CTNF 18/868,182 CTNF 87634 DETAILED ACTION 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. Priority 02-26 AIA Receipt is acknowledged of certified copies of papers required by 37 CFR 1.55. Information Disclosure Statement 06-52 The information disclosure statement (IDS) was submitted on 11/22/2024. The submission is in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statement is being considered by the examiner. 07-30-03-h AIA Claim Interpretation 07-30-03 AIA The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(f): (f) Element in Claim for a Combination. – An element in a claim for a combination may be expressed as a means or step for performing a specified function without the recital of structure, material, or acts in support thereof, and such claim shall be construed to cover the corresponding structure, material, or acts described in the specification and equivalents thereof. The following is a quotation of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph: An element in a claim for a combination may be expressed as a means or step for performing a specified function without the recital of structure, material, or acts in support thereof, and such claim shall be construed to cover the corresponding structure, material, or acts described in the specification and equivalents thereof. 07-30-05 The claims in this application are given their broadest reasonable interpretation using the plain meaning of the claim language in light of the specification as it would be understood by one of ordinary skill in the art. The broadest reasonable interpretation of a claim element (also commonly referred to as a claim limitation) is limited by the description in the specification when 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is invoked. As explained in MPEP § 2181, subsection I, claim limitations that meet the following three-prong test will be interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph: (A) the claim limitation uses the term “means” or “step” or a term used as a substitute for “means” that is a generic placeholder (also called a nonce term or a non-structural term having no specific structural meaning) for performing the claimed function; (B) the term “means” or “step” or the generic placeholder is modified by functional language, typically, but not always linked by the transition word “for” (e.g., “means for”) or another linking word or phrase, such as “configured to” or “so that”; and (C) the term “means” or “step” or the generic placeholder is not modified by sufficient structure, material, or acts for performing the claimed function. Use of the word “means” (or “step”) in a claim with functional language creates a rebuttable presumption that the claim limitation is to be treated in accordance with 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph. The presumption that the claim limitation is interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is rebutted when the claim limitation recites sufficient structure, material, or acts to entirely perform the recited function. Absence of the word “means” (or “step”) in a claim creates a rebuttable presumption that the claim limitation is not to be treated in accordance with 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph. The presumption that the claim limitation is not interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is rebutted when the claim limitation recites function without reciting sufficient structure, material or acts to entirely perform the recited function. Claim limitations in this application that use the word “means” (or “step”) are being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, except as otherwise indicated in an Office action. Conversely, claim limitations in this application that do not use the word “means” (or “step”) are not being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, except as otherwise indicated in an Office action. 07-30-06 This application includes one or more claim limitations that do not use the word “means,” but are nonetheless being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, because the claim limitation(s) uses a generic placeholder that is coupled with functional language without reciting sufficient structure to perform the recited function and the generic placeholder is not preceded by a structural modifier. Such claim limitation(s) is/are: “voice acquisition unit”, “acoustic environment determination processing unit”, and “acoustic characteristics application unit” in claim 1-11. Because this/these claim limitation(s) is/are being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, it/they is/are being interpreted to cover the corresponding structure described in the specification as performing the claimed function, and equivalents thereof. If applicant does not intend to have this/these limitation(s) interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, applicant may: (1) amend the claim limitation(s) to avoid it/them being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph (e.g., by reciting sufficient structure to perform the claimed function); or (2) present a sufficient showing that the claim limitation(s) recite(s) sufficient structure to perform the claimed function so as to avoid it/them being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph. Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 101 07-04-01 AIA 07-04 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. Regarding claim 13 : the claimed invention is directed to non-statutory subject matter. The claim(s) does/do not fall within at least one of the four categories of patent eligible subject matter because it claims “a program” which is a software and not one of the four patent eligible subject matters. Allowable Subject Matter 12-151-07 AIA 07-97 12-51-07 Claim s 1-12 are allowed. Claim 13 is allowed if amended to overcome the 101 rejection. 13-03 AIA The following is an examiner’s statement of reasons for allowance: Regarding independent claim 1 : this claim invokes 112(f) as discussed above. Mindlin et al. (US 11405436 B1 ) is one of the closest prior art. The prior art provides a virtual collaboration experience that allows for audio communication between a plurality acoustic environment of users represented by a plurality of avatars located within a virtual collaboration space. The prior art fails to teach a device that determines an acoustic environment at a position of the virtual space at which a first avatar is present based on a collider associated with the scene or the areas and applies acoustic characteristics matching a processing result of the acoustic environment determination processing to the voice of the second user. Other pertinent prior art are: Shimizu et al (US 20230385011 A1) teaches an information processing apparatus including a control unit that controls display of a virtual space, in which the control unit performs control to acquire communication information of one or more other users in another virtual space and present the acquired communication information by a virtual object disposed in the virtual space. Mindlin et al. (US 20230031439 A1 – Cited IDS ) teaches a collaboration space provider system defines, within a virtual collaboration space, a sound boundary associated with a particular avatar located within the virtual collaboration space. The collaboration space provider system then prevents, based on the sound boundary, at least one direction of audio communication for a user represented by the particular avatar. Corresponding methods and systems are also disclosed. Kuang (US 20180053311 A1 – Cited IDS) teaches a method for collision detection between colliders in a real-time virtual scene. Koppens (EP 3595337 A1 – Cited IDS ) teaches an audio apparatus for a virtual reality client for generating output audio signals from a set of input audio signals by applying reverberation processing to the set of input audio signals in response to the acoustic environment data adapting a first property of the reverberation processing in response to a second property of the set of binaural transfer functions. None of the other prior arts or any combination of the prior art teaches a device that determines an acoustic environment at a position of the virtual space at which a first avatar is present based on a collider associated with the scene or the areas and applies acoustic characteristics matching a processing result of the acoustic environment determination processing to the voice of the second user. Regarding independent claim 12 : this claim recites the corresponding method that performs by the device of claim 1 and allowed under the same reasons that applied to claim 1. Regarding independent claim 13 : this claim has an 101 issue. Suggest amending the claim from “A program…” to “A non-transitory computer-readable storage medium..” to overcome the 101 rejection. The proposed amendment recites the corresponding non-transitory computer-readable storage medium storing a program when executed by a computer of the information processing device of claim 1 and allowed under the same reasons that applied to claim 1 . Any comments considered necessary by applicant must be submitted no later than the payment of the issue fee and, to avoid processing delays, should preferably accompany the issue fee. Such submissions should be clearly labeled “Comments on Statement of Reasons for Allowance.” Conclusion Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to DAVID L TON whose telephone number is (571)270-7839. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday 8:00 AM - 6:00 PM (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, Vivian Chin can be reached at (571)272-7848. 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. /DAVID L TON/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2695 Application/Control Number: 18/868,182 Page 2 Art Unit: 2695 Application/Control Number: 18/868,182 Page 3 Art Unit: 2695 Application/Control Number: 18/868,182 Page 4 Art Unit: 2695 Application/Control Number: 18/868,182 Page 5 Art Unit: 2695 Application/Control Number: 18/868,182 Page 6 Art Unit: 2695 Application/Control Number: 18/868,182 Page 7 Art Unit: 2695
Prosecution Insights