.
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.
/ROBERT J UTAMA/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3715