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 § 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)(1) the claimed invention was patented, described in a printed publication, or in public use, on sale, or otherwise available to the public before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
(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, 2, 5, 6, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, and 20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Bastian et al. (U.S. Patent Application Publication No. 2002/0196202).
Regarding claim 1, Bastian discloses a wearable head device [Bastian: 0010 “head-mounted display (HMD)”] comprising: a see-through display [Bastian: 0037 ““see-through” portion (a transparent or Semitransparent surface) of the hand-held display device”]; and one or more processors configured for: determining a geo-spatial location associated with a second wearable head device [Bastian: 0027 “A method for communicating the position and orientation of the EFR display device to the incident commander.”](teaches position and orientation which corresponds to geospatial location); presenting, via the see-through display, a planned movement path of the second wearable head device, wherein the planned movement path comprises a graphical representation of a planned movement of the second wearable head device, the planned movement comprising the geo-spatial location (interpreted as showing on the see through display a planned route for the second wearable head device)[Bastian: 0046 “The EFR generating the path, a Second EFR, and the incident commander could all see the path in their own displays, if desired.”](teaches that the EFR generating the path, a second EFR, and the incident commander could see it in their own displays); determining an actual movement of the second wearable head device, the actual movement comprising the geo-spatial location (interpreted as determine the real movement actually taken by the second wearable head device through physical space)[Bastian: 0046 “The path which the EFR has taken may be tracked”](teaches tracking the movement taken on the path); and presenting, via the see-through display, an actual movement path of the second wearable head device based on the actual movement of the second wearable head device, wherein the actual movement path comprises a graphical representation of the actual movement of the second wearable head device (interpreted as displaying the actual route already traveled by the second wearable head device as a virtual path on the display)[Bastian: 0046 “The EFR generating the path, a Second EFR, and the incident commander could all see the path in their own displays”]; determining, via the second wearable head device, an attribute associated with a location on the actual movement path [Bastian: 0046 “The path which the EFR has taken may be tracked”]; in accordance with a determination that the location on the actual movement path is visible via the wearable head device, presenting, via the see-through display, a first event indicator based on the attribute (interpreted as if the relevant path location is visible, the system shows a first visual indicator tied to the attribute and event indicator is interpreted to mean displayed visual cues such as an icon, marker, overlay or similar displayed indicator)[Bastian: 0047 “the incident commander may select, from a list or menu, icons representing situations, actions, and hazards”]; and in accordance with a determination that the location on the actual movement path is not visible via the wearable head device, presenting, via the see-through display, a second event indicator based on the attribute, the second event indicator different from the first event indicator (interpreted as if the relevant path location is not visible, the system shows a different visual indicator tied to the same attribute) [Bastian: 0047 “the incident commander may select, from a list or menu, icons representing situations, actions, and hazards”](teaches using icons as indicators to represent situations).
Regarding claim 2, Bastian discloses the wearable head device of claim 1, wherein the one or more processors are further configured for presenting, based on the geo-spatial location, a virtual content on the see-through display (interpreted as the device shows computer generated content on a transparent display and the content is presented as function of a physical location in space)[Bastian: 0034 “a See-through monocular HMD is used.”][Bastian: 0040 “tracked to determine the location of the EFR's display device”][Bastian: 0057 “Computer generated images are projected into this device”](teaches all three elements of the limitation).
Regarding claim 2, Bastian discloses the wearable head device of claim 1, wherein the one or more processors are further configured for presenting, based on the geo-spatial location, a virtual content on the see-through display (interpreted as the device shows computer generated content on a transparent display and that content is presented as a function of a physical location in space) [Bastian: 0034 “a See-through monocular HMD is used.”][Bastian: 0040 “tracked to determine the location of the EFR's display device”][Bastian: 0057 “Computer generated images are projected into this device”](teaches all three elements of the limitation).
Regarding claim 5, Bastian discloses the wearable head device of claim 2, wherein the one or more processors are further configured for updating said presenting of the virtual content on the see-through display in accordance with a determination that a view of the second wearable head device via the wearable head device is impaired (limitation is interpreted as the device has the ability to update what is displayed)[Bastian: 0055 “The layout of the incident space can also be displayed to the EFR as a wireframe rendering (see FIG. 9). This is particularly useful in low visibility situations”](teaches being able to update what’s rendered in situations that have low visibility).
Regarding claim 6, Bastian discloses the wearable head device of claim 2, wherein said presenting of the virtual content indicates a level of visibility of the second wearable head device [Bastian: 0055 “particularly useful in low visibility situations”](teaches having the ability to detect visibility).
Regarding claim 9, Bastian discloses the wearable head device of claim 2, wherein the one or more processors are further configured for updating said presenting of the virtual content on the see-through display in accordance with a determination that the actual movement of the second wearable head device is in a direction of the planned movement path (interpreted as updating the currently presented content as the second head device is moving in the direction of the path)[Bastian: 0047 “As the EFR reaches consecutive points along the path, the previous point is removed and the next goal is established via an icon representing the next intermediate point on the path.”](teaches planned path made of waypoints and then teaches that the EFR actually progresses along that path, the displayed virtual content is updated, the previous waypoint is removed and the next waypoint icon becomes the new displayed goal).
Regarding claim 10, Bastian discloses the wearable head device of claim 1, wherein the one or more processors are further configured for determining the actual movement of the second wearable head device via one or more sensors of the second wearable head device (interpreted as using sensing components to determine when an object is moving)[Bastian: 0040 “The receiver is what will be tracked to determine the location of the EFR's display device. Alternately, if a hand-held display device is used, the receiver could be mounted directly in or on the device, or a receiver worn by the EFR could be used to compute the position of the device.”][Bastian: 0042 “The tracking equipment could also have a two-axis tilt Sensor which measures the pitch and roll of the device.”].
Regarding claim 11, Bastian discloses the wearable head device of claim 1, wherein the attribute indicates an assessment of the location along the actual path by a user of the second wearable head device [Bastian: 0047 “The path of the EFR 154 can be recorded, and the incident commander may use this information to relay possible escape routes, indicators of hazards 152, 153, and a final destination point 151 to one or more EFRs 150 at the scene (see FIG.”](teaches assessing the path for hazards).
Regarding claim 12, Bastian discloses the wearable head device of claim 11, wherein the assessment comprises a safety assessment [Bastian: 0004 “the Structure to the EFR So a hazard, Such as flames, can Safely be abated; he/she may need to plot a Safe path through a structure, avoiding hazards Such as fire or radiation, So that the EFR can reach a destination Safely and quickly”](teaches taking safety into consideration which can be considered a safety assessment).
Regarding claim 13, Bastian discloses the wearable head device of claim 1, wherein the planned movement of the second wearable head device is determined via a signal from a remote server [Bastian: 0047 “The incident commander may even generate a set of points in a path (“waypoints”) for the EFR to follow to reach a destination.”](this is remote controlling).
Regarding claim 14, Bastian discloses the wearable head device of claim 1, wherein the planned movement of the second wearable head device is determined via a signal from the second wearable head device [Bastian: 0047 “The incident commander may even generate a set of points in a path (“waypoints”) for the EFR to follow to reach a destination.”](this is remote controlling).
Claims 15 and 20 are method and non-transitory computer readable medium claims corresponding to claim 1 without any additional limitations. Thus, claims 15 and 20 are rejected for the same reasons as claim 1 above.
Claim 16 is a method claim corresponding to claim 2 without any additional limitations. Thus, claim 16 is rejected for the same reasons as claim 2 above.
Claim 17 is a method claim corresponding to claim 6 without any additional limitations. Thus, claim 17 is rejected for the same reasons as claim 6 above.
Claim 18 is a method claim corresponding to claim 10 without any additional limitations. Thus, claim 18 is rejected for the same reasons as claim 10 above.
Claim 19 is a method claim corresponding to claim 11 without any additional limitations. Thus, claim 19 is rejected for the same reasons as claim 11 above.
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 3 and 4 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Bastian et al. (U.S. Patent Application Publication No. 2002/0196202), in view of Maciocci et al. (WO 2012/135546).
Regarding claim 3, Bastian discloses the wearable head device of claim 2, but fails to explicitly disclose wherein the one or more processors are further configured for locking the virtual content on a location of the see-through display associated with the geo-spatial location.
However, Maciocci discloses wherein the one or more processors are further configured for locking the virtual content on a location of the see-through display associated with the geo-spatial location [Maciocci: 0077 “the object will not appear to move as the user moves his/her head and moves around the anchor location, and thus around the virtual object.”](teaches locking the object).
Bastian and Maciocci are considered to be analogous to the claimed invention because they are in the same field of AR wearable displays. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the system of Bastian to incorporate Maciocci’s teachings of locking the virtual content. The combination provides improved spatial registration.
Regarding claim 4, Bastian discloses the wearable head device of claim 2, but fails to explicitly disclose wherein the one or more processors are further configured for locking the virtual content with respect to an object presented on a location of the see-through display associated with a location between a location of the first wearable head device and the geo-spatial location.
However, Maciocci discloses wherein the one or more processors are further configured for locking the virtual content with respect to an object presented on a location of the see-through display associated with a location between a location of the first wearable head device and the geo-spatial location (interpreted as the processor keeps the virtual content fixed relative to an object shown on the see through display)(Maciocci: 713; Fig. 7B “Display virtual object so virtual object appears anchored to the anchor surface”)[Maciocci: 0261 “over the image only when the other individual's body part occludes the anchored virtual object”](teaches the virtual object is anchored to a surface which is the locking aspect and further teaches that when an intervening body part is located in front of the anchored virtual object and the processor displays the virtual object over that intervening body part meaning its relative).
Bastian and Maciocci are considered to be analogous to the claimed invention because they are in the same field of AR wearable displays. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the system of Bastian to incorporate Maciocci’s teachings of locking the virtual content. The combination provides improved spatial registration.
Claims 7 and 8 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Bastian et al. (U.S. Patent Application Publication No. 2002/0196202), in view of Bar-Zeev et al. (WO 2012/064546).
Regarding claim 7, Bastian discloses the wearable head device of claim 2, but fails to explicitly disclose wherein the one or more processors are further configured for presenting the virtual content according to a focus distance of a user of the wearable head device.
However, Bar-Zeev discloses wherein the one or more processors are further configured for presenting the virtual content according to a focus distance of a user of the wearable head device (interpreted as present the virtual content based on the users viewing focus distance) [Bar-Zeev: 131 “the system displays a virtual image in the field of view of the user at the focal depth the user is viewing while the user is looking through the head mounted display device 2.”].
Bastian and Bar-Zeev are considered to be analogous to the claimed invention because they are in the same field of AR wearable displays. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the system of Bastian to incorporate Bar-Zeev’s teachings of utilizing focal depth. The combination provides improved visual comfort and realism.
Regarding claim 8, Bastian discloses the wearable head device of claim 7, but fails to explicitly disclose wherein the focus distance is substantially equal to a distance from the wearable head device to the second wearable head device.
However, Bar-Zeev discloses wherein the focus distance is substantially equal to a distance from the wearable head device to the second wearable head device [Bar-Zeev: 00131 “the system displays a virtual image in the field of view of the user at the focal depth the user is viewing”][Bar-Zeev: 00142 “From a depth value as part of the target location of a virtual object, the focal distance of the object in the image is determined”](teaches determining a virtual objects focal distance from a depth value that is part of the objects target location).
Bastian and Bar-Zeev are considered to be analogous to the claimed invention because they are in the same field of AR wearable displays. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the system of Bastian to incorporate Bar-Zeev’s teachings of utilizing focal depth. The combination provides improved visual comfort and realism.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to AHMED TAHA whose telephone number is (571)272-6805. The examiner can normally be reached 8:30 am - 5 pm, Mon - Fri.
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, XIAO WU can be reached at (571)272-7761. 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.
/AHMED TAHA/Examiner, Art Unit 2613
/XIAO M WU/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2613
Prosecution Insights