DETAILED ACTION
Double Patenting
The nonstatutory double patenting rejection is based on a judicially created doctrine grounded in public policy (a policy reflected in the statute) so as to prevent the unjustified or improper timewise extension of the “right to exclude” granted by a patent and to prevent possible harassment by multiple assignees. A nonstatutory double patenting rejection is appropriate where the conflicting claims are not identical, but at least one examined application claim is not patentably distinct from the reference claims because the examined application claim is either anticipated by, or would have been obvious over, the reference claims.
Claims 1, 6-9, 11-12 and 17-19 are provisionally rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claims 1-20 of copending Application No. 19/392,786 (reference application). Although the claims at issue are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other because the present application has substantially identical claim scope as in the ‘786 application.
In independent claims 1 and 11-12, the present application does not expressly require “in a scene corresponding to the interests of the user”. However, the limitation of profile information and assets used in digital illustration in present application can be considered as including the same scope of “a scene to the interests of the user”.
Independent claims 1 and 11-12 merely claims a broader scope from dependent claims 2-9, 11-14 and 16-20 in the ‘786 application.
Dependent claims 6-9 and 17-19 are substantially identical to claims 2-6, 11-12 and 16-18 in the ‘786 application.
This is a provisional nonstatutory double patenting rejection because the patentably indistinct claims have not in fact been patented.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
The following is a quotation of the appropriate paragraphs of 35 U.S.C. 102 that form the basis for the rejections under this section made in this Office action:
A person shall be entitled to a patent unless – (a)(2) the claimed invention was described in a patent issued under section 151, or in an application for patent published or deemed published under section 122(b), in which the patent or application, as the case may be, names another inventor and was effectively filed before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claims 1-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) as being anticipated by Buzzelli (US 2024/0,112,389).
Referring to claims 1 and 11-12, Buzzelli discloses a method for generating a digital illustration (fig. 6, modified emotional state 604, graphical representation 606), the method comprising:
receiving, by a processor, assets (fig. 6, emotional state of the user and magnitude of the detected emotional state 602) associated with an entity
accessing, by the processor, profile information (fig. 6, facial animation rules 605);
generating, by the processor based on the asset and the profile information, the digital illustration (fig. 6, modified emotional state 604) depicting the entity
generating, by the processor executing an artificial intelligence model (para.0021, artificial intelligence deep learning model), an illustrative depiction (fig. 6, graphical representation of the user 606; para.0021, rendered modified emotional states of user) of a person (fig. 9, user 900) in the digital illustration based on the profile information (fig. 6, select rule to render 605).
As to claims 2 and 13, Buzzelli discloses the method of claim 1, wherein the person is a user (fig. 1, user 101A) visualizing the digital illustration.
As to claims 3 and 14, Buzzelli discloses the method of claim 1, wherein the person is someone (fig. 1, user 122A) associated with a user (fig. 1, user 101A) visualizing the digital illustration.
As to claims 4 and 15, Buzzelli discloses the method of claim 1, wherein the digital illustration comprises a template (fig. 6, score of emotional state 603) generated at a first time, and the depiction of the person is inserted (fig. 6, determine modified emotional state 604) into the template at a second time later than the first time.
As to claims 5 and 16, Buzzelli discloses the method of claim 4, wherein the depiction of the person is dynamically generated (fig. 1, user 101A during meeting 100) when the digital illustration will be displayed to a user (fig. 1, user 101A).
As to claims 6 and 17, Buzzelli discloses the method of claim 1, comprising modifying (fig. 3, control area 319 modifying emotions 1/2/3/4) the depiction of the person in the digital illustration to match a facial expression (fig. 3, emotions 1/2/3/4) of the person with aspects of the digital image.
As to claims 7 and 18, Buzzelli discloses the method of claim 6, wherein the aspects of the digital image comprise mood, tone or setting (fig. 4, control areas for laughing, joy, frowning, sadness 419).
As to claims 8 and 19, Buzzelli discloses the method of claim 1, wherein the asset includes text, logos, images, audio or videos (fig. 2, representations 222A/222B of a user).
As to claims 9 and 20, Buzzelli discloses the method of claim 1, wherein the artificial intelligence model is trained (para. 0033, machine learning training data sets of facial images) using various images of persons, various images of scenes, and various artistic styles of comics to influence an output (fig. 9, magnitude of detected emotional state of user 900; fig. 3, emotional state of user 319) accurately depicting the person in the digital illustration.
As to claim 10, Buzzelli discloses the method of claim 1, wherein generating the illustrative depiction of the person comprises:
identifying distinguishing features (fig. 9, magnitude of detected emotional state of user 900) of the person from a photo or descriptor; and
interpolating the distinguishing features into a comic representation (para. 0020, avatar, animation) of the person.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments have been fully considered, but they are not deemed to be persuasive.
Applicant argues that the cited prior art does not disclose claimed invention because Buzzelli’s “emotional state” is not comparable to “an entity or product” (pp.2-3).
Initially, Examiner points out that applicant incorrectly argued examiner’s citation. Examiner corresponds Buzzelli’s “emotional state” with claimed “assets”, and “user” with claimed “entity or product”. Further, Examiner reminds applicant to consider prior art and the claim scope as a whole rather than a particular way of claim language mapping.
Generally, the claimed invention as recited in independent claims 1 and 11-12 can be viewed as receiving emotional state associated with a user, accessing facial animation rules, depicting the user based on the emotional state and facial animation rules, generating a graphical representation of the user by an artificial intelligence model as disclosed in Buzzelli.
Conclusion
This action is made final. 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 in three months from the mailing date of this action. In the event a first reply is filled 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 of the advisory action is mailed, and any extension fee 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 date of this final action.
Contact Information
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to examiner Cheng-Yuan Tseng whose telephone number is (571)272-9772, and fax number is (571)273-9772. The examiner can normally be reached on Monday through Friday from 09:00 to 17:30 Eastern Time. If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Alicia Harrington can be reached on (571)272-2330. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is (571)273-8300. Information regarding the status of an application may be obtained from the Patent Application Information Retrieval (PAIR) system. Status information for published applications may be obtained from either Private PAIR or Public PAIR. Status information for unpublished applications is available through Private PAIR only. Should you have questions on access to the Private PAIR system, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at (866)217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative or access to the automated information system, call (800)786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or (571)272-1000.
/CHENG YUAN TSENG/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2615
Prosecution Insights