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 .
DETAILED ACTION
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.
DOUBLE PATENTING
The nonstatutory double patenting rejection is based on a judicially created doctrine grounded in public policy (a policy reflected in the statute) so as to prevent the unjustified or improper timewise extension of the “right to exclude” granted by a patent and to prevent possible harassment by multiple assignees. A nonstatutory double patenting rejection is appropriate where the conflicting claims are not identical, but at least one examined application claim is not patentably distinct from the reference claim(s) because the examined application claim is either anticipated by, or would have been obvious over, the reference claim(s). See, e.g., In re Berg, 140 F.3d 1428, 46 USPQ2d 1226 (Fed. Cir. 1998); In re Goodman, 11 F.3d 1046, 29 USPQ2d 2010 (Fed. Cir. 1993); In re Longi, 759 F.2d 887, 225 USPQ 645 (Fed. Cir. 1985); In re Van Ornum, 686 F.2d 937, 214 USPQ 761 (CCPA 1982); In re Vogel, 422 F.2d 438, 164 USPQ 619 (CCPA 1970); In re Thorington, 418 F.2d 528, 163 USPQ 644 (CCPA 1969).
A timely filed terminal disclaimer in compliance with 37 CFR 1.321(c) or 1.321(d) may be used to overcome an actual or provisional rejection based on nonstatutory double patenting provided the reference application or patent either is shown to be commonly owned with the examined application, or claims an invention made as a result of activities undertaken within the scope of a joint research agreement. See MPEP § 717.02 for applications subject to examination under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA as explained in MPEP § 2159. See MPEP §§ 706.02(l)(1) - 706.02(l)(3) for applications not subject to examination under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA . A terminal disclaimer must be signed in compliance with 37 CFR 1.321(b).
The USPTO Internet website contains terminal disclaimer forms which may be used. Please visit www.uspto.gov/patent/patents-forms. The filing date of the application in which the form is filed determines what form (e.g., PTO/SB/25, PTO/SB/26, PTO/AIA /25, or PTO/AIA /26) should be used. A web-based eTerminal Disclaimer may be filled out completely online using web-screens. An eTerminal Disclaimer that meets all requirements is auto-processed and approved immediately upon submission. For more information about eTerminal Disclaimers, refer to www.uspto.gov/patents/process/file/efs/guidance/eTD-info-I.jsp.
Claims 1 – 20 of the current application are rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claims 1 – 20 of US Patent Application 11,069,129 B2. Although the claims at issue are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other because the limitations of the current application claims are essentially covered by the limitations of the patent claims.
Also, shown below is a mapping between the limitations of independent claim 1 of current application U.S. Patent Application 18902629 and independent claims of U.S. Patent Application 11,069,129 B2.
Claims
Current Application
Claims
Patent Application
1
A method comprising:
1
A method comprising:
identifying, based at least on a ray-tracing operation and within a plurality of records that specify instances of objects in a scene in memory,a record representing an instance of geometry of the object in the scene using the one or more definitions;based at least on the identifying, accessing the one or more first records from the one or more first memory locations using the first location identifier and
determining, in a three-dimensional (3D) scene, an intersection between a ray traced virtual ray and geometry of an object instance of the 3D scene; determining, based on the intersection, an offset value that defines a first location in a memory, the first location corresponding to one or more shader records of a shader binding table that corresponds to the object instance, each shader record including an identifier of at least one shader, associating a set of resources with the at least one shader, and capturing one or more criteria associated with the intersection that when satisfied binds the at least one shader to the object instance, wherein the one or more criteria defines a location of the shader record in the shader binding table; determining, based at least in part on at least one criteria of the one or more criteria associated with the intersection being satisfied for a selected shader record of the one or more shader records, a section selector value that selects a section of shader records in the shader binding table; computing a second location in the memory, the second location corresponding to the selected shader record within the section based at least in part on the offset value and the section selector value; accessing the selected shader record at the second location in the memory to determine the set of resources and the at least one shader associated with the selected shader record; and executing the at least one shader of the selected shader record to render at least a portion of the 3D scene using the set of resources associated with the at least one shader.
10
A system comprising:one or more processors to perform operations including:identifying, based at least on a ray-tracing operation and within a plurality of records that specify instances of objects in a scene in memory,a record representing an instance of identifier representing one or more first memory locations of
12
A method comprising: determining that a ray tracing query for an intersection between a ray in a three-dimensional (3D) scene and geometry in the 3D scene resulted in a miss of the geometry; determining an offset value that defines a first location in a memory of a set of shader records within a shader binding table that corresponds to the miss of the geometry, each shader record including an identifier of at least one shader, associating a set of resources with the at least one shader, and capturing one or more criteria associated with the ray tracing query that when satisfied binds the at least one shader to a result of the ray tracing query, wherein the one or more criteria defines a location of the shader record in the shader binding table; determining, based at least of in part on the ray type of the ray satisfying at least one criteria of the one or more criteria associated with the ray tracing query for a selected shader record the set of shader records, a section selector value that selects a section of the set of shader records relative to the offset value; computing a second location in the memory of the selected shader record within the section based at least in part on the offset value and the section selector value; and executing the at least one shader of the selected shader record to render at least a portion of the 3D scene using the set of resources associated with the at least one shader based at least in part on accessing the shader record using the second location in the memory.
16
At least one processor comprising: one or more circuits to render an image using at least one shader of one or more shaders corresponding to an object represented by a record within a plurality of records that specify instances of objects in memory and based at least on [[[with]] a ray-tracing operation that identifies the record,the record including a first location identifier representing one or more first memory locations of[[,]]that specify geometry a second location identifier representing one or more second memory locations of one or more second records representing the one or more shaders corresponding to the object, the record having been used to instantiate the geometry of the object in the scene using the one or more definitions.
17
A method comprising: determining an offset value that defines a first location in a memory for a set of shader records in a shader binding table that corresponds to a potential result of a ray tracing query for an intersection between a ray in a three-dimensional (3D) scene and geometry in the 3D scene, each shader record including an identifier of at least one shader, associating a set of resources with the at least one shader, and capturing one or more criteria associated with the ray tracing query that when satisfied binds the at least one shader to the potential result of the ray tracing query, wherein the one or more criteria defines a location of the shader record in the shader binding table; determining, based at least in part on the potential result of the ray tracing query satisfying at least one criteria of the one or more criteria associated with the ray tracing query for a selected shader record the set of shader records, a section selector value that selects a section of shader records in the shader binding table, a section selector value that selects a section of the set of shader records relative to the offset value; computing a second location in the memory for the selected shader record of the set of shader records within the section based at least in part on the offset value and the section selector value; and configuring the selected shader record in the shader binding table based at least in part on the second location in the memory.
Allowable Subject Matter
Regarding claim 1, No art was found that could be applied to the claim as recited. Claim 1 is not allowable and rejected to as being dependent upon a rejection under DOUBLE PATENTING.
The closest prior art discovered is the combination of Gritz et al. (Patent: US 7136081 B2) in view of Berteig et al. (Publication: US 20070018980), Ozda et al. (Publication: 2014/0333623 A1), Patel et al. (Publication: 2016/0071230 A1).
However, none of the prior art cited above, nor any other prior art discovered by Examiner, fully teaches claim 1, either singly or in an obvious combination.
Dependent claims not mentioned specifically above inherit the deficiencies from the claims stated above on which they depend.
Regarding claim 10, No art was found that could be applied to the claim as recited. Claim 10 is not allowable and rejected to as being dependent upon a rejection under DOUBLE PATENTING.
The closest prior art discovered is the combination of Gritz et al. (Patent: US 7136081 B2) in view of Berteig et al. (Publication: US 20070018980), Ozda et al. (Publication: 2014/0333623 A1), Patel et al. (Publication: 2016/0071230 A1).
However, none of the prior art cited above, nor any other prior art discovered by Examiner, fully teaches claim 10, either singly or in an obvious combination.
Dependent claims not mentioned specifically above inherit the deficiencies from the claims stated above on which they depend.
Regarding claim 16, No art was found that could be applied to the claim as recited. Claim 1 is not allowable and rejected to as being dependent upon a rejection under DOUBLE PATENTING.
The closest prior art discovered is the combination of Gritz et al. (Patent: US 7136081 B2) in view of Berteig et al. (Publication: US 20070018980), Ozda et al. (Publication: 2014/0333623 A1), Patel et al. (Publication: 2016/0071230 A1).
However, none of the prior art cited above, nor any other prior art discovered by Examiner, fully teaches claim 16, either singly or in an obvious combination.
Dependent claims not mentioned specifically above inherit the deficiencies from the claims stated above on which they depend.
Response to Arguments
Claim Rejection Under 35 U.S.C. 103
The argument has been fully considered and is persuasive. Therefore, the rejection has been withdrawn.
Conclusion
THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a).
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 extension fee 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 date of this final action.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Ming Wu whose telephone number is (571) 270-0724. The examiner can normally be reached on Monday - Friday.
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, Devona Faulk can be reached on 571-272-7515. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300.
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.
/Ming Wu/
Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2618
Prosecution Insights