DETAILED ACTION
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 1-21 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) as being anticipated by Potetsianakis (US 2024/0,212,294).
Referring to claims 1, 8 and 15, Potetsianakis discloses a method (para.0004, extended reality; fig, 2, scene rendered using head mounted display to augment an external environment) comprising:
obtaining a description (fig. 1, scene descriptor data 20; para.0084, descriptor data; para.0172, descriptor files) of an extended reality scene (fig. 1, at extended reality rendering device 100; para. 0171, rendered scene), the description comprising:
a scene graph (para. 0244, scene graph; para.0015, 3D graphics) and a set of behavior information (paras.0246-247, branches 1.2/1.2.1/1.2.2 in XML, JSON formats; para.0015, change in state) associating a trigger (para.0248, RemoteRenderBranch messaging by client or server) with an action on nodes (para.0248, render objects or object parts) of the scene graph; and
a trigger (para.0248, RemoteRenderBranch messaging by client or server, i.e., requesting rendering; fig. 3, request 400/transmit 420), wherein the trigger is associated with:
a first node (para.0251, 3D graphics object of camera recording; para.0248, server; fig. 3, server 200) of the scene graph describing a camera (para.0144, virtual cameras); and
a second node (para.0251, client receiving streaming; para.0248, client; fig. 3, client 100) of the scene graph
describing a first object (para.0159, such as 3D assets) and
comprising first information (para.0217, scene descriptor) indicating at what extent the first object has to be visible by the camera to activate the trigger (paras.0213-0217, object visibility); and
applying the action associated with the trigger in the set of behavior information when conditions of the first information are fulfilled (fig. 2, show scene rendered; para.0095).
As to claims 2, 9 and 16, Potetsianakis discloses the method of claim 1, wherein the first information is percentage value (para.0172, descriptor data for visibility; AAPA Khronos/glTF, specification, p.1, ll.14-21, percentage values used in glTF JSON format) indicating a part of the first object to be visible from the camera to activate the trigger (para.0159, client only download viewpoint visible 3D assets), the trigger being activated on condition that the part of the first object is visible by the camera (para.0158, AR scene descriptor and assets from server).
As to claims 3, 10 and 17, Potetsianakis discloses the method of claim 1, wherein the first information is a Boolean value (para.0002, visually overlaid, mixed or blended; AAPA, Boolean values used in glTF JSON format), a true value indicating that the trigger is activated only on condition that the first object is fully visible by the camera, and a false value indicating that the trigger is activated on condition that a part of the first object is visible by the camera (para.0172, descriptor data for visibility).
As to claims 4, 11 and 18, Potetsianakis discloses the method of claim 1, wherein the first information is a number value (para.0172, descriptor data for visibility; AAPA, number values being used in glTF JSON format) indicating how many faces of a mesh representative of a geometry (para.0034, 3D graphics in form of mesh data) of the first object has to be visible to activate the trigger.
As to claims 5, 12 and 19, Potetsianakis discloses the method of claim 1, wherein the second node comprises second information indicating a list of third nodes (fig. 2, objects 360/380 etc.,) describing second objects (fig. 2, one of objects 360/380 etc.,) to be ignored to evaluate whether the first object is fully visible (fig. 2, such as background 340; para.0002, visually overlaid, mixed or blended).
As to claims 6, 13 and 20, Potetsianakis discloses the method of claim 1, wherein the second node comprises second information indicating a list of third nodes (fig. 2, objects 360/380 etc.,) describing second objects (fig. 2, one of objects 360/380 etc.,) to be considered to evaluate whether the first object is fully visible (fig. 2, such as background 340; para.0002, visually overlaid, mixed or blended).
As to claims 7, 14 and 21, Potetsianakis discloses the method of claim 1, wherein the second node comprises third information indicating a mesh (para.0043, 3D graphics in form of mesh data) to use to evaluate whether the first object is fully visible (para.0002, visually overlaid, mixed or blended).
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 “a description comprising a scene graph and a set of behavior information associating a trigger with an action on nodes of the scene graph” as in claims 1, 8 and 15 (pp.2-3).
Potetsianakis discloses a scene descriptor comprising scene graph (fig. 2) and data structures for describing objects in XML format (para.246). The XML files describe objects in the graph. The scene descriptor describes the 3D scene and objects within.
Applicant argues that the cited prior art does not disclose “a trigger with an action on nodes of the scene graph … the trigger associated with … at what extent the first object has to be visible by the camera to activate the trigger” (pp.3-4).
Potetsianakis exchanges messages between client and server as a trigger to activate next operations such as requesting rendering objects (para.0248) represented by the XML files.
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