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 § 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.
Claim(s) 26-29, 32-34, 37, 43 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Melkote (US 20230039100) in view of Burns (US 5995518).
Regarding claim 26 Melkote teaches a method of supporting cloud-based rendering, implemented by a network device (fig.7, [0067]), the method comprising:
generating video data representing a viewing frustrum of a three-dimensional scene (fig. 6. 606a-606c), wherein a plurality of virtual objects is within the viewing frustrum (fig.7, video data generated by 712)
transmitting pose information and the video data to a computing device over a first transport channel (fig. 7, channel that transmit warped metadata, [0069]) and a second transport channel (fig. 7, channel that transmit HEVC/H.263, [0068]), respectively, and the pose information comprises a pose of a virtual object within the viewing frustrum ([0092] he second metadata may include at least one of anchor identifiers or pose information corresponding to the plurality of virtual objects 202 included in the one or more bounding boxes 204 i.e. frustrum).
Melkote is silent on wherein the first transport channel has lower latency characteristics than the second transport channel.
However, Burns teaches on wherein the first transport channel has lower latency characteristics than the second transport channel (col. 2, FIG. 1 is a block diagram illustrating reduction of latency perceived by a user using two communication channels having different latencies according to the present invention, a high latency communication channel as represented by block 12, and a low latency communication channel as represented by block 14).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of the ordinary skilled in the art to combine Melkote in light of Burns teaching so that it may include wherein the first transport channel has lower latency characteristics than the second transport channel.
The motivation is to provide a communication system and method for interactive communication applications which reduce perceived delay between transmission and reception of information.
Regarding claim 27 Melkote teaches wherein transmitting the pose information comprises transmitting the pose of the virtual object after transmitting the video data such that the pose of the virtual object is more current than the video data upon arrival at the computing device (fig. 7, head pose is before output of 714, [0091]- [0092]).
Regarding claim 28 Melkote teaches transmitting the pose information further comprises transmitting, before the pose of the virtual object, an earlier pose of the virtual object; and the earlier pose and pose of the virtual object correspond to motion of the virtual object within the viewing frustrum ([0077]-[0079]).
Regarding claim 29 Melkote teaches herein the generating and transmitting is responsive to receiving a scene update notification from the computing device ([0069] The AR runtime/warp (APR) engine 708 may receive the decoded eye buffer from the video decoder 714 in addition to head pose and/or anchor pose information from the perception module 706 to warp the content included in the bounding boxes/tiles indicated by the metadata received from the eye buffer. For example, the perception module 706 may provide the head pose and/or anchor pose information based on a determination/measurement that occurs prior to warping the content (e.g., immediately prior to warping the content). A warped eye buffer including the warped content may be subsequently provided to a display 710 of the client device for displaying the warped virtual content).
Regarding claim 32 Melkote teaches the pose information further comprises a further virtual object within the viewing frustrum (fig.2, 202, bounded box); the method further comprises assigning the virtual object and the further virtual object to different layers of the video data; and generating the video data comprises generating a respective video stream for each of the different layers (fig. 7, 712, 714 etc.).
Regarding claim 33 Melkote teaches further comprising assigning an additional virtual object (fig.2, balloon) within the viewing frustrum to a same layer as the virtual object responsive to the virtual object and the additional virtual object having disjoint bounding boxes (fig. 2, each virtual object such as globe, picture frame balloon has disjoint boxed 204).
Regarding claim 34 Melkote teaches wherein the pose information further comprises a camera pose corresponding to the viewing frustrum (fig.6, 604, [0061]).
Regarding 37 Melkote teaches further comprising excluding a pose of a non-moving virtual object within the viewing frustrum from the pose information (fig.2 [0043] FIG. 2 illustrates a field of view 200 having a plurality of virtual objects 202 projected into the field of view 200 in accordance with one or more techniques of this disclosure. Generated content for both augmented reality (AR) and virtual reality (VR) may be configured to appear as static/fixed in the “real world” (e.g., via an anchor point)).
Regarding claim 37 Melkote teaches further comprising excluding a pose of a non-moving virtual object within the viewing frustrum from the pose information (fig.2, [0043]).
Regarding claim 43 Melkote teaches a network device comprising: processing circuitry and interface circuitry communicatively connected to the processing circuitry, wherein the processing circuitry (fig. 7, fig. 1). The other limitations are similar to the limitations of claim 26 so rejected same way.
Claim(s) 30, 31, 38, 39, 40, 44 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Melkote (US 20230039100) in view of Burns (US 5995518) and Ambrus (US 20170115488).
Regarding claim 38 Melkote teaches a method of generating a two-dimensional image of a three-dimensional scene (fig.2), implemented by a computing device, the method comprising:
receiving, from a network device, pose information and video data over a first transport channel (fig. 7, channel that transmit warped metadata, [0069]) and a second transport channel (fig. 7, channel that transmit HEVC/H.263, [0068]), respectively, wherein: the video data represents a viewing frustrum of a three-dimensional scene;
the pose information comprises a pose of a virtual object within the viewing frustrum, the pose being more current (fig. 7, head pose before video data from 714) than the video data ([0092] he second metadata may include at least one of anchor identifiers or pose information corresponding to the plurality of virtual objects 202 included in the one or more bounding boxes 204 i.e. frustrum); and
and the video data (fig.7, output of 714) as inputs to a warping function (fig. 7, 708).
Melkote is silent on the first transport channel has lower latency characteristics than the second transport channel;
predicting a newer pose of the virtual object from the pose information;
generating a two-dimensional image using the predicted pose.
However, Burns teaches on the first transport channel has lower latency characteristics than the second transport channel (col. 2, FIG. 1 is a block diagram illustrating reduction of latency perceived by a user using two communication channels having different latencies according to the present invention, a high latency communication channel as represented by block 12, and a low latency communication channel as represented by block 14).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of the ordinary skilled in the art to combine Melkote in light of Burns teaching so that it may include wherein the first transport channel has lower latency characteristics than the second transport channel.
The motivation is to provide a communication system and method for interactive communication applications which reduce perceived delay between transmission and reception of information.
Further, Ambrus teaches predicting a newer pose of the virtual object from the pose information ([0030] the pose prediction machine predicts the future pose of the virtual reality device at a future time, and this future time is separated from the current time by a buffer period); generating a two-dimensional image using the predicted pose. (fig.1, [0031] also see fig.2).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of the ordinary skilled in the art to combine Melkote in light of Ambrus teaching so that it may include predicting a newer pose of the virtual object from the pose information;
generating a two-dimensional image using the predicted pose.
The motivation is to provide virtual reality device which are usable for generating and viewing interactive virtual imagery so as to make it appear that virtual objects remain in a fixed location in the real world.
Regarding claim 30 Melkote in view of Burns and Ambrus teach wherein the virtual object (fig. 2, 211 blocked) occludes an occluded virtual object (Ambrus:fig. 2, virtual sofa) that is within the viewing frustrum and the method comprises excluding the occluded virtual object from the pose information transmitted to the computing device (fig. 2,).
Regarding claim 31 Melkote in view of Burns and Ambrus teach determining that the virtual object and the occluded virtual object mutually occlude each other; assigning a non-cyclic object occlusion relationship to the virtual object and occluded virtual object, the non-cyclic object occlusion relationship designating the virtual object as occluding the occluded virtual object without the occluded virtual object occluding the virtual object; and excluding the occluded virtual object from the pose information in response to assigning the non-cyclic object occlusion relationship (Ambrus: fig. 2).
Regarding claim 39 Melkote in view of Burns and Ambrus teach wherein generating the two-dimensional image using the predicted pose (Ambrus: [0030] ) and the video data as inputs to the warping function (fig. 7, 708) comprises warping a bounding box of the virtual object based on the predicted newer pose (Ambrus: fig.1, [0031] also see fig.2).
Regarding claim 40 Melkote teaches wherein: the video data comprises a plurality of video streams, each video stream corresponding to a respective layer of the scene; and the virtual object and a further virtual object within the viewing frustrum are assigned to different layers of the scene (fig. 7, 712, 714 etc. also fig.2).
Regarding claim 44 Melkote teaches a network device comprising: processing circuitry and interface circuitry communicatively connected to the processing circuitry, wherein the processing circuitry (fig. 7, fig. 1).
The other limitations are similar to the limitations of claim 38 so rejected same way.
Claim(s) 35 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Melkote (US 20230039100) in view of Burns (US 5995518) and Liu (CN 110801628).
Regarding claim 35 Melkote is silent on transmitting a speed and/or acceleration of the virtual object over the first transport channel.
However, Liu teaches transmitting a speed and/or acceleration of the virtual object over the first transport channel (the client sends the corresponding speed of the virtual object under the static state to the server,).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of the ordinary skilled in the art to combine Melkote in light of Liu teaching so that it may include transmitting a speed and/or acceleration of the virtual object over the first transport channel.
The motivation is to provide method of controlling virtual object.
Claim(s) 36 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Melkote (US 20230039100) in view of Burns (US 5995518) and Kim (WO 2021225333).
Regarding claim 36 Melkote is silent on the pose of the virtual object in the pose information responsive to determining that the pose of the virtual object has changed.
However, Kim teaches the pose of the virtual object in the pose information responsive to determining that the pose of the virtual object has changed (FIG. 16, the processor 300 determines the changed position of the virtual object related to the first electronic device 200 in a first section 1602 based on a reference point (eg, a user position) 1600).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of the ordinary skilled in the art to combine Melkote in light of Kim teaching so that it may include the pose of the virtual object in the pose information responsive to determining that the pose of the virtual object has changed.
The motivation is to provide an apparatus and method for providing an augmented reality service in an electronic device.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 41, 42 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.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 12/09/25 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
Applicant argues: Applicant argues that Melkote does not teach “
A network device …transmitting pose information and the video data to a computing device”.
Examiner responds: The Examiner respectfully disagrees. Melkote disclose a network device in fig. 7 that disclosed wireless network device. Melkote teaches in fig. 7, item 706 transmitting pose to display 710 that comprise display processor, i.e. computing device and this method is being done through wireless network.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
-Shen US 20190045248
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 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 TOWFIQ ELAHI whose telephone number is (571)270-1687. The examiner can normally be reached M-F: 10AM-3PM.
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, William Boddie can be reached at (571)272-0666. 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.
/TOWFIQ ELAHI/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2625
Prosecution Insights