CTNF 18/908,903 CTNF 83306 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. Procedural Summary This is responsive to the claim amendments filed 2/24/2026. Claims 15-34 are pending. Signed copies of the IDS’ are attached. The Drawings filed 10/8/2024 are noted. Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103 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 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. 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. 07-23-aia AIA The factual inquiries set forth in Graham v. John Deere Co. , 383 U.S. 1, 148 USPQ 459 (1966), that are applied for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized as follows: 1. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art. 2. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue. 3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art. 4. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness. 07-20-02-aia AIA This application currently names joint inventors. In considering patentability of the claims the examiner presumes that the subject matter of the various claims was commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the claimed invention(s) absent any evidence to the contrary. Applicant is advised of the obligation under 37 CFR 1.56 to point out the inventor and effective filing dates of each claim that was not commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the later invention in order for the examiner to consider the applicability of 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(C) for any potential 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) prior art against the later invention. 07-21-aia AIA Claim s 15, 22, 25-27 & 34 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Croxford et al. (U.S. Pub. No.: 2022/0308667 A1) in view of Vange et al. (U.S. Pub. No.: 2022/0274023 A1) . Croxford discloses a data processing apparatus (Abstract), with processor and memory (Fig. 2.) configured to: obtain video game data from a video game application indicating an in-game situation, (¶¶ 6-8); obtain data indicating a predicted in-game action of a first user in response to the in-game situation, (Fig. 5 and related description), the data indicating the predicted in-game action of the first user being based on past video game data, (Fig. 5, s52, Fig. 6, s62 and related descriptions); determine, based on a recorded input from the first user, whether or not the predicted in-game action is instructed by the first user, (Fig. 6, s64 and related descriptions), and based on the determination, perform a reconfiguration process for reconfiguring a required input for the first user for instructing the predicted in-game action, (Fig. 6, s65 and related descriptions). Croxford discloses the invention substantially but does not make explicit, the data indicating the predicted in-game action of the first user being based on past in-game actions of one or more second users. However, in a related invention, Vange teaches an AI powered user interface where predicted in-game actions are based on inputs from other users, (Vange, e.g., ¶¶ 27-29.) It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Croxford’s neural network training system with Vange’s input parameters, including other users’ past in-game actions, for several reasons, including provided more accurate predictions of a user’s intended actions. A person of ordinary skill in the art would recognize that training a neural network using more data points could result in higher accuracy. Here, expanding Croxford’s training parameters with Vange’s additional data points yields the expected results of more accurately predicting user inputs. Therefore, since changes to the prior art using known techniques yielding predictable and expected results are considered obvious, the claimed invention is unpatentable over the art . 07-21-aia AIA Claim s 23 & 24 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Croxford et al. (U.S. Pub. No.: 2022/0308667 A1) and Vange et al. (U.S. Pub. No.: 2022/0274023 A1) as applied to Claim 15, in view of Barak et al. (U.S. Pub. No.: 2021/0223858 A1) . Croxford discloses the invention substantially but does not make explicit performing the reconfiguration process based on received pose estimation including leaning to a side or jumping. However, in a related invention, Barak shows these limitations by using pose configuration data to train a neural network, (Barak, e.g., Abstract, Fig. 6, ¶¶ 4, 5, 70, 87.) It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have provided Barak’s pose prediction methods in Croxford’s system for the purpose of increasing accuracy of inputs . Allowable Subject Matter 12-151-08 AIA 07-43 12-51-08 Claim s 16-21 & 28-33 are 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. 13-03-01 AIA The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter: The closest prior art, of record herein, fails to disclose, suggest or render obvious, in combination with the other claimed limitations, the salient features recited by these dependent claims . Conclusion Additional Relevant References: See 892 Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to OMKAR A DEODHAR whose telephone number is (571)272-1647. The examiner can normally be reached on M-F, generally 9am-5:30 pm. 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, David Lewis can be reached on 571-272-7673 . 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 https://ppair-my.uspto.gov/pair/PrivatePair. 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. /OMKAR A DEODHAR/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3715 Application/Control Number: 18/908,903 Page 2 Art Unit: 3715 Application/Control Number: 18/908,903 Page 3 Art Unit: 3715 Application/Control Number: 18/908,903 Page 4 Art Unit: 3715 Application/Control Number: 18/908,903 Page 5 Art Unit: 3715 Application/Control Number: 18/908,903 Page 6 Art Unit: 3715
Prosecution Insights