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 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.
Claims 1-6, 8-12, 21, 22 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Osterhout [US 2021/0173480] in view of Donney et al [US 2018/0040162]
Claim 1. A computer-implemented method (see Figs. 24, 37, abstract), comprising:
executing, by a virtual reality headset, driving simulation software that presents a virtual driving environment to a user wearing the virtual reality headset (any head-worn device known to the art, such as including the eyepiece 100 as described herein, but also to helmets e.g. military helmets, pilot helmets, bike helmets, motorcycle helmets, deep sea helmets, space helmets, and the like, ski goggles, eyewear, water diving masks, dusk masks, respirators, Hazmat head gear, virtual reality headgear, simulation, and the like (see Figs. 1, 88, para [0238]). The headgear or eyepiece 100 is programmed with computer software executed the eyepiece applications or portion of simulation execution may provide the visual environment and information display to the soldier, pilot, aircraft vehicle, motorcycle rider, the vehicle navigation system to the eyepiece 100 worn by a vehicle driver and/or combat vehicle, see Figs. 1, 88, para [0066, 0087, 0285, 0390, 0771, 0786, 0809, 0810, 0903]);
receiving, by the virtual reality headset, sensor data that reflects characteristics of
the user wearing the virtual reality headset based on the sensor data (the user's virtual
head mounted eyepiece, headset, headgear, AR glasses or goggles 100, see abstract, Figs. 1, 10, para [0008, 0014, 0082, 0084, 0238]),
based on determining, by the virtual reality headset, that the user is likely experiencing motion sickness (read upon the headset/eyepiece/AR glassed wearer is an experienced or shock experienced such as of motion sickness or motion unstable situations or experience a g-force headshake from a proximate explosion causing user's health condition or injuries “sickness”, see Figs. 1, 28, para [0813, 0819]); and
based on determining that the user is likely experiencing motion sickness, activating, by
the virtual reality headset, a vibration device that is configured to provide vibration
feedback to a body of the user (the eyepiece's ability to interpret patterns of motion
across a surface may allow for projecting reference content in order to give the user
something to point at and provide them with visual, audio, tactile and/or vibration
feedback (see para [0813, 0819]). The control aspects of the eyepiece may include
combinations of using user action capture inputs/devices and feedback to the user
related to external devices and applications, such as with an activity determination
system and tonal output, sound warning or vibration. The soldier may have access to
the activity determination system through the eyepiece 100 to monitor and determine
the soldier's state of activity, such as in extreme activity, at rest, bored, anxious, in
exercise, and the like, and where the eyepiece may provide forms of tonal output,
sound, tactile or vibration warning when conditions go out of limits in any way, such as
pre-set, learned, as typical, and the like. For instance, the soldier may be monitored for
current state of health during combat (see para [0813, 0819]). But
Osterhout fails to disclose a vibration device that is configured to provide vibration feedback to a body of the user to reduce the motion sickness. However,
Osterhout teaches that the headgear/eyepiece soldier or user action capture inputs and/or devices, feedback related to external devices and/or external applications, and the like, as described herein, may also be applied. The soldier/user receives tactile or vibration warning to indicate that he/she is suffer health condition or injury by the g-force, see para [0813, 0819]).
Donney et al suggests that the vehicle 10 can be equipped with a virtual reality (VR) headset specialized output devices for virtual reality experiences that engage a rider's other senses, such as with tactile, haptic, or force feedback or motion forces from the vehicle 10 or game. In some aspects, virtual reality system 237 represents a computing platform, software framework, or set of application programming interfaces that make the acceleration profile 233 and other AV 200 data available to virtual reality services such as games. Thus, virtual reality system 237 enables these VR services to access a rider's future physical motion trajectory to provide VR content 238, including visual and/or auditory experiences, that realistically incorporate that motion trajectory and minimize motion sickness induced by entrainment stimulus or by motion forces or force feedback (see abstract, Figs. 1, 2, para [0027, 0044, 0049, 0050, 0068]).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify and/or implement the minimizing motion sickness by force feedback of Donney et al to the headgear/eyepiece of Osterhout for assisting and helping a soldier/user to reduce pain and/or anxiety under experiences with explosion, motion and/ vibration causing health condition or injury.
Claim 2. The method of claim 1, wherein activating the vibration device comprises:
based on the sensor data, generating, by the virtual reality headset, an electrical
signal (as cited in respect to claim 1 above, and including electrical signals, see para
[0068, 0069, 0454]); and
providing, by the virtual reality headset and to the vibration device, the electrical
signal (see para [0712]).
Claim 3. The method of claim 2, wherein the electrical signal is an audio signal (see
para [0024, 0068, 0447]).
Claim 4. The method of claim 1, wherein the sensor data is received from a head
position sensor (see para [0297, 0413]), a gaze direction sensor, an eye tracking sensor
(see para [0087, 0454, 0459-0461, 0475), a gravity sensor (see para [0350]), a skin
conductance sensor (see para [0022]), an accelerometer (see para [0351, 0366, 0356,
0413]), a proximity sensor (see para [0425, 0441]), a light sensor (see para [0387,
0401]), a camera (see para [0037-0041, 0055-0057, 0351]), and a microphone (see
para [0295, 0362, 0409]).
Claim 5. The method of claim 1, wherein determining that the user is likely experiencing
motion sickness comprises: providing, to a model that is trained using previous sensor
data and previous data indicating that previous users are experiencing motion sickness,
the sensor data (as cited in respect to claim 1 above, and including the learning and
training for soldier or user, see para [0805-0807, 0803, 0813, 0839-0841]); and
receiving, from the model, data indicating that the user is likely experiencing motion
sickness (as cited in respect to claim 1 above, see Figs. 15D, 34B, para [0179, 0260, 0819]).
Claim 6. The method of claim 1, comprising: receiving, by the virtual reality headset
and from the user, data indicating whether the user is experiencing motion sickness (as
cited in respect to claims 1 and 5 above); and
providing, for output by the virtual reality headset, the data indicating whether the
user is experiencing motion sickness, the sensor data, and data indicating that the user
is likely experiencing motion sickness (as cited in respect to claims 1 and 5 above, such
as the soldier or user's experienced or shock experienced such as of motion sickness or
motion unstable situations or experience a -g-force headshake from a proximate
explosion causing user's health condition or injuries).
Claim 8. The method of claim 1, wherein determining that the user is likely experiencing
motion sickness is further based on graphics being displayed on a screen of the virtual
reality headset (as cited in respect to claim 1 above, and including the graphic display,
see TABLE-US-00002, para 0340, 0362, 0368, 0436, 0467, 0761, 0764, 0820]).
Claim 9. The method of claim 1, wherein determining that the user is likely experiencing
motion sickness is further based on a field of view or a narrowing or widening in the field
of view of graphics being displayed on a screen of the virtual reality headset (as cited in
respect to claim 1 above, and including small display and/or or narrow or wide view, see
Fig. 2, para [0228, 0314, 453]).
Claim 10. The method of claim 1, comprising: after activating the vibration device,
receiving, by the virtual reality headset, additional sensor data that reflects the
characteristics of the user wearing the virtual reality headset; based on the additional
sensor data, determining, by the virtual reality headset, that the user is continuing to
likely experience motion sickness; and based on determining that the user is continuing
to likely experienced motion sickness: adjusting, by the virtual reality headset, a
vibration level of the vibration device; and activating, by the virtual reality headset, an
additional vibration device that is configured to provide additional vibration feedback to
the body of the user (as cited in respect to claim 1 above, and including additional
sensor data from two or more of the head position sensor (see para [0297, 0413]), a
gaze direction sensor, an eye tracking sensor (see para [0087, 0454, 0459-0461, 0475),
a gravity sensor (see para [0350]), a skin conductance sensor (see para [0022]), an
accelerometer (see para [0351, 0366, 0356, 0413]), a proximity sensor (see para [0425,
0441]), a light sensor (see para [0387, 0401]), a camera (see para [0037-0041, 0055-
0057, 0351]), and a microphone (see para [0295, 0362, 0409]); and the head mounted
eyepiece 100 can controlling and adjusting the focus of the lens and changing the focal
length of the lens, or control to adjust the gain or other parameters of the corrections
see para [0344, 0345, 0354, 0356]).
Claim 11. The method of claim 1, comprising: based on determining that the user is
likely experiencing motion sickness, adjusting, by the virtual reality headset, a field of
view of graphics being displayed on a screen of the virtual reality headset (as cited in
respect to claims 8-10 above).
Claim 12. The method of claim 1, comprising: receiving, by the virtual reality headset
and from the user, data indicating whether the user is experiencing motion sickness,
wherein determining that the user is likely experiencing motion sickness is further
based on the data indicating whether the user is experiencing motion sickness as cited
in respect to claim 6 above).
Claim 21. (New) The method of claim 1, comprising based on determining that the user is likely experiencing motion sickness, adjusting, by the virtual reality headset, a speed of texture movement in graphics displayed on a screen of the virtual reality headset relative to a geometry of a virtual world presented by the driving simulation software (as cited in respect to claim 1 above, and the programmable headset/eyepiece can adjust or change associated with the projected image on 3D displayed map 1512C and geographical area according to the sensed motions and movement data information, see Figs. 15A-C, 72, para [0352, 0353, 0445, 0446, 0835]).
Claim 22. (New) The method of claim 5, wherein the model is one of a plurality of models, each trained using previous sensor data and previous data indicating that previous users having a same type of disability are experiencing motion sickness, and
wherein determining that the user is likely experiencing motion sickness comprises:
selecting, based on the type of disability of the user, the model from the plurality of
models; and providing the sensor data to the selected model (as cited in respect to claims 1 and 5 above, and wherein the eye control of feature and option selection may be controlled including selection of protocols may be displayed to the user to help him in treating the patient, navigation mode and/or mode control of the eyepiece and activated by object recognition software loaded on the system processor. Object recognition software may enable augmented reality, combine the recognition output with querying a database, combine the recognition output with a computational tool to determine dependencies/likelihoods, and the like, such as the object in the surrounding environment, services and individuals or person of interest, type of injury as a fellow soldier is wounded to the chest, etc. (see Fig. 36, para [0406, 0433, 0522, 0539, 0570, 0740, 0820, 0830, 0840-0844]).
Claim 19 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Osterhout
et al [US 2021/0173480] and Donney et al [US 2018/0040162] and further in view of Forsland et al [US 2021/0223864]
Claim 19. Osterhout et al fails to disclose wherein the first input device and the second
input device are configured to connect to a wheelchair.
However, Osterhout et al teaches that the user's second hand uses on the virtual
keyboard by swipe, tap, touch, press, click, roll of a rollerball, and the like, see Fig. 14,
para [0015, 0017, 0393, 0429, 0430]);
Forsland et al suggests that the bio-signal data is collected from the sensors on or
connected to the headset, input into the printed circuit board on the headset, processed
on the headset, and then output to transducers including but not limited to visual,
auditory, and haptic transducers. The senses that may be stimulated as biofeedback
may include, e.g. output commands sent to inflatable bags for pressure, temperature for
increasing therapeutic sensation, electrical stimulation, or even a command to an
external device or system such as a prosthetic hand/arm/leg or wheelchair for controlled
movement. The headset is a unique design that consolidates more processing power
into a smaller package than conventional BCI headsets. The portability factor may make
a significant impact on individuals who want to have this experience in locations that are
away from modern conveniences, as well as for people who are disabled (see Fig. 1,
para [0036-0039]).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one skill in the art before the effective filing
date of the invention to add or implement the entering or inputting commands to a
wheelchair of Forsland et al to the second user input of Osterhout et al and Donney et al to provide convenient and easy for a patent, soldier or user being disable walking, injury, etc. used a wheelchair for transportation and capable to control the wheelchair and communicate with eyepiece and remote caregiver or other people for assistance.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments, see the amendment, filed on 04/16/2026, with respect to the rejection(s) of independent claims 1, 13 and 17 under Forsland et al have been fully considered and are persuasive. Therefore, the rejection has been withdrawn. However, upon further consideration, a new ground(s) of rejection is made in view of Donney et al based on the amendment claim to make the rejection smoother as above.
Applicant’s arguments:
(A) Osterhout fails to anticipate claims 1-6 and 8-12 because Osterhout does not describe executing, by a virtual reality headset, driving simulation software that presents a virtual driving environment to a user wearing the virtual reality headset; determining, based on the sensor data and by the virtual reality headset, that the user is likely experiencing motion sickness caused by the driving simulation software; and activating, based on determining that the user is likely experiencing motion sickness and by the virtual reality headset, a vibration device that is configured to provide vibration feedback to a body of the user to reduce the motion sickness.
(B) Osterhout does not describe a virtual reality headset configured to select a driving scenario from a plurality of driving scenarios; analyze, after executing the driving scenario, performance data reflecting a performance of the user.
(C) Osterhout does not describe a virtual reality headset configured to select a driving scenario from a plurality of driving scenarios; analyze, after executing the driving scenario, performance data reflecting a performance of the user during the
driving scenario; and determine, based on the performance data and the type of disability of the user, whether to repeat the driving scenario.
(D) Osterhout does not describe a virtual reality headset configured to select a driving scenario from a plurality of driving scenarios; analyze, after executing the driving scenario, performance data reflecting a performance of the user during the driving scenario; and determine, based on the performance data and the type.
(E) Osterhout does not describe a controller communicating with a driving simulator executing on a virtual reality headset, wherein the controller comprises a first input device that is configured to receive a first type of input from a user, wherein the first input device comprises a hand control for at least one of a throttle or a brake; a second input device that is configured to receive a second type of input from the user, wherein
the second input device comprises at least one of a steering device or a foot control for the throttle or the brake; and a processor that is configured to receive, from the virtual reality headset, data indicating a type of disability of the user.
Response to the arguments:
(A) Osterhout teaches that the headgear or eyepiece 100 such as headgears, headsets, helmets which are used on plurality of applications is programmed with computer software executed the eyepiece applications or portion of simulation execution may provide the visual environment and information display to the soldier, pilot, aircraft vehicle, motorcycle rider, the vehicle navigation system to the headgear/eyepiece worn by a driver of the commercial vehicles and/or combat vehicles, as cited in respect to claim 1 above. And it is obvious to combine the minimizing or reducing motion sickness by force feedback of Donney et al to the headgear/eyepiece of Osterhout for assisting and helping a soldier/user to reduce pain and/or anxiety under experiences with explosion, motion and/ vibration causing health condition or injury.
(B) Osterhout teaches that the eye control of feature and option selection may be controlled including selection of protocols may be displayed to the user to help him in treating the patient, navigation mode and/or mode control of the eyepiece and activated by object recognition software loaded on the system processor. Object recognition software may enable augmented reality, combine the recognition output with querying a database, combine the recognition output with a computational tool to determine dependencies/likelihoods, and the like, such as the object in the surrounding environment, services and individuals or person of interest, type of injury as a fellow soldier is wounded to the chest, etc. (see Fig. 36, para [0406, 0433, 0522, 0539, 0570, 0740, 0820, 0830, 0840-0844]).
(C) The claim limitation “determine, based on the performance data and the type of disability of the user, whether to repeat the driving scenario”, which overcomes the rejected references and allowed.
(D) As indicated in section (B) above, wherein the headgear/eyepiece is programmed executing to operate and use on plurality applications such as games, commercial vehicle, military vehicle, etc., as cited in respect to claim 1 above.
(E) The claim limitation “the first input device comprises a hand control for at least one of a throttle or a brake; a second input device that is configured to receive a second type of input from the user, wherein the second input device comprises at least one of a steering device or a foot control for the throttle or the brake; and a processor that is configured to receive, from the virtual reality headset, data indicating a type of disability of the user”, which overcomes the rejected references and allowed.
Conclusion
Claims 13-15 and 17-20 are allowable over the prior art. The prior art fails to teaching of:
Consider claim 13, A driving simulator, comprising: a virtual reality headset that is configured to: receive data indicating a type of disability of the user based on the type of disability of the user; select a driving scenario from the plurality of driving scenarios; and based on the performance data and the type of disability of the user, determine whether to repeat the driving scenario.
Consider claim 17, A controller that is configured to communicate with a driving simulator executing on a virtual reality headset, comprising wherein the controller comprises: a first input device that is configured to receive a first type of input from a user, wherein the first input device comprises a hand control for at least one of a throttle or a brake; a second input device that is configured to receive a second type of input from the user, wherein the second input device comprises at least one of a steering device or a foot control for the throttle or the brake; and a processor that is configured to: based on the type of disability of the user, activate the first input device and deactivate the second input device.
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 examiner should be directed to primary examiner craft is Van Trieu whose telephone number is (571) 2722972. The examiner can normally be reached on Mon-Fri from 8:00 AM to 3:00 PM. If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner's supervisor, Mr. Wang Quan-Zhen can be reached on (571) 272-3114.
Examiner interviews are available via telephone, 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.
Information regarding the status of an application may be obtained from the Patent Application Information Retrieval (PAIR) system. Status information for published applications may be obtained from either Private PAIR or Public PAIR. Status information for unpublished applications is available through Private PAIR only.
For more information about the PAIR system, see http://pair- direct.uspto.gov. Should you have questions on access to the Private PAIR system, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative or access to the automated information system, call 800-786- 9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000.
/VAN T TRIEU/
Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2685
05/22/2026
Prosecution Insights