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 .
Response to Amendment
Received 08/12/2026
Claim(s) 1-20 is/are pending.
Claim(s) 1, 3, and 9-20 has/have been amended.
The 35 USC § 101 rejection to claim(s) 20 have been withdrawn in view of the amendments received on 08/12/2026.
The 35 USC § 112(f) interpretation of claim(s) 1-18 have been withdrawn in view of the amendments received on 08/12/2026.
The 35 U.S.C § 103 rejection to claim(s) 1-20 have been fully considered in view of the amendments received on 08/12/2026 and are fully addressed in the prior art rejection below.
Claim Objections
Claim 15 is objected to because of the following informalities: the repeating of the word “as” within line 6.
Appropriate correction is required.
Response to Arguments
Received 08/12/2026
Regarding independent claim(s) 1, 19, and 20:
Applicant’s arguments (Remarks, Page 11: ¶ 2 to Page 13: ¶ 1), filed 08/12/2026, with respect to the rejection(s) of claim(s) 1, 19, and 20 under 35 U.S.C § 103 have been fully considered and are persuasive. Wherein, Bedikian et al. (U.S. Patent No. 20170345218 A1) fails to disclose the amended subject matter. Therefore, the rejection has been withdrawn, necessitated by Applicant's amendments. However, upon further consideration, a new ground(s) of rejection is made in view of Wang et al. (US PGPUB No. 20170345218 A10) and further in view of Abe (US PGPUB No. 20200132998 A1).
Applicant’s arguments (Remarks, Page 13: ¶ 1), filed 08/12/2026, with respect to the rejection(s) of claim(s) 19 and 20 under 35 U.S.C § 103 have been fully considered and are persuasive due claim 19's and claim 20's similarity to claim 1. Therefore, the rejection has been withdrawn, necessitated by Applicant's amendments. However, upon further consideration, a new ground(s) of rejection is made in view of the prior art as mentioned above.
Regarding dependent claim(s) 2-18:
Applicant’s arguments (Remarks, Page 13: ¶ 1 to Page 14: ¶ 3), filed 08/12/2026, with respect to the rejection(s) of claim(s) 2-18 under 35 U.S.C § 103 have been fully considered and are persuasive due the dependency upon claims 1, 19, and 20 respectively. Therefore, the rejection has been withdrawn, necessitated by Applicant's amendments. However, upon further consideration, a new ground(s) of rejection is made in view of the prior art as mentioned above.
Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP § 706.07(a). Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a).
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 103(a) which forms the basis for all obviousness rejections set forth in this Office action:
(a) A patent may not be obtained though the invention is not identically disclosed or described as set forth in section 102 of this title, if the differences between the subject matter sought to be patented and the prior art are such that the subject matter as a whole would have been obvious at the time the invention was made to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which said subject matter pertains. Patentability shall not be negatived by the manner in which the invention was made.
Claim(s) 1-3, 5, 10, and 16-20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Wang et al., US PGPUB No. 20170345218 A1, hereinafter Wang, and further in view of Abe, US PGPUB No. 20200132998 A1, hereinafter Abe.
Regarding claim 1, Wang discloses an information processing device (Wang; an information processing device (i.e. MR system) [¶ 0053], as illustrated within Fig. 4; additionally, session manager [¶ 0077], as illustrated within Fig. 6) comprising:
circuitry configured to cause a captured image captured by a camera in a first space in which an imaging target object exists to be displayed (Wang; the information processing device (i.e. MR system) [as addressed above] comprises circuitry [¶ 0056-0057] configured to cause a captured image captured by a camera in a 1st space [¶ 0053-0054] in which an imaging target object (i.e. shared virtual content) exists to be displayed [¶ 0068-0069 and ¶ 0071], as illustrated within Figs. 5A-B), and cause, based on an imaging position and an imaging angle, for the imaging target object (Wang; cause for the imaging target object (i.e. shared virtual content) based on an implicit imaging position and an implicit imaging angle (given that the shared virtual content has an placement and orientation) [¶ 0054 and ¶ 0069-0071], as illustrated within Fig. 5A; wherein, virtual content appears to users in a similar manner [¶ 0063]; additionally, virtual content can be arranged based on a determined position (e.g. location and/or orientation) of a user’s head [¶ 0050 and ¶ 0096], as illustrated within Fig. 9), set in a second space that is being subjected to sharing of a virtual space with the first space (Wang; set in a 2nd space that is being subjected to sharing of a virtual space with the 1st space [¶ 0069, ¶ 0071, and ¶ 0073]; moreover, virtual collaboration between users [¶ 0060-0062 and ¶ 0068] within a shared MR session [¶ 0069-0071]), an imaging instruction guide that guides imaging at the imaging angle for the imaging target object (Wang; an imaging instruction guide (corresponding to a session handle, annotation object, and/or user avatar) that (subjectively) guides imaging at the imaging angle for the imaging target object (i.e. shared virtual content) [¶ 0069-0070 and ¶ 0096-0098], as illustrated within Fig. 5A and Fig. 9; wherein, the shared virtual object may be positioned relative to session handle [¶ 0071]; and wherein, the virtual content allows for interaction [¶ 0091]), wherein the imaging instruction guide is superimposed and displayed as a first virtual object in relation to a second virtual object corresponding to the imaging target object, at a position, on the captured image, corresponding to the imaging position (Wang; wherein the imaging instruction guide (corresponding to a session handle, annotation object, and/or user avatar) [as addressed above] is implicitly superimposed (given its placement within the MR session) and displayed as a 1st virtual object in relation to a 2nd virtual object corresponding to the imaging target object (i.e. shared virtual content) on the captured image at a position corresponding to the imaging position [¶ 0069-0070, ¶ 0091, and ¶ 0096-0098], as illustrated within Fig. 5A and Fig. 9; moreover, Fig. 5 illustrates, a virtual object corresponding to a session handle that is incorporated within the MR session in relation with a shared virtual content; still further, Fig. 9 illustrates, a virtual object corresponding to an annotation menu is incorporated in relation with a shared virtual content), and wherein the imaging instruction guide for the imaging target object is displayed in accordance with a relative positional relationship and a relative pose between the first virtual object and the second virtual object (Wang; the imaging instruction guide (corresponding to a session handle, annotation object, and/or user avatar) for the imaging target object (i.e. shared virtual content) [as addressed above] is displayed in accordance with a relative positional relationship and a relative pose between the 1st virtual object (i.e. imaging instruction guide (corresponding to a session handle, annotation object, and/or user avatar)) and the 2nd virtual object (i.e. shared virtual content) [¶ 0097-0099]; wherein, presenting virtual content positioned relative to session handle [¶ 0069 and ¶ 0071-0073]; and wherein, displaying the annotation menu in proximity to a corresponding virtual object [¶ 0096]).
Wang fails to explicitly disclose an imaging position and an imaging angle.
However, Abe teaches an imaging position and an imaging angle (Abe; an imaging position and an imaging angle [¶ 0035-0036]; still further, imaging range [¶ 0037-0038], as illustrated within Fig. 4).
Wang and Abe are considered to be analogous art because both pertain to generating and/or managing data in relation with providing media data to a user, wherein one or more computerized units are utilized in order to produce a visualization effect.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing of the claimed invention was made to modify Wang, to incorporate space an imaging position and an imaging angle (as taught by Abe), in order to provide an improved imaging within a virtualized environment that allow for better mixed/augmented reality experience (Abe; [¶ 0004-0006]).
Regarding claim 2, Wang in view of Abe further discloses the information processing device according to claim 1, wherein the imaging position and the imaging angle are set for a corresponding object corresponding to the imaging target object (Wang; the implicit imaging position and the implicit imaging angle (given that the shared virtual content has an placement and orientation) [as addressed within the parent claim(s)] are set for a corresponding object corresponding to the imaging target object (i.e. shared virtual content) [¶ 0054, ¶ 0069-0071, and ¶ 0073], as illustrated within Fig. 5A; wherein, virtual content appears to users in a similar manner [¶ 0063]), the corresponding object being present in the second space (Wang; the corresponding object being present in the 2nd space [¶ 0068-0069, ¶ 0071, and ¶ 0073], as illustrated within Figs. 5A-B).
Regarding claim 3, Wang in view of Abe further discloses the information processing device according to claim 2, wherein the corresponding object comprises the second virtual object in the virtual space (Wang; the corresponding object comprises the 2nd virtual object in the virtual space [¶ 0070-0071 and ¶ 0073]; moreover, a user may launch an MR collaboration session and may see two virtual 3D models [¶ 0060-0061 and ¶ 0068]).
Regarding claim 5, Wang in view of Abe further discloses the information processing device according to claim 1, wherein the first space and the second space are subjected to three-dimensional space sharing using a virtual origin (Wang; the 1st space and the 2nd space [as addressed within the parent claim(s)] are subjected to 3D space sharing using a virtual origin [¶ 0028-0029 and ¶ 0037]; moreover, displaying and/or synchronizing virtual content across multiple MR systems [¶ 0060-0061 and ¶ 0063-0064]).
Regarding claim 10, Wang in view of Abe further discloses the information processing device according to claim 1, wherein in a case where a still image is imaged by the camera at a predetermined position in the first space, the circuitry causes the still image to be superimposed and displayed as the second virtual object, at a position, on the captured image, corresponding to the predetermined position (Wang; the circuitry [as addressed within the parent claim(s)] causes the still image to be superimposed and displayed as the 2nd virtual object (corresponding to the imaging target object (i.e. shared virtual content)) at a position on the captured image corresponding to the predetermined position in a case where a still image is imaged by the camera at a predetermined position in the 1st space [¶ 0069-0071]; wherein, virtual content is presented in different sessions/spaces [¶ 0060-0061 and ¶ 0063]).
Regarding claim 16, Wang in view of Abe further discloses the information processing device according to claim 1, wherein the circuitry is further configured to cause the imaging position and the imaging angle to be acquired via a network (Wang; the circuitry [as addressed within the parent claim(s)] is further configured to cause the imaging position and the imaging angle to be acquired [¶ 0069-0071], as illustrated within Figs. 5A-B, via a network [¶ 0077, ¶ 0079-0080, and ¶ 0085], as illustrated within Fig. 6; wherein, transmitted data [as addressed above] corresponds to a still image imaged by the camera at a predetermined position in the 1st space to the device [¶ 0069-0071]; moreover, MR collaboration session between multiple users [¶ 0060-0061, ¶ 0063, and ¶ 0068]), the imaging position and the imaging angle being set in a device configured to provide the second space (Wang; the imaging position and the imaging angle being set in a device configured to provide the 2nd space [¶ 0069-0071 and ¶ 0073]; moreover, MR collaboration session between multiple users [¶ 0060-0061, ¶ 0063, and ¶ 0068]).
Regarding claim 17, Wang in view of Abe further discloses the information processing device according to claim 16, wherein the circuitry is further configured to transmit, to the device via the network, a still image imaged by the camera at a predetermined position in the first space (Wang; the circuitry [as addressed within the parent claim(s)] is further configured to transmit data via the network [¶ 0077, ¶ 0079-0080, and ¶ 0085]; wherein, transmitted data [as addressed above] corresponds to a still image imaged by the camera at a predetermined position in the 1st space to the device [¶ 0069-0071], as illustrated within Figs. 5A-B; moreover, MR collaboration session between multiple users [¶ 0060-0061, ¶ 0063, and ¶ 0068]).
Regarding claim 18, Wang in view of Abe further discloses the information processing device according to claim 16, wherein the still image is displayed as the second virtual object (Wang; the still image is displayed as the 2nd virtual object (corresponding to the imaging target object (i.e. shared virtual content)) [¶ 0069-0071], as illustrated within Figs. 5A-B), at a position that corresponds to the predetermined position (Wang; at a position that corresponds to the predetermined position [¶ 0063 and ¶ 0071]), the position that corresponds to the predetermined position being in the second space provided by the device (Wang; the position that corresponds to the predetermined position being in the 2nd space provided by the device [¶ 0063 and ¶ 0071]; moreover, collaboration between users [¶ 0060-0061 and ¶ 0068]).
Regarding claim 19, the rejection of claim 19 is addressed within the rejection of claim 1, due to the similarities claim 19 and claim 1 share, therefore refer to the rejection of claim 1 regarding the rejection of claim 19. Although, claim 1 and claim 19 may not be identical, they are considerably comparable or substantially equivalent given their overlapping subject matter. However, the subject matter/limitations that differs from that addressed by claim 1 is/are addressed below.
Wang discloses superimposing and displaying, as a first virtual object, based on an imaging position and an imaging angle (Wang; implicitly superimposed (given its placement within the MR session) and displaying as a 1st virtual object based on an implicit imaging position and an implicit imaging angle (given that the shared virtual content has an placement and orientation) [¶ 0054 and ¶ 0069-0071], as illustrated within Fig. 5A; wherein, virtual content appears to users in a similar manner [¶ 0063]; additionally, virtual content can be arranged based on a determined position (e.g. location and/or orientation) of a user’s head [¶ 0050, ¶ 0091, and ¶ 0096-0098], as illustrated within Fig. 9).
(further refer to the rejection of claim 1)
Regarding claim 20, the rejection of claim 20 is addressed within the rejection of claim 1, due to the similarities claim 20 and claim 1 share, therefore refer to the rejection of claim 1 regarding the rejection of claim 20. Although, claim 1 and claim 20 may not be identical, they are considerably comparable or substantially equivalent given their overlapping subject matter. However, the subject matter/limitations not addressed by claim 1 is/are addressed below.
Wang discloses a non-transitory computer-readable storage medium having embodied thereon a program (Wang; a non-transitory CRSM having embodied thereon a program [¶ 0025]; moreover, CRM [¶ 0103 and ¶ 0105]), which when executed by a computer causes the computer to execute an information processing method (Wang; which when executed by a computer causes the computer to execute an information processing method [¶ 0025]).
(further refer to the rejection of claim 1)
Claim(s) 6, 8, 9, and 15 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Wang in view of Abe as applied to claim(s) 1 above, and further in view of Ogasawara, US PGPUB No. 20230033201 A1, hereinafter Ogasawara.
Regarding claim 6, Wang in view of Abe further discloses the information processing device according to claim 1, wherein the imaging instruction guide comprises a three-dimensional representation image indicating at least the imaging angle from the imaging position (Wang; the imaging instruction guide (corresponding to a session handle, annotation object, and/or user avatar) comprises a 3D representation image indicating at least the implicit imaging angle from the implicit imaging position [¶ 0068-0069 and ¶ 0071], as illustrated within Figs. 5A-B; additionally, virtual content can be arranged based on a determined position (e.g. location and/or orientation) of a user’s head [¶ 0050 and ¶ 0096], as illustrated within Fig. 9; moreover, a user avatar being a user representative within a session [¶ 0074-0075]).
Wang as modified by Abe fails to explicitly disclose a three-dimensional representation image indicating at least the imaging angle from the imaging position.
However, Ogasawara teaches the imaging instruction guide comprises a three-dimensional representation image indicating at least the imaging angle from the imaging position (Ogasawara; the imaging instruction guide (i.e. virtual viewpoint) comprises a 3D representation image indicating at least the imaging angle from the imaging position [¶ 0041-0042], as illustrated within Figs. 3C-D; moreover, a virtual viewpoint in relation to a vector [¶ 0054 and ¶ 0056], as illustrated within Figs. 5B-D).
Wang in view of Abe and Ogasawara are considered to be analogous art because they pertain to generating and/or managing data in relation with providing media data to a user, wherein one or more computerized units are utilized in order to produce a visualization effect.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing of the claimed invention was made to modify Wang as modified by Abe, to incorporate the imaging instruction guide comprises a three-dimensional representation image indicating at least the imaging angle from the imaging position (as taught by Ogasawara), in order to improve accuracy of positioning a viewpoint (Ogasawara; [¶ 0002-0004]).
Regarding claim 8, Wang in view of Abe and Ogasawara further discloses the information processing device according to claim 6, wherein the imaging instruction guide includes a planar image indicating the imaging angle from the imaging position (Ogasawara; the imaging instruction guide (i.e. virtual viewpoint) includes a planar image indicating the imaging angle from the imaging position [¶ 0054-0056], as illustrated within Fig. 5A-C; wherein, the virtual viewpoint corresponds to a captured image view and view frustum [¶ 0040-0041]), the planar image having a plane facing in an imaging direction (Ogasawara; the planar image having a plane facing in an imaging direction [¶ 0054-0056], as illustrated within Fig. 5A-C).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing of the claimed invention was made to modify Wang as modified by Abe and Ogasawara, to incorporate the imaging instruction guide includes a planar image indicating the imaging angle from the imaging position, the planar image having a plane facing in an imaging direction (as taught by Ogasawara), in order to improve accuracy of positioning a viewpoint (Ogasawara; [¶ 0002-0004]).
Regarding claim 9, Wang in view of Abe and Ogasawara further discloses the information processing device according to claim 6, wherein the circuitry is further configured to cause at least one of a size or a pose of the imaging instruction guide to change in accordance with a position and a pose of the camera (Ogasawara; the circuitry [¶ 0031 and ¶ 0035-0036] is further configured to cause at least one of a size or a pose of the imaging instruction guide to change in accordance with a position and a pose of the camera [¶ 0041-0042]).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing of the claimed invention was made to modify Wang as modified by Abe and Ogasawara, to incorporate the circuity is further configured to cause at least one of a size or a pose of the imaging instruction guide to change in accordance with a position and a pose of the camera (as taught by Ogasawara), in order to improve accuracy of positioning a viewpoint (Ogasawara; [¶ 0002-0004]).
Regarding claim 15, Wang in view of Abe further discloses the information processing device according to claim 1, wherein the circuitry is further configured to cause, together with a plurality of the imaging instruction guides, an arrow image indicating an imaging order at a plurality of the imaging positions corresponding to the plurality of the imaging instruction guides to be superimposed and displayed (Wang; the circuitry [as addressed within the parent claim(s)] is further configured to cause an image at a plurality of the imaging positions corresponding to the plurality of the imaging instruction guides (corresponding to session handles, annotation objects, and/or user avatars) to be superimposed and displayed together with a plurality of the imaging instruction guides (corresponding to session handles, annotation objects, and/or user avatars) [¶ 0068-0069, ¶ 0071, and ¶ 0073], as illustrated within Figs. 5A-B), as as a plurality of first virtual objects, on the captured image (Wang; as a plurality of 1st virtual objects on the captured image [¶ 0068-0069, ¶ 0071, and ¶ 0073], as illustrated within Figs. 5A-B).
However, Ogasawara teaches wherein the circuitry is further configured to cause, together with a plurality of the imaging instruction guides, an arrow image indicating an imaging order at a plurality of the imaging positions corresponding to the plurality of the imaging instruction guides to be superimposed and displayed (Ogasawara; the circuitry is further configured to cause an arrow image (i.e. marker input vector) indicating an imaging order at a plurality of the imaging positions corresponding to the plurality of the imaging instruction guides to be superimposed and displayed together with a plurality of the imaging instruction guides [¶ 0054-0056], as illustrated within Figs. 5A-D; additionally, line-of-sight [¶ 0041], as illustrated within Fig. 3C), as a plurality of first virtual objects, on the captured image (Ogasawara; as a plurality of 1st virtual objects on the captured image [¶ 0054-0056]).
Wang in view of Abe and Ogasawara are considered to be analogous art because they pertain to generating and/or managing data in relation with providing media data to a user, wherein one or more computerized units are utilized in order to produce a visualization effect.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing of the claimed invention was made to modify Wang as modified by Abe, to incorporate the circuitry is further configured to cause, together with a plurality of the imaging instruction guides, an arrow image indicating an imaging order at a plurality of the imaging positions corresponding to the plurality of the imaging instruction guides to be superimposed and displayed (as taught by Ogasawara), in order to improve accuracy of positioning a viewpoint (Ogasawara; [¶ 0002-0004]).
Claim(s) 7 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Wang in view of Abe and Ogasawara as applied to claim(s) 6 above, and further in view of Chen et al., US PGPUB No. 20200261157 A1, hereinafter Chen.
Regarding claim 7, Wang in view of Abe and Ogasawara further discloses the information processing device according to claim 6, wherein the imaging instruction guide includes an image indicating the imaging angle and an imaging range from the imaging position (Ogasawara; the imaging instruction guide (i.e. virtual viewpoint) includes an image indicating the imaging angle and an imaging range from the imaging position [¶ 0040-0042], as illustrated within Figs. 3C-D), the image having a frustum shape with a lower base face facing in an imaging direction or a columnar shape with one of base faces facing in the imaging direction (Ogasawara; the image having a frustum shape with a lower base face facing in an imaging direction or a columnar shape with one of base faces facing in the imaging direction [¶ 0041-0042 and ¶ 0054-0055], as illustrated within Figs. 3C-D).
Wang as modified by Abe and Ogasawara fails to disclose a stereoscopic image indicating the imaging angle and an imaging range from the imaging position; and
the stereoscopic image having a frustum shape.
However, Chen teaches a stereoscopic image indicating the imaging angle and an imaging range from the imaging position (Chen; a stereoscopic image indicating the imaging angle and an imaging range from the imaging position [¶ 0054 and ¶ 0072-0073], as illustrated within Fig. 2); and
the stereoscopic image having a frustum shape with a lower base face facing in an imaging direction or a columnar shape with one of base faces facing in the imaging direction (Chen; the stereoscopic image [as addressed above ] having a frustum shape with a lower base face facing in an imaging direction or a columnar shape with one of base faces facing in the imaging direction [¶ 0054 and ¶ 0072-0073], as illustrated within Fig. 2; additionally, focusing a frustum is a direction [¶ 0074-0076], as illustrated within Fig. 3).
Wang in view of Abe and Ogasawara and Chen are considered to be analogous art because they pertain to generating and/or managing data in relation with providing media data to a user, wherein one or more computerized units are utilized in order to produce a visualization effect.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing of the claimed invention was made to modify Wang as modified by Abe and Ogasawara, to incorporate a stereoscopic image indicating the imaging angle and an imaging range from the imaging position; and the stereoscopic image having a frustum shape with a lower base face facing in an imaging direction or a columnar shape with one of base faces facing in the imaging direction (as taught by Chen), in order to provide realistic/enhanced imaging for a viewer of a three-dimensional scene (Chen; [¶ 0047-0048 and ¶ 0051]).
Claim(s) 4 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Wang in view of Abe as applied to claim(s) 2 above, and further in view of Ichikawa et al., US PGPUB No. 20200051336 A1, hereinafter Ichikawa.
Regarding claim 4, Wang in view of Abe further discloses the information processing device according to claim 2, wherein the corresponding object at a location different from the first space (Wang; the corresponding object at a location different from the 1st space [¶ 0068-0069, ¶ 0071, and ¶ 0073], as illustrated within Figs. 5A-B; moreover, collaboration between users [as addressed within the parent claim(s)]).
Wang as modified by Abe fails to disclose object comprises a real object existing at a location different from the first space.
However, Ichikawa teaches the corresponding object comprises a real object existing at a location different from the first space (Ichikawa; the corresponding object comprises a real object existing at a location different from the 1st space (i.e. real environment of an AR environment) [¶ 0090, ¶ 0121, and ¶ 0123-0124], as illustrated within Fig. 6).
Wang and Abe and Ichikawa are considered to be analogous art because they pertain to generating and/or managing data in relation with providing media data to a user, wherein one or more computerized units are utilized in order to produce a visualization effect.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing of the claimed invention was made to modify Wang as modified by Abe, to incorporate the corresponding object comprises a real object existing at a location different from the first space (as taught by Ichikawa), in order to provide an improved communication between users within augmented environment (Ichikawa; [¶ 0007-0009]).
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 11-14 are objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, but would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure:
(regarding UI interactions for virtual objects)
Clausen et al. (US Patent No. 10657716 B2); and
Mlyniec et al. (US PGPUB No. 20130104083 A1).
(regarding shared or collaboration environment within AR or VR)
Perez et al. (US Patent No. 9122321 B2);
Cordes et al. (US Patent No. 10796489 B1);
Miller, IV et al. (US PGPUB No. 20190188895 A1);
Roche et al. (US Patent No. 10768776 B1); and
Tachi et al. (US Patent No. 6836286 B1).
(regarding switching between VR and AR visual environments)
Martin (US Patent No. 10831334 B2 or US PGPUB No. 20180033208 A1).
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. Refer to PTO-892, Notice of Reference Cited for a listing of analogous art.
Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP § 706.07(a). 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 THREE MONTHS from the mailing date of this action. In the event a first reply is filed 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 the advisory action is mailed, and any nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) 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 mailing date of this final action.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Charles Lloyd Beard whose telephone number is (571)272-5735. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday, 8:00 AM - 5: 00 PM, alternate Fridays EST.
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, Tammy Goddard can be reached at (571) 272-7773. 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.
CHARLES LLOYD. BEARD
Primary Examiner
Art Unit 2611
/CHARLES L BEARD/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2611
Prosecution Insights