CTNF 18/828,859 CTNF 82537 Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status 07-03-aia AIA 15-10-aia 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 Claims 1-20 are pending in this application and have been examined in response to application filed on 09/09/2024. Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102 07-06 AIA 15-10-15 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. 07-07-aia AIA 07-07 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 – 07-08-aia AIA (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. 07-15 AIA Claim s 1, 4-5, 11, 14-15 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102( a)(1 ) as being unpatentable by McKenzie et al. (US 20250355485 A1) . As to INDEPENDENT claim 1, McKenzie discloses a machine-implemented method, comprising: generating a user interface for an eXtended Reality (XR) system; displaying the user interface as an overlay over real-world objects in front of a camera attached to the XR system ([0004]; an extended reality interface is generated); detecting that a non-dominant hand of a user is open and facing the camera (fig.7E, fig.7F; a user’s hand is captured); in response to the detecting that the non-dominant hand of a user is open and facing the camera: displaying, proximate to the non-dominant hand within the user interface, an application interaction element indicating that the XR system is in a mode in which interaction between an application of the XR system is enabled; displaying a first virtual button over a finger of the non-dominant hand in the user interface ([0257]; a virtual button is displayed over a user’s finger when the system detects that the user’s hand is in an open position); and detecting a pinching motion, the pinching motion comprising a movement of a thumb of the non-dominant hand and/or the finger of the non-dominant hand so that the thumb touches the finger; and in response to the detecting of the pinching motion: causing a state of the XR system to change (fig.8H, [0414]; a state of the XR is changed when an air pinch gesture is detected). As to claim 4, McKenzie discloses detecting a rotational movement of the non-dominant hand to a position in which the non-dominant hand is no longer facing the camera; and in response to the detection of the rotational movement, removing the application interaction element and the first virtual button from the user interface (fig.7AO; [0315]; different interface elements are displayed depending on the rotation of the hand). As to claim 5, McKenzie discloses wherein the XR system is a head-wearable apparatus (fig.1B; a head mount display is disclosed). As to INDEPENDENT claim 11 is rejected under the same rationale addressed in the rejection of claim 1 above. As to claim 14 is rejected under the same rationale addressed in the rejection of claim 4 above. As to claim 15 is rejected under the same rationale addressed in the rejection of claim 5 above . Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103 07-06 AIA 15-10-15 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. 07-20-aia AIA 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. 07-21-aia AIA Claim s 6-7, 10, 16 and 19-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over McKenzie in view of Yang et al. (US 2021/0072832 A1) . As to INDEPENDENT claim 6, McKenzie discloses a machine-implemented method, comprising: generating a user interface for an eXtended Reality (XR) system; displaying the user interface as an overlay over real-world objects in front of a camera attached to the XR system ([0004]; an extended reality interface is generated); detecting that a non-dominant hand of a user is open and facing the camera (fig.7E, fig.7F; a user’s hand is captured); in response to the detecting that the non-dominant hand of a user is open and facing the camera: displaying, proximate to the non-dominant hand within the user interface, an application interaction element indicating that the XR system is in a mode in which interaction between an application of the XR system is enabled; displaying a first virtual button over a finger of the non-dominant hand in the user interface ([0257]; a virtual button is displayed over a user’s finger when the system detects that the user’s hand is in an open position); and detecting a … motion, the … motion comprising a movement …; and in response to the detecting of the … motion: causing a state of the XR system to change (fig.8H, [0414]; a state of the XR is changed when an air pinch gesture is detected). McKenzie does not expressly disclose the motion is a hand-closing motion, the hand-closing motion comprising a movement of the fingers of the non-dominant hand to a palm of the non-dominant hand. In the same field of endeavor, Yang discloses the motion is a hand-closing motion, the hand-closing motion comprising a movement of the fingers of the non-dominant hand to a palm of the non-dominant hand ([0045]; a fisting gesture is detected). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, having the teaching of McKenzie and Yang before him prior to the effective filling date, to modify the augmented reality gesturing interface taught by McKenzie to include a fisting gesture taught by Yang with the motivation being to provide different gestures for different functions. As to claim 7 is rejected under the same rationale addressed in the rejection of claim 4 above. As to claim 10 is rejected under the same rationale addressed in the rejection of claim 5 above. As to INDEPENDENT claim 16 is rejected under the same rationale addressed in the rejection of claim 6 above. As to claim 19 is rejected under the same rationale addressed in the rejection of claim 4 above. As to claim 20 is rejected under the same rationale addressed in the rejection of claim 5 above . 07-21-aia AIA Claim s 2-3, 12-13 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over McKenzie in view of Davies et al. (US 2020/0301512 A1) . As to claim 2, McKenzie discloses wherein the state is related to whether a … of the XR system is enabled or disabled ([0354]; audio state is changed when a corresponding gesture is detected). McKenzie does not expressly disclose the state is related to a microphone. In the same field of endeavor, Davies discloses the state is related to a microphone (fig.1C; [0035]; the microphone is muted based on a recognized gesture). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, having the teaching of McKenzie and Davies before him prior to the effective filling date, to modify the augmented reality gesturing interface taught by McKenzie to include microphone controls taught by Davies with the motivation being to expand usability by controlling different components. As to claim 3, the prior art as combined discloses wherein the first virtual button visually indicates the state (Davies, fig.1C, “156”; the state of a microphone is displayed graphically). As to claim 12 is rejected under the same rationale addressed in the rejection of claim 2 above. As to claim 13 is rejected under the same rationale addressed in the rejection of claim 3 above . 07-21-aia AIA Claim s 7-8, 17-18 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over McKenzie-Yang and in view of Davies . As to claim 7 is rejected under the same rationale addressed in the rejection of claim 2 above. As to claim 8 is rejected under the same rationale addressed in the rejection of claim 3 above. As to claim 17 is rejected under the same rationale addressed in the rejection of claim 2 above. As to claim 18 is rejected under the same rationale addressed in the rejection of claim 3 above. Conclusion Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to HAOSHIAN SHIH whose telephone number is (571)270-1257. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 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, FRED EHICHIOYA can be reached at (571) 272-4034. 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. /HAOSHIAN SHIH/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2179 Application/Control Number: 18/828,859 Page 2 Art Unit: 2179 Application/Control Number: 18/828,859 Page 3 Art Unit: 2179 Application/Control Number: 18/828,859 Page 5 Art Unit: 2179
Prosecution Insights