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 .
Claim Status
Claims 1-20 are pending and rejected.
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statements (IDS) submitted on 9/4/2024 and 1/29/2025 are in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statements have been considered by the examiner.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 101
35 U.S.C. 101 reads as follows:
Whoever invents or discovers any new and useful process, machine, manufacture, or composition of matter, or any new and useful improvement thereof, may obtain a patent therefor, subject to the conditions and requirements of this title.
Claims 1-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 101 because the claimed invention is directed to a judicial exception (i.e., a law of nature, a natural phenomenon, or an abstract idea) without significantly more.
Step 1:
Claims 1-17 are directed to a device, which is an apparatus. Claims 18-19 are directed to a system, which is a machine. Claim 20 is directed to a method, which is a process. Therefore, claims 1-20 are directed to one of the four statutory categories of invention.
Step 2A (Prong 1):
Representative claim 1 sets forth the following limitations which recite the abstract idea of providing product information:
generate a mixed reality image to be output to a display unit of a glass worn by a user who enters a shop,
determines a product to be presented in accordance with a user who enters the shop, and
generates a mixed reality image that enables observation of a virtual object image of the determined product to be presented, together with a real object in the shop.
The recited limitations above set forth steps to providing product information. These limitations amount to certain methods of organizing human activity, including commercial or legal interactions (e.g. advertising, marketing or sales activities or behaviors).
Such concepts have been identified by the courts as abstract ideas (see: MPEP 2106).
Step 2A (Prong 2):
Examiner notes that representative claim 1 recites additional elements such as a data processing unit, etc.
When taken individually and as a whole, the additional elements of claim 1 do not integrate the recited judicial exception into a practical application of the exception. The claim merely includes instruction to implement an abstract idea on a computer, or to merely use a computer as a tool to perform an abstract idea, while the additional elements do no more than generally link the use of a judicial exception to a particular field of technological environment or field of use.
Furthermore, this is also because the claim fails to (i) reflect an improvement in the functioning of a computer, or an improvement to other technology or technical field, (ii) implement a judicial exception with a particular machine, (iii) effect a transformation or reduction of a particular article to a different state or thing, or (iv) apply the judicial exception in some other meaningful way beyond generally linking the use of the judicial exception to a particular technological environment.
In view of the above, under Step 2A (Prong 2), claim 1 does not integrate the recited exception into a practical application (see again: MPEP 2106).
Step 2B:
When taken individually or as a whole, the additional elements of claim 1 do not provide an inventive concept (i.e. whether the additional elements amount to significantly more than the exception itself). As discussed above with respect to integration of the abstract idea into a practical application, the additional element of using a processor to perform the steps amounts to no more than mere instructions to apply the exception using a generic computer component. Mere instructions to apply an exception using a generic computer component cannot provide an inventive concept. Certain additional elements also recite well-understood, routine, and conventional activity (See MPEP 2106.05(d)).
Even if considered as an ordered combination, the additional elements of claim 1 do not add anything further than when they are considered individually.
In view of the above, claim 1 does not provide an inventive concept under step 2B, and is ineligible for patenting.
Dependent claims 2-17 recite further complexity to the judicial exception (abstract idea) of claim 1, such as by further defining the steps for providing product information. Thus, each of claims 2-17 are held to recite a judicial exception under Step 2A (Prong 1) for at least similar reasons as discussed above.
Therefore, dependent claims 2-17 do not add “significantly more” to the abstract idea. The dependent claims recite additional functions that describe the abstract idea and only generally link the abstract idea to a particularly technological environment, and applied on a generic computer. Further, the additional limitations fail to provide an improvement to the functioning of the computer, another technology, or a technical field.
Even when viewed as an ordered combination, the dependent claims simply convey the abstract idea itself applied on a generic computer and are held to be ineligible under Steps 2A/2B for at least similar rationale as discussed above regarding claim 1.
The analysis above applies to all statutory categories of invention. Regarding independent claims 18 (system) and 20 (method), the claims recite substantially similar limitations as set forth in claim 1. As such, claims 18 and 20 and dependent claim 19 are rejected for at least similar rationale as discussed above.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
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 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.
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 1-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Keeler et al. (U.S. Pre-Grant Publication No. 2019/0066198 A1) (“Keeler”).
Regarding claim 1, Keeler teaches an information processing device comprising:
a data processing unit configured to generate a mixed reality image to be output to a display unit of a glass worn by a user who enters a shop (Fig. 1, 2; para [0041]-[0042], customer (e.g., a user) 250 can utilize a head-mounted display (HMD) 212 to view a visually three-dimensional layout 200 of a visually three-dimensional virtual store or a store that has been virtualized),
wherein the data processing unit determines a product to be presented in accordance with a user who enters the shop (para [0036], system can be configured with an optimizer to modify a layout of a store and placement of one or more devices within the layout of the store to maximize profit based on one or more of previous history of customer events and personalized information (e.g., profile information)), and
generates a mixed reality image that enables observation of a virtual object image of the determined product to be presented, together with a real object in the shop (Fig. 1, 2, 9, 10; para [0041], rendering of a physical store 100 can include one or more of multi-media (e.g., videos, motion pictures, etc.) 102, furniture and/or display counters 104, items and/or devices (e.g., items) 106 for sale, and checkout counter(s) 108, among others. In one or more embodiments, the rendering of store 100 can incorporate one or more locations of the one or more of multi-media 102, furniture and/or display counters 104, items and/or devices 106 for sale, and checkout counter(s) 108, among others; para [0136]-[0137]; para [0159], customer 250 can interact with the simulated person and an object (e.g., the object for sale or for service) in a same or similar fashion as customer 250 would interact with a person (e.g., a human being), such as a customer service representative of a retail establishment).
Regarding claim 2, Keeler teaches the above device of claim 1. Keeler also teaches wherein a virtual object image of the product to be presented is a three-dimensional image of the product to be presented, and the data processing unit sequentially updates a virtual object image of the product to be presented in accordance with a motion of the glass, and generates a mixed reality image in which the product to be presented appears to be arranged in a product arrangement space that is a real object in the shop (para [0054], device 452 can be displayed via picture and/or video information 446 at a first angle and via display picture and/or video information 448 at a second angle, different from the first angle. For example, when device 452 is displayed at two different angles, device 452 can appear three-dimensional).
Regarding claim 3, Keeler teaches the above device of claim 2. Keeler also teaches wherein the data processing unit analyzes a motion of the glass on a basis of at least any information among a captured image obtained by a camera mounted to the glass and detection information of an inertial measurement unit (IMU) (para [0050], HMD 212 can include one or more of a gyroscope 350 and an accelerometer 360 that can be coupled to processor 310. In one or more embodiments, one or more of gyroscope 350 and accelerometer 360 can measure one or more of orientation and motion of HMD 212, among others).
Regarding claim 4, Keeler teaches the above device of claim 1. Keeler also teaches wherein the data processing unit causes processing of taking out a real item of a product presented to a user as the virtual object image from a warehouse and delivering the real item to a user position in the shop, in response to a request from the user (para [0093], processing the transaction can include one or more of debiting an account associated with user 250, providing item and/or delivery information to a warehouse and/or a shipping company/service, and providing the item to user).
Regarding claim 5, Keeler teaches the above device of claim 4. Keeler also teaches wherein the data processing unit causes a product delivery robot to execute product delivery processing (para [0093], processing the transaction can include one or more of debiting an account associated with user 250, providing item and/or delivery information to a warehouse and/or a shipping company/service, and providing the item to user).
Regarding claim 6, Keeler teaches the above device of claim 4. Keeler also teaches wherein the data processing unit generates a virtual object image in which a color of a real item of a product delivered to the user position is changed, and outputs the virtual object image to the display unit of the glass worn by the user (para [0137], AR device 2112 can display information associated with women's shoe 2126 (e.g., price, manufacture information, model information, material information, endorsement information, a uniform resource locator (URL), a uniform resource identifier (URI), a picture of another wearing the shoe, etc.). ).
Regarding claim 7, Keeler teaches the above device of claim 4. Keeler also teaches wherein the data processing unit generates a virtual object image in which a real item of a product delivered to the user position is tried on by the user, and outputs the virtual object image to the display unit of the glass worn by the user (para [0038], obtain a “hands-on” experience of how a device will function prior to purchase. In one or more embodiments, a system can be configured to allow virtual live interaction with a live person to assist in a sales process. For example, one or more images of a human being (e.g., a sales and/or service person) can be captured and displayed within a virtual environment. In one or more embodiments, a system can be configured that can allow a customer to select a model that fits his or her body dimensions, try on clothing and/or devices, and to view how one or more items appear in a virtual dressing room).
Regarding claim 8, Keeler teaches the above device of claim 1. Keeler also teaches wherein the data processing unit determines a product to be presented in accordance with a shop type selected from a plurality of shop types by a user (para [0059], customer can select an item from a selection and can select virtual model 224, where the selected item can be displayed on the virtual model. For example, customer 250 can select an item of items 540-570 of selections 510, and customer 250 can select virtual model 224 to display the selected item. For instance, customer 250 can select and/or actuate a “hotspot” of virtual model 224 to display the selected item.).
Regarding claim 9, Keeler teaches the above device of claim 1. Keeler also teaches wherein the data processing unit determines a product to be presented with reference to registration data in a database in which user preference information for each user is registered (Fig. 9, 10; para [0075], head-mounted display and user profile-based representations of a store, as viewed via the head-mounted display, are illustrated, according to one or more embodiments).
Regarding claim 10, Keeler teaches the above device of claim 9. Keeler also teaches wherein a face image of a registered user is registered in the database, and the data processing unit executes collation processing between a captured image of a user who enters the shop and a face image registered in the database, to identify the user who enters the shop (para [0060], profile information can include verification information, identification information, and/or authentication information, among others, to verify, identify, confirm, and/or authenticate that the shopper (e.g., the customer) is the one that is associated with and/or corresponds to the payment information).
Regarding claim 11, Keeler teaches the above device of claim 1. Keeler also teaches wherein the glass worn by the user is a glass having a transmissive display unit, and the glass worn by the user is a glass that enables observation of a mixed reality image including a real object in the shop that can be observed with a naked eye through the transmissive display unit and a virtual object image displayed on the transmissive display unit (para [0135], AR can include one or more user experiences in semantic context with environmental elements, such as shopping, walking down a street, viewing a video, viewing a picture, etc.).
Regarding claim 12, Keeler teaches the above device of claim 1. Keeler also teaches wherein the glass worn by the user is a glass having a non- transmissive display unit, and the glass worn by the user is a glass that enables observation of a mixed reality image including a real object image in the shop captured by the camera mounted to the glass and a display image of a virtual object image (para [0134], AR can be or include a view (e.g., direct, indirect, etc.) of a physical environment, where one or more elements of the physical environment are augmented by computing device output).
Regarding claim 13, Keeler teaches the above device of claim 1. Keeler also teaches wherein the data processing unit further generates a mixed reality image including a virtual object image of a product to be presented and a real object image in the shop, and outputs the mixed reality image to a display unit of a glass worn by an operator who serves the user, the virtual object image and the real object image being included in a mixed reality image output to the display unit of the glass worn by the user (para [0137], AR device 2112 can display information based on a user's interaction with one or more of elements 2120-2128. In one example, user 250 can interact with women's shoe 2126, and AR device 2112 can display information associated with one or more of women's shoe 2126 and women's purse 2122, among others.).
Regarding claim 14, Keeler teaches the above device of claim 13. Keeler also teaches wherein a real object image in the shop output to the display unit of the glass worn by the operator is an image generated on a basis of a captured image obtained by a camera in the shop (Fig. 23A, 23B; para [0156], ne or more cameras 234 and 236 can be configured at different angles of exposure. In one or more embodiments, utilizing multiple cameras at different angles of exposure can be included in a method, process, and/or system of producing a stereoscopic display and/or view for a customer).
Regarding claim 15, Keeler teaches the above device of claim 13. Keeler also teaches wherein in a case where the operator serves a plurality of users in the shop, the data processing unit generates a mixed reality image including virtual object images of different products to be presented, the different products to be presented being determined individually in accordance with the plurality of users in the shop, and the data processing unit outputs the mixed reality image to the display unit of the glass worn by the operator (Fig. 9, 10; para [0075], head-mounted display and user profile-based representations of a store, as viewed via the head-mounted display, are illustrated, according to one or more embodiments).
Regarding claim 16, Keeler teaches the above device of claim 1. Keeler also teaches wherein the data processing unit generates a mixed reality image including an avatar image of a salesclerk as a virtual object image, and the data processing unit outputs the mixed reality image to the display unit of the glass worn by the user (para [0159], customer 250 can interact with the simulated person and an object (e.g., the object for sale or for service) in a same or similar fashion as customer 250 would interact with a person (e.g., a human being), such as a customer service representative of a retail establishment).
Regarding claim 17, Keeler teaches the above device of claim 16. Keeler also teaches wherein the information processing device includes: a communication unit configured to receive an utterance to the avatar image from the user, and transmit an utterance to the user from an operator who serves the user (para [0057], customer 250 can talk to, interact with, and/or view a live person or a virtual person (e.g., an artificial person, artificial intelligence, etc.) or a live person via an avatar, each via a real-time communication via HMD 212).
Regarding claims 18-20, independent claims 18 and 20 and dependent claim 19 are substantially similar to above claims 1-17. Therefore claims 18-20 are rejected on at least similar rationale.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ANAND LOHARIKAR whose telephone number is 571-272-8756. The examiner can normally be reached Monday through Friday, 9am – 5pm.
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, Marissa Thein can be reached at 571-272-6764. 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.
/ANAND LOHARIKAR/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3689
Prosecution Insights