CTNF 18/883,222 CTNF 100826 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. 07-06 AIA 15-10-15 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 (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA) 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. Priority 02-25 AIA Acknowledgment is made of applicant's claim for foreign priority based on an application filed in Republic of Korea on August 21 st 2024 . It is noted, however, that applicant has not filed a certified copy of the KR10-2024-0111837 application as required by 37 CFR 1.55. Information Disclosure Statement 06-52 The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted on September 12 th 2024 is in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statement is being considered by the examiner. Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112 07-30-02 AIA The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(b): (b) CONCLUSION.—The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention. The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA), second paragraph: The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the applicant regards as his invention. 07-34-01 Claims 1-20 rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA), second paragraph, as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor (or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the applicant), regards as the invention. Claims 1,10, and 19-20 , state the following limitation “wherein each of at least one of the first data element or the second data element is divided into a plurality of sub-data elements” . Examiner is unsure what applicant means by “each of at least one of” as the terminology of “each” and “at least one” contradict each other. Therefore, examiner determines by broadest reasonable interpretation that “wherein each of at least one of the first data element or the second data element is divided into a plurality of sub-data elements” means either the first data element or the second data element is divided into a plurality of sub-data elements. Thus, the claim will be examined as best understood by the Examiner. Claim 13 , states the following limitation “through a merger of first sub-avatar data based on the first sub-data element obtained based on the first period, and second sub-avatar data based on the second sub-data element obtained based on the second period, the dynamic 3D avatar data in a current frame is obtained.” . Examiner is unsure what applicant means by “through a merger of first sub-avatar data….” . Therefore, examiner determines by broadest reasonable interpretation that “through a merger of first sub-avatar data” means “through merging a first sub-avatar data…” . Thus, the claim will be examined as best understood by the Examiner. Claim 14 , states the following limitation “through a retargeting based on information of the second data element for the first data element, the dynamic 3D avatar data in a current frame is obtained.” . Examiner is unsure what applicant means by “through a retargeting based on….” and if they are referring to avatar retargeting or generic retargeting information. Therefore, examiner determines by broadest reasonable interpretation that “through a retargeting based on….” means “through modifying based on information of the second data element for the first data element, the dynamic 3D avatar data in a current frame is obtained.” . Thus, the claim will be examined as best understood by the Examiner. Claims 2-9, 11-12, 15-18 inherit their indefiniteness from claims 1 and 10 from which they depend. Claims 1-20 will also be examined as best understood by the Examiner. Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103 07-20-aia AIA 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. 07-21-aia AIA Claim (s) 1-3, 5-7, 10-13, 16, and 19-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Han et al. WIPO Application WO 2023003349 A1 (hereinafter Han) in view of NPL “Point Cloud Processing I” by Ravi Peters, Hugo Ledoux, Ken Arroyo Ohori (hereinafter Peters) . Regarding claim 1, Han teaches a method for transmitting dynamic 3-dimensional (3D) avatar data (Transmitting Point Cloud Data Containing Avatar Data, Page 12 Para. 5 and Fig. 9) , the method comprising: Generating (Creating an Avatar Page 28 Para. 4 or Generating a Point Cloud Page 12 Para. 5) a plurality of data elements (Attributes, Geometry, Auxiliary Data, Mesh Data, Page 13 Para. 5 and Fig. 9) configuring the dynamic 3D avatar data (Point Cloud Data Containing Avatar Data, Page 12 Para. 5 and Fig. 9) ; performing a first encoding and transmission for a first data element (Attribute Stream, Page 12 Para. 5 and Fig. 9) of the plurality of data elements (Attributes, Geometry, Auxiliary Data, Mesh Data, Page 13 Para. 5 and Fig. 9) ; and performing a second encoding and transmission for a second data element (Geometry Stream, Page 12 Para. 5 and Fig. 9) of the plurality of data elements (Attributes, Geometry, Auxiliary Data, Mesh Data, Page 13 Para. 5 and Fig. 9) , wherein each of at least one of the first data element (Attribute Stream, Page 12 Para. 5 and Fig. 9) or the second data element (Geometry Stream, Page 12 Para. 5 and Fig. 9) is divided into a plurality of sub-data elements (Geometry – x, y, z position values Page 13 Para. 6, Attribute – Texture, Color, Reflectance, Attributes 1-N, Page 13 Para. 7 to Page 14 Para. 1) . The Geometry stream contains position and location elements and the attribute stream contains color, light, and texture elements. While Han fails to explicitly teach the first data element or the second data element is divided into a plurality of sub-data elements. Han teaches the point cloud data comprises several data streams that then contain various data elements such position, location, texture, mesh, color, light, and metadata (Page 13 Para. 7 to Page 14 Para. 1). Han further teaches the point cloud data(x ,y, z positions, color, reflectance, transparency, etc.… ) can be represented in PLY(Polygon File Format or Standford Triangle Format) Format. However, Han fails to explicitly detail the PLY format. Han and Peters are analogous to the claimed invention because both of them are in the same field of processing point cloud data in PLY format. Peters teaches the PLY format arranges data in an array of point records often by coordinates and attributions. Each point record consists of several fields to store values of several types, such as x, y, z coordinates or color information. (Section: 1 Point Cloud File Formats, Para. 1) Therefore, it would have been obvious to someone of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Han’s Point Cloud Data to incorporate Peters PLY Format that Subdivides Point Cloud Data into a plurality of sub-data elements. Since doing so would provide the benefit of organizing the point cloud data into a standardized ASCII format which is a flexible standard as users can choose the composition of the point records. (Peters et al. Section: 1.2 The PLY Format, Page 2) Regarding claim 2, Han teaches the method of Claim 1, wherein: a period (Specific Time Period, Page 17 Para. 2) of the first encoding and transmission and a period (Specific Time Period, Page 17 Para. 2) of the second encoding is and transmission are adaptively determined based on a characteristic of the first data element (Attribute Stream, Page 12 Para. 5 and Fig. 9) and the second data element (Geometry Stream, Page 12 Para. 5 and Fig. 9) , respectively. The point cloud can be represented in frames/pictures which can represent a specific time period (Page 17 Para. 2) in frames. The point cloud is divided into several streams or combined into one with sub elements (Page 14 Para. 2). While Han fails to explicitly teach the first and second encoding and transmission are determined based on characteristics of the first and second data elements. Han teaches a delivery unit that delivers the point cloud for transmission processing or data that has already been processed. This delivery unit follows any transmission protocol and delivers data in an on-demand manner. The delivery unit delivers the point cloud based on orientation, viewpoint, or any information selected by the user (Page 14, Para. 4). Thus, a user could choose to deliver portion of the point cloud based on the characteristics of the point cloud. Therefore, it would have been obvious to someone of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Han’s Point Cloud Transmission to incorporate Han’s own teaching to Determine the Transmission based on Characteristics. Since doing so would provide the benefit of increasing the flexibility of the point cloud transmission and allowing different modalities of transmitting the point cloud. Regarding claim 3, Han teaches the method of Claim 1, wherein: when the first data element (Attribute Stream, Page 12 Para. 5 and Fig. 9) is divided into the plurality of sub-data elements (Texture, Color, Reflectance, Attributes 1-N, Page 13 Para. 7 to Page 14 Para. 1) , the first encoding and transmission for the first data element includes: a first period-based (Specific Time Period, Page 17 Para. 2) encoding and transmission for a first sub-data element (Slice Data - Attr00) among the plurality of sub-data elements (Attributes 1-N or Slices, Page 22 Para. 10) , and a second period-based (Specific Time Period, Page 17 Para. 2) encoding and transmission for a second sub-data element (Slice Data - Attr10) among the plurality of sub-data elements (Attributes 1-N or Slices, Page 22 Para. 10) . A slice in encoding can be a portion of a video frame that has been divided into manageable segments. Slices are often encoded/decoded/transmitted separately, but in parallel. In Han’s the slices are portions of the attribute or geometry streams which are portions of the point cloud. Regarding claim 5, Han teaches the method of Claim 1, wherein: the first data element (Attribute Stream, Page 12 Para. 5 and Fig. 9) is divided into the plurality of sub-data elements (Texture, Color, Reflectance, Attributes 1-N, Page 13 Para. 7 to Page 14 Para. 1) by referring to information of the second data element (Geometry Stream, Page 12 Para. 5 and Fig. 9) . The attribute streams or slices are the attributes of points in the point cloud. The points are based on the position information in the geometry stream. Thus, the attribute stream refers to the geometry stream to determine which attributes belong to specific points in the point cloud. (Page 22 Para. 10) Regarding claim 6, Han teaches the method of Claim 1, wherein: an encoding and a transmission of the plurality of sub-data elements (Geometry – x, y, z position values Page 13 Para. 6, Attribute – Texture, Color, Reflectance, Attributes 1-N, Page 13 Para. 7 to Page 14 Para. 1) are performed independently or in parallel (Page 14 Para. 2) . Regarding claim 7, Han teaches the method of Claim 1, wherein: based on a combination of the first data element (Attribute Stream, Page 12 Para. 5 and Fig. 9) , or at least one sub-data element (Texture, Color, Reflectance, Attributes 1-N, Page 13 Para. 7 to Page 14 Para. 1) of the first data element; and the second data element (Geometry Stream, Page 12 Para. 5 and Fig. 9) , or at least one sub-data element (x, y, z position values Page 13 Para. 6) of the second data element, at least one sub-avatar data (Point Cloud or Portion of Point Cloud) is configured. The avatar data is represented as point cloud data. Combining the point cloud streams results in the full point cloud. Thus, combining sub elements of the attribute and geometry streams results in portions of the point cloud. Which would be sub avatar data, as the data would only consist of the portions of the point cloud. Resulting in portions of the avatar data as only portions of the point cloud were encoded. Regarding claim 10, Han teaches a method for obtaining dynamic 3-dimensional (3D) avatar data (Obtaining Decoded Point Cloud Data Containing Avatar Data , Page 13 Para. 2, Fig. 10, Page 28 Para. 4) the method comprising: obtaining a first data element (Attribute Stream, Page 16 Para. 1) based on a first reception and decoding (Point Cloud Decoding, fig. 10) for an encoded first data element of a plurality of data elements (Attributes, Geometry, Auxiliary Data, Mesh Data, Page 16 Para. 2) ; obtaining a second data element (Geometry Stream, Page 16 Para. 1) based on a second reception and decoding (Point Cloud Decoding, fig. 10) for an encoded second data element of the plurality of data elements (Attributes, Geometry, Auxiliary Data, Mesh Data, Page 16 Para. 2) ; and obtaining the dynamic 3D avatar data (Obtaining Decoded Point Cloud Data Containing Avatar Data , Page 13 Para. 2, Fig. 10) based on the plurality of data elements (Attributes, Geometry, Auxiliary Data, Mesh Data, Page 16 Para. 2) including the first data element (Attribute Stream, Page 16 Para. 1) and the second data element (Geometry Stream, Page 16 Para. 1) , wherein each of at least one of the first data element (Attribute Stream, Page 16 Para. 1) or the second data element (Geometry Stream, Page 16 Para. 1) is divided into a plurality of sub-data elements (Geometry – x, y, z position values Page 13 Para. 6, Attribute – Texture, Color, Reflectance, Attributes 1-N, Page 13 Para. 7 to Page 14 Para. 1) . While Han fails to explicitly teach the first data element or the second data element is divided into a plurality of sub-data elements. Han teaches the point cloud data comprises several data streams that then contain various data elements such position, location, texture, mesh, color, light, and metadata (Page 13 Para. 7 to Page 14 Para. 1). Han further teaches the point cloud data(x ,y, z positions, color, reflectance, transparency, etc.… ) can be represented in PLY(Polygon File Format or Standford Triangle Format) Format. However, Han fails to explicitly detail the PLY format. Han and Peters are analogous to the claimed invention because both of them are in the same field of processing point cloud data in PLY format. Peters teaches the PLY format arranges data in an array of point records often by coordinates and attributions. Each point record consists of several fields to store values of several types, such as x, y, z coordinates or color information. (Section: 1 Point Cloud File Formats, Para. 1) Therefore, it would have been obvious to someone of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Han’s Point Cloud Data to incorporate Peters PLY Format that Subdivides Point Cloud Data into a plurality of sub-data elements. Since doing so would provide the benefit of organizing the point cloud data into a standardized ASCII format which is a flexible standard as users can choose the composition of the point records. (Peters et al. Section: 1.2 The PLY Format, Page 2) Regarding claim 11, Han teaches the method of Claim 10, wherein: based on a period (Specific Time Period, Page 17 Para. 2) of at least one of the first reception and decoding (Point Cloud Decoding, Fig. 10) or the second reception and decoding (Point Cloud Decoding, Fig. 10) corresponding to a plurality of frames (Page 17 Para. 2) , The point cloud can be mapped to frames/pictures. at least one of the first data element (Attribute Stream, Page 16 Para. 1) or the second data element (Geometry Stream, Page 16 Para. 1) obtained from a first frame (Portion of Point Cloud) among the plurality of frames (Entire Point Cloud) is applied to at least one remaining frame (Portion of Point Cloud) among the plurality of frames (Entire Point Cloud) . The point cloud can have multiple frames associated with it; thus portions of a point cloud stream could belong to multiple frames (Page 13 Para. 6). Regarding claim 12, Han teaches the method of Claim 10, wherein: when the first data element (Attribute Stream, Page 16 Para. 1) is divided into the plurality of sub-data elements (Texture, Color, Reflectance, Attributes 1-N, Page 13 Para. 7 to Page 14 Para. 1) , the first reception and decoding (Point Cloud Decoding, Fig. 10 for the first data element includes: a first period-based (Specific Time Period, Page 17 Para. 2) reception and decoding (Point Cloud Decoding, Fig. 10) for a first sub-data element (Slice Data - Attr00) among the plurality of sub-data elements (Attributes 1-N or Slices, Page 22 Para. 10) , and a second period-based (Specific Time Period, Page 17 Para. 2) reception and decoding (Point Cloud Decoding, Fig. 10) for a second sub-data element (Slice Data - Attr10) among the plurality of sub-data elements (Attributes 1-N or Slices, Page 22 Para. 10) . A slice in encoding can be a portion of a video frame that has been divided into manageable segments. Slices are often encoded/decoded/transmitted separately, but in parallel. In Han’s the slices are portions of the attribute or geometry streams. Regarding claim 13, Han teaches the method of Claim 12, wherein: through a merger of first sub-avatar data (Portion of Point Cloud based on Attribute Stream) based on the first sub-data element (Slice Data - Attr00) obtained based on the first period (Specific Time Period, Page 17 Para. 2) , and second sub-avatar data (Portion of Point Cloud based on Attribute Stream) based on the second sub-data element (Slice Data - Attr10) obtained based on the second period (Specific Time Period, Page 17 Para. 2) , the dynamic 3D avatar data in a current frame (Point Cloud or Portion of Point Cloud) is obtained. The sub-data elements can be portions of the attribute or geometry streams. These portions of streams contain portions of the point cloud. Since the point cloud can be of an avatar the portion of streams would contain sub-avatar data. As well as, since the point cloud can be mapped to frames/pictures. The portion of point cloud retrieved/decoded could be any frame or the only frame. Regarding claim 16, Han teaches the method of Claim 10, wherein: a post-processing process (Combining Point Cloud Streams, Fig. 10 and Fig. 12) related to a removal or an alleviation of a discontinuity between the plurality of sub-data elements (Geometry – x, y, z position values Page 13 Para. 6, Attribute – Texture, Color, Reflectance, Attributes 1-N, Page 13 Para. 7 to Page 14 Para. 1) is performed. The point cloud streams are combined to render the decoded point cloud data and provide content to a user, like displaying an avatar. Regarding claim 19, Han teaches a device (First or Second Communication Device) for transmitting dynamic 3-dimensional (3D) avatar data, the device comprising: at least one processor (Processors 911, 921, 913, 923, Page 4 Para. 5 to Page 5 Para. 1) ; and at least one memory (Memory 914 and 924, Page 4 Para. 5 to Page 5 Para. 1) operably connected to the at least one processor, and storing an instruction for making the device to perform an operation when being executed by the at least one processor, wherein the operation includes the transmitting method of claim 1, therefore it is rejected under the same rationale as claim 1. Regarding claim 20, Han teaches a device (First or Second Communication Device) for obtaining dynamic 3-dimensional (3D) avatar data, the device comprising: at least one processor (Processors 911, 921, 913, 923, Page 4 Para. 5 to Page 5 Para. 1) ; and at least one memory (Memory 914 and 924, Page 4 Para. 5 to Page 5 Para. 1) operably connected to the at least one processor, and storing an instruction for making the device to perform an operation when executed by the at least one processor, wherein the operation includes the obtaining method of claim 10, therefore it is rejected under the same rationale as claim 10 . 07-21-aia AIA Claim (s) 4 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Han et al. WIPO Application WO 2023003349 A1 (hereinafter Han) in view of NPL “Point Cloud Processing I” by Ravi Peters, Hugo Ledoux, Ken Arroyo Ohori (hereinafter Peters) in further view of NPL “Auto-CARD: Efficient and Robust Codec Avatar Driving for Real-time Mobile Telepresence” by Yonggan Fu, Yuecheng Li, Chenghui Li, Jason Saragih, Peizhao Zhang, Xiaoliang Dai, Yingyan (Celine) Lin, Georgia Institute of Technology, and Meta (hereinafter Fu) . Regarding claim 4, Han and Peters fails to teach the method of Claim 3, wherein: the first period and the second period are adaptively determined based on a degree of a change in an attribute of the first sub-data element and the second sub-data element over time, respectively. Han, Peters, and Fu are analogous to the claimed invention because all of them are in the same field of processing point data and Han and Fu are in the same field of Encoding Avatars. Fu teaches the method of Claim 3, wherein: the first period (Number of Frames) and the second period (Number of Frames) are adaptively determined based on a degree of a change in an attribute (Difference in Left/Right Eye or Mouth) of the first sub-data element (Mouth, Fig. 1 (b)) and the second sub-data element (Eyes, Fig. 1 (b)) over time, respectively. (Section: 4.3 LATEX: Leveraging Temporal Redundancy) Fu teaches reducing computations for frames deemed redundant. The frames of the avatar face are divided into portions of frames containing eyes and mouth (Fig. 1 (b)). By utilizing LATEX which compares the differences between frames (Differences Left/Right Eye or Mouth). If the differences are deemed substantial the frame is encoded, but if it is not the frame is extrapolated (Section: 4.3.2 Proposed Adaptive Latent Extrapolation). Therefore, it would have been obvious to someone of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Han’s Point Cloud Frame altered by Peters to incorporate Fu’s Minimizing of Redundancy Frames . Since doing so would provide the benefit of reducing computation by reducing encoding redundant frames . 07-21-aia AIA Claim (s) 8-9, 17-18 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Han et al. WIPO Application WO 2023003349 A1 (hereinafter Han) in view of NPL “Point Cloud Processing I” by Ravi Peters, Hugo Ledoux, Ken Arroyo Ohori (hereinafter Peters) in further view of Naka et al. U.S. Patent 6512520 B1 (hereinafter Naka) . Regarding claim 8, Han teaches the method of Claim 1, wherein: the first data element (Attribute Stream, Page 12 Para. 5 and Fig. 9) corresponds to volumetric data including avatar geometry data and avatar texture data (Texture, Color, Reflectance, Attributes 1-N, Page 13 Para. 7 to Page 14 Para. 1) , the second data element corresponds to avatar skeleton motion data. However, Han and Peters fails to teach the second data element corresponds to avatar skeleton motion data. Han, Peters, and Naka are analogous to the claimed invention because all of them are in the same field of processing point data and Han and Naka are in the same field of encoding/decoding avatars. Naka teaches: the second data element corresponds to avatar skeleton motion data (Skeletal Stream Transmission (SS) or Motion Steam Transmission (SM),Col. 6 Lines 4-21 Fig. 2) . Therefore, it would have been obvious to someone of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Han’s Data Streams altered by Peters to incorporate a Skeletal Motion Stream . Since doing so would provide the benefit of reproducing skeletal structures in frames naturally by defining motion amounts of joints of the skeleton (Naka et al. Col. 2 Lines 5-14) and would allow for animation recreation to fit the environment better. Regarding claim 9, Han teaches the method of Claim 8, wherein: the plurality of data elements further include at least one of avatar audio data, avatar haptic data, or avatar metadata (Auxiliary Data, Page 13 Para. 7 to Page 14 Para. 1) . Auxiliary Data represents metadata about the point cloud. Regarding claim 17, has similar limitations as of claim 8, therefore it is rejected under the same rationale as claim 8. Regarding claim 18, has similar limitations as of claim 9, therefore it is rejected under the same rationale as claim 9 . 07-21-aia AIA Claim (s) 14-15 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Han et al. WIPO Application WO 2023003349 A1 (hereinafter Han) in view of NPL “Point Cloud Processing I” by Ravi Peters, Hugo Ledoux, Ken Arroyo Ohori (hereinafter Peters) in further view of NPL “Retargeting Human-Object Interaction to Virtual Avatars” by Yeonjoon Kim, Hangil Park, Seungbae Bang, and Sung-Hee Lee (hereinafter Kim) . Regarding claim 14, Han teaches the method of Claim 10, wherein: through a retargeting based on information of the second data element (Geometry Stream, Page 16 Para. 1 and Fig. 10) for the first data element (Attribute Stream, Page 16 Para. 1 and Fig. 10) , the dynamic 3D avatar data (Point Cloud or Potion of Point Cloud) in a current frame is obtained. The point cloud can be mapped to frames/pictures. The portion of point cloud retrieved/decoded could be any frame or the only frame. The points are based on the position information in the geometry stream. Thus, the attribute stream refers to the geometry stream to determine which attributes belong to specific points in the point cloud. (Page 22 Para. 10) Similarly, the geometry would refer to the attribute stream for the specific point attributes. However, Han and Peters fails to teach through a retargeting based on information of the second data element for the first data element, the dynamic 3D avatar data in a current frame is obtained. Han, Peters, and Kim are analogous to the claimed invention because all of them are in the same field of processing point data and Han and Kim are in the same field of creating avatars/meshes. Kim teaches through a retargeting (Retargeting Motion) based on information of the second data element (Input Motion) for the first data element (Spatial Map) , the dynamic 3D avatar data in a current frame is obtained. (Fig. 2 and Section: 3 Motion Retargeting Method) Kim teaches retargeting the motion of an avatar based on the surroundings meshes. Therefore, it would have been obvious to someone of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Han’s Data Elements altered by Peters to incorporate Kim’s Retargeting. Since doing so would provide the benefit of retargeting avatar motion to better fit the 3D spaces surrounding them, (Section: 1 Introduction) as Han’s already incorporates meshes of the environment and avatar. Regarding claim 15, Han teaches the method of Claim 10, wherein: based on a combination of the first data element (Attribute Stream, Page 16 Para. 1 and Fig. 10) , or at least one sub-data element (Texture, Color, Reflectance, Attributes 1-N, Page 13 Para. 7 to Page 14 Para. 1) of the first data element; and the second data element (Geometry Stream, Page 16 Para. 1 and Fig. 10) , or at least one sub-data element (x, y, z position values) of the second data element, at least one sub-avatar data (Point Cloud or Potion of Point Cloud) is independently retargeted. However, Han and Peters fails to teach at least one sub-avatar data is independently retargeted. Kim teaches: based on a combination of the first data element (Spatial Map) , or at least one sub-data element of the first data element; and the second data element (Input Motion) , or at least one sub-data element of the second data element, at least one sub-avatar data is independently retargeted (Retargeting Motion) . (Fig. 2 and Section: 3 Motion Retargeting Method) Kim teaches retargeting the motion of an avatar based on the surroundings meshes. Therefore, it would have been obvious to someone of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Han’s Data Elements altered by Peters to incorporate Kim’s Retargeting. Since doing so would provide the benefit of retargeting avatar motion to better fit the 3D spaces surrounding them, (Section: 1 Introduction) as Han’s already incorporates meshes of the environment and avatar. Conclusion Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to BRIANNA R COCHRAN whose telephone number is (571)272-4671. The examiner can normally be reached Mon-Fri. 7:30am - 5:00pm. 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, Alicia Harrington can be reached at (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 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. /BRIANNA RENAE COCHRAN/ Examiner, Art Unit 2615 /ALICIA M HARRINGTON/ Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2615 Application/Control Number: 18/883,222 Page 2 Art Unit: 2615 Application/Control Number: 18/883,222 Page 3 Art Unit: 2615 Application/Control Number: 18/883,222 Page 4 Art Unit: 2615 Application/Control Number: 18/883,222 Page 5 Art Unit: 2615 Application/Control Number: 18/883,222 Page 6 Art Unit: 2615 Application/Control Number: 18/883,222 Page 7 Art Unit: 2615 Application/Control Number: 18/883,222 Page 8 Art Unit: 2615 Application/Control Number: 18/883,222 Page 9 Art Unit: 2615 Application/Control Number: 18/883,222 Page 10 Art Unit: 2615 Application/Control Number: 18/883,222 Page 11 Art Unit: 2615 Application/Control Number: 18/883,222 Page 12 Art Unit: 2615 Application/Control Number: 18/883,222 Page 13 Art Unit: 2615 Application/Control Number: 18/883,222 Page 14 Art Unit: 2615 Application/Control Number: 18/883,222 Page 15 Art Unit: 2615 Application/Control Number: 18/883,222 Page 16 Art Unit: 2615 Application/Control Number: 18/883,222 Page 17 Art Unit: 2615
Prosecution Insights