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 § 101
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.
Claims 9-16 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 101 because the claimed invention is directed to non-statutory subject matter. The claims do not fall within at least one of the four categories of patent eligible subject matter because the claims describe computer-readable storage medium.
Further, Applicant's specification, at paragraph [0051], fails to explicitly define the scope of a computer readable medium. Thus, in giving the term its plain meaning (see MPEP 2111.01), the claimed computer readable medium is considered to include data signals per se. Data signals per se are not statutory as they fail to fall into one of the four statutory categories of invention.
As an additional note, a non-transitory computer readable medium having executable programming instructions stored thereon is considered statutory as non-transitory computer readable media excludes transitory data signals.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
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.
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 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Northrup et al (US 20190340876 A1) in view of Butler et al (US 20130073978 A1).
Regarding claim 1, Northrup discloses a method for using secured virtual doors for user traversal across one or more artificial reality (XR) worlds (Northrup [0334], “method 713 for verifying and monitoring a user device location in a (virtual) zone and a sub-zone (artificial reality zones/worlds)”, the method comprising:
creating a new virtual door that links a first XR world and a second XR world (Northrup [0448], “Referring to FIGS. 16A through 16F, one embodiment for a user interface for creating a polyhedral zone … The owner … uses the owner's Zone Web Application … to define a zone around a place”; [0454], “Referring to FIG. 16G, an embodiment with virtual gate (the virtual gate is created by the owner during the creation of the polyhedral zone – figs. 16A-16F) is shown … Virtual gate 160721 enables the user to enter zone 160701 … such as an entrance to a secure area.”),
determining that the XR device is authenticated (Northrup [0372], “In step 1202, a user is authenticated”).
Northrup does not disclose
wherein the virtual door is associated with a request to mint a new door key that will be associated with the virtual door, and wherein the virtual door is displayed by an XR device as a virtual object in the first XR world;
receiving a request, associated with the XR device, to travel through the virtual door, wherein the request includes an indication of the door key;
in response to the request to travel through the virtual door, determining that the XR device is authenticated by verifying the indicated door key in relation to the virtual door; and
based on the determining that the XR device is authenticated, causing an avatar associated with the XR device to move from the first XR world to the second XR world.
However, discloses
wherein the virtual door is associated with a request to mint a new door key that will be associated with the virtual door, and wherein the virtual door is displayed by an XR device as a virtual object in the first XR world (Butler [0092], “respective sets of capabilities 414 that are maintained (exemplary minted and maintained new door key) by the capabilities system 412”; [0093], “a capability has a set of attribute fields, including a capability identifier attribute field … of capabilities include a CanEnterZone (exemplary door key) capability that relates to the ability of a grantee communicant to enter a target zone of a virtual area; a CanOpenDoor capability that relates to the ability of a grantee communicant to open a door object of a target room in a virtual area;”; [0149], “In FIG. 13C, the door object 542 (virtual door is displayed by an XR device as a virtual object in the first XR world)”);
receiving a request, associated with the XR device, to travel through the virtual door, wherein the request includes an indication of the door key (Butler [0093], “capabilities include a CanEnterZone (exemplary door key)”; [0161], “a communicant requests to enter the room by clicking on the door with a user input device (XR device)”; [0163], “enter request by a particular one of the communicants to enter a particular one of the room objects … The area server allows the particular communicant to enter the particular room object based on a determination that the particular communicant has a respective set of capabilities (request includes an indication of the door key)”);
in response to the request to travel through the virtual door, determining that the XR device is authenticated by verifying the indicated door key in relation to the virtual door (Butler [0163], “The area server allows the particular communicant to enter the particular room object based on a determination that the particular communicant has a respective set of capabilities”); and
based on the determining that the XR device is authenticated, causing an avatar associated with the XR device to move from the first XR world to the second XR world (Butler [0166], “The possession of this capability by the communicant will cause the client communications application to automatically move the communicant's avatar into the zone”).
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Northrup with Butler to generate an access key for entering a virtual zone and display corresponding doors and avatars. This would have enhanced Northrup by enabling users to experience a more realistic representation of different environments.
Regarding claim 2, Northrup in view of Butler discloses the method of claim 1,
wherein the virtual door includes a configuration option, controlable by an owner of the virtual door, specifying whether the virtual door is locked (Northrup [0395], “supervisor device 1402 determines a … configuration … to identify a zone to be associated with the account set up with VGZ server 1403 for a geographic place or location.”; [0404], “the owner requesting the new zone is presented with a suggested layer identifier to differentiate the new zone from the pre-existing zone.”; Butler, [0047] “The security service controls communicants' access to the assets and other resources of the virtual environment based on one or more of capabilities (where access is granted to entities having proper capabilities or permissions) (specifying whether the virtual door is locked) that are maintained by the capabilities engine.”); and
wherein the causing the avatar to move from the first XR world to the second XR world is further based on a determination that the configuration option specifies that the virtual door is not locked (Butler [0137], “A door is an object that has a state and a style, which also are properties of the associated room … a door can be in one of the following states and have one of the following styles: [0138] Current State [0139] 1. Open (not locked)”; [0153], “a particular one of the door objects is associated with a particular rule that conditions grant of a capability to enter the associated particular room object on the state of the door object being open.”).
Regarding claim 3, Northrup in view of Butler discloses the method of claim 1, wherein the first XR world and the second XR world are within the same XR universe hosted by an XR universe server system (Northrup [0309], “VGZ server 201 saves the sets of zones and/or sub-zones”).
Regarding claim 4, Northrup in view of Butler discloses the method of claim 1, wherein the first XR world is within a first XR universe hosted by a first XR universe server system, and wherein the second XR world is within a second XR universe hosted by a second XR universe server system (Northrup [0874], “In a preferred embodiment, management server 570102 comprises multiple physical servers, virtual servers, and cloud servers that host multiple server applications, which together comprise server app 570104.”).
Regarding claim 5, Northrup in view of Butler discloses the method of claim 1, wherein the creating the new virtual door is in response to a verification that a request for the creating the new virtual door is associated with an owner of virtual property, in the first XR world, over which the virtual door will be located (Northrup [0450], “In FIGS. 16B through 16E, the owner uses the user interface of the Zone Web Application to initiate the creation of a polygon”; [0454], “Referring to FIG. 16G, an embodiment with virtual gate is shown. A close-up view of virtual gate 160721 forms one side of a closed polygon of zone 160701. Virtual gate 160721 enables the user to enter zone 160701 at a designated gated area”; [0462], “the completed zone can either be approved or rejected by VGZ cloud 1706 based on the zone is valid as determined by VGZ cloud 1706 … If the zone is approved, the zone information related to zone 1704 is added to a zone administration database of VGZ cloud 1706”).
Regarding claim 6, Northrup in view of Butler discloses the method of claim 1, wherein the door key includes one or more of a universally unique identifier (UUID), a hash code, and/or an encrypted value (Butler [0093], “an identifier that identifies a respective one of the communicants who is granted the capability, a target identifier (UUID) attribute field containing a value for identifying one or more objects with respect to which the capability is applicable”).
Regarding claim 8, Northrup in view of Butler discloses the method of claim 1, further comprising storing a traversal record associated with a user of the XR device, wherein the traversal record provides the user with an option to move back through the virtual door, causing the avatar to return to the first XR world (Butler [0085], “he network infrastructure service environment records the path traversed by the user … The back button 369 corresponds to a backward control that enables the user to incrementally move backward to preceding ones of the zones in the history of the zones that were traversed by the user.”).
Claim 9 recites a computer-readable storage medium which corresponds to the function performed by the method of claim 1. As such, the mapping and rejection of claim 1 above is considered applicable to the computer-readable storage medium of claim 9.
Additionally, Northrup discloses
A computer-readable storage medium storing instructions, the instructions, when executed by a computing system (Northrup [0178]).
Claim 10 recites a computer-readable storage medium which corresponds to the function performed by the method of claim 2. As such, the mapping and rejection of claim 2 above is considered applicable to the computer-readable storage medium of claim 10.
Claim 11 recites a computer-readable storage medium which corresponds to the function performed by the method of claim 3. As such, the mapping and rejection of claim 3 above is considered applicable to the computer-readable storage medium of claim 11.
Claim 12 recites a computer-readable storage medium which corresponds to the function performed by the method of claim 4. As such, the mapping and rejection of claim 4 above is considered applicable to the computer-readable storage medium of claim 12.
Claim 13 recites a computer-readable storage medium which corresponds to the function performed by the method of claim 5. As such, the mapping and rejection of claim 5 above is considered applicable to the computer-readable storage medium of claim 13.
Claim 14 recites a computer-readable storage medium which corresponds to the function performed by the method of claim 6. As such, the mapping and rejection of claim 6 above is considered applicable to the computer-readable storage medium of claim 14.
Claim 16 recites a computer-readable storage medium which corresponds to the function performed by the method of claim 8. As such, the mapping and rejection of claim 8 above is considered applicable to the computer-readable storage medium of claim 16.
Claim 17 recites a computing system which corresponds to the function performed by the method of claim 1. As such, the mapping and rejection of claim 1 above is considered applicable to the computing system of claim 17.
Additionally, Northrup discloses
A computer computing system (Northrup [0206]).
Claim 17 recites a computing system which corresponds to the function performed by the method of claim 1. As such, the mapping and rejection of claim 1 above is considered applicable to the computing system of claim 17.
Claim 18 recites a computing system which corresponds to the function performed by the method of claim 2. As such, the mapping and rejection of claim 2 above is considered applicable to the computing system of claim 18.
Claim 19 recites a computing system which corresponds to the function performed by the method of claim 4. As such, the mapping and rejection of claim 4 above is considered applicable to the computing system of claim 19.
Claim 20 recites a computing system which corresponds to the function performed by the method of claim 5. As such, the mapping and rejection of claim 5 above is considered applicable to the computing system of claim 20.
Claims 7 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Northrup in view of Butler and further view of Yilanci et al (US 20220148268 A1).
Regarding claim 7, Northrup in view of Butler discloses the method of claim 1, but does not disclose wherein the door key is stored on a blockchain and is provided, for the request, through a wallet application associated with the XR device.
However, Yilanci discloses
the door key is stored on a blockchain and is provided, for the request, through a wallet application associated with the XR device (Yilanci [0063], “virtual experiences via keys can be integrated with a blockchain … a user device installed with a wallet client that provides information used for processing the blockchain ledger data and minting of a virtual experience token including virtual experience key in its metadata.”).
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Northrup further with Yilanci to utilize a blockchain and a wallet client mechanism for storing and accessing virtual door keys. This would have enhanced Butler even further by enabling additional capabilities and features such as a marketplace of virtual experiences and an ownership mechanism where users can possess the ownership of the key for a specific virtual experience. See for example, Yilanci [0064].
Claim 15 recites a computer-readable storage medium which corresponds to the function performed by the method of claim 7. As such, the mapping and rejection of claim 7 above is considered applicable to the computer-readable storage medium of claim 15.
Conclusion
See the notice of references cited (PTO-892) for prior art made of record, including art that is not relied upon but considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to JITESH PATEL whose telephone number is (571)270-3313. The examiner can normally be reached 8am - 5pm.
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, Said A. Broome can be reached at (571) 272-2931. 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.
/JITESH PATEL/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2612
Prosecution Insights