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 .
This action is in response to the Amendment filed on 8/20/2026.
Claims 1-22 are pending. Claims 21-22 are newly added.
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.
Claim(s) 1-20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over DeCoro et al. (US 20090109219 A1, hereinafter DeCoro) in view of Hsu (US 8884955 B1).
Regarding Claim 1 DeCoro teaches a system comprising: one or more processing units to:
determine a grouping of cells corresponding to a grouping of geometric shapes depicted in a scene (DeCoro, Paragraph [0042], "a bounding box is placed around the original input mesh 150 and divided into a grid 152"; it is noted the grid of cells is placed in correspondence with the input mesh (grouping of geometric shapes/triangles), such that each cell corresponds to a spatial region containing a subset of the mesh's shapes); determine a first geometric shape in the grouping of geometric shapes and a second geometric shape in the grouping of geometric shapes that are each at least partially within boundaries of a same cell in the grouping of cells (DeCoro, Fig. 3–4; Paragraph [0042], " a bounding box is placed around the original input mesh 150 and divided into a grid 152 <read on a grouping of cells> (e.g., a 9x9x9 grid of cells). In the embodiment shown, the grid 152 is a uniform rectilinear grid (each grid cell has the same cubic dimensions) "; [0003], "In general, mesh simplification entails transforming an input mesh containing a number of triangles <read on a grouping of geometric shapes> into a simplified mesh having fewer triangles that approximates well the original mesh"); modify, based on determining the first geometric shape and the second geometric shape to be at least partially within the same cell, one or more edges of at least one of the first geometric shape or the second geometric shape to create a modified grouping of geometric shapes (DeCoro, Paragraph [0062], "The vertex shader 54 remaps (step 308) the vertices of the original mesh 150 to the simplified (i.e., representative) vertex positions"; "The geometry shader 56 culls (step 316) those triangles <read on geometric shapes > that become degenerate because of the remapping"; [0004], "In a simplest case, the result is a rectilinear lattice of cubes, with all vertices in a given cube or cell being replaced with a single representative vertex (i.e., clustered). Faces that become degenerate are removed from the resulting simplified mesh"; [0063], “the geometry shader 56 determines if the three vertices of a remapped triangle are in different cluster cells. If the three vertices are not in three different cluster cells, the geometry shader 56 culls the triangle”; [0045], “For each vertex v in the triangle F: (a) Compute the cluster C containing the vertex v;”; it is noted based on triangles being within the same cell, their vertices are remapped (modifying edges) and degenerate triangles are culled to create the simplified/modified mesh); and render an image of the scene that includes the modified grouping of geometric shapes (DeCoro, Paragraph [0053], "The decimated mesh 160 is subsequently displayed (step 124)."; [0063], "The vertices of the resulting new triangles stored in the stream output buffer 72 comprise a simplified version of the original input mesh 150."; [0031], "The GPU-based mesh simplification technique of the invention can generate multiple LODs of an object during a single execution of the technique.").
Hsu further teaches modify, based on determining the first geometric shape and the second geometric shape to be at least partially within the same cell, one or more edges of at least one of the first geometric shape or the second geometric shape to create a modified grouping of geometric shapes (Hsu, Column 7, Line 15-30, "vertex reducing engine 320 reduces the vertices toward a center of the tile to simplify the mesh included in the tile while maintaining vertices along a perimeter of the tile").
Hsu and DeCoro are analogous since both of them are dealing with three-dimensional mesh simplification and level-of-detail (LOD) generation for rendering graphical scenes. DeCoro provided a way of simplifying a polygonal mesh by dividing the mesh into a grid of cells and modifying vertices/edges within each cell (e.g., vertex clustering and remapping) to generate a simplified mesh for rendering. Hsu provided a way of partitioning a mesh into tiles (cells) and reducing vertices within each tile (e.g., moving vertices toward a tile center while preserving boundary vertices) to simplify the mesh while maintaining structural consistency across regions. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention was made to incorporate tile-based vertex reduction and edge/vertex modification within localized regions (tiles/cells) taught by Hsu into modified invention of DeCoro such that mesh simplification within each cell is improved by systematically reducing vertices toward tile centers while preserving boundary structure, thereby producing an efficient and visually consistent modified grouping of geometric shapes. The motivation is to improve mesh simplification efficiency while preserving visual continuity and reducing computational cost for rendering different levels of detail.
Regarding Claim 2, the combination of DeCoro and Hsu teaches the invention of Claim 1.
The combination further teaches wherein the grouping of geometric shapes represent at least one of: one or more objects in the scene; or one or more surfaces in the scene (DeCoro, Paragraph [0028], " In the example shown, a high-resolution three-dimensional object 24 (i.e., the “head of David”) <read on objects in a scene > appears on the display screen 14. Objects in 3D graphics are usually represented by a web or mesh of polygons <read on grouping of geometric shapes>. Each polygon has various properties, such as color and texture. In this example, the object 24 is comprised of approximately 2 million faces"; [0002],"The present invention relates generally to computer graphics processing. More particularly, the present invention relates to systems and methods for performing real-time polygonal mesh simplification.") Hsu further teaches the same limitation (Hsu, Column 4, Line 19-23, "A polygonal mesh represents the geometry of a three-dimensional model and is a three-dimensional graphics representation for a surface that has no texture on ; it is noted that Hsu further corroborates that the grouping of geometric shapes (polygonal mesh) represents surfaces in the scene.)
As explained in rejection of Claim 1, the obviousness for combining of tile-based mesh simplification of Hsu into grid-based mesh simplification of DeCoro is provided above.
Regarding Claim 3, the combination of DeCoro and Hsu teaches the invention of Claim 1.
The combination further teaches wherein a shader creates the modified grouping of geometric shapes (DeCoro, Abstract, "A geometry shader receives the vertices from the vertex shader and generates from the received vertices a simplified mesh that portrays the three-dimensional graphics object in less detail than the input mesh.", [0035]-[0036], “In addition, the texture buffer 70 can provide texture data that are used at the geometry shader stage 56” "The geometry shader also has the ability to cull input primitives from the rendering stream, thereby preventing their rasterization. This capability proves useful for achieving mesh decimation. Thus, from the input vertices of a given primitive, the geometry shader can discard the primitive or generate the vertices of one or more new primitives.")
Regarding Claim 4, the combination of DeCoro and Hsu teaches the invention of Claim 1.
The combination further teaches wherein the grouping of geometric shapes form a polygon mesh (DeCoro, Paragraph [0042], "a bounding box is placed around the original input mesh 150 and divided into a grid 152"; [0004], "Various mesh simplification algorithms have been devised to decimate a triangle mesh <read on grouping of geometric shapes >"; [0002], "The present invention relates generally to computer graphics processing. More particularly, the present invention relates to systems and methods for performing real-time polygonal mesh simplification").
Regarding Claim 5, the combination of DeCoro and Hsu teaches the invention of Claim 1.
The combination further teaches wherein the grouping of cells is a grid of cells (DeCoro, Abstract; "The input mesh is divided into a grid of cells <read on grouping of cells >"; [0042], "a bounding box is placed around the original input mesh 150 and divided into a grid 152 (e.g., a 9×9×9 grid of cells). In the embodiment shown, the grid 152 is a uniform rectilinear grid (each grid cell has the same cubic dimensions)".
Regarding Claim 6, the combination of DeCoro and Hsu teaches the invention of Claim 1.
The combination further teaches wherein at least one geometric shape in the grouping of geometric shapes is a triangle (DeCoro, Paragraph [0004], "Various mesh simplification algorithms have been devised to decimate a triangle mesh."; [0063], "the geometry shader 56 determines if the three vertices of a remapped triangle are in different cluster cells."; [0045], "each triangle F in the input mesh").
Regarding Claim 7, the combination of DeCoro and Hsu teaches the invention of Claim 1.
The combination further teaches wherein at least one cell in the grouping of cells [[ is a square ]] (DeCoro, Paragraph [0042], "a bounding box is placed around the original input mesh 150 and divided into a grid 152 (e.g., a 9×9×9 grid of cells). In the embodiment shown, the grid 152 is a uniform rectilinear grid (each grid cell has the same cubic dimensions)."; DeCoro teaches cubic/rectilinear cells, which include square cross-sections).
But Decoro does not explicitly disclose the grouping of cells is a square.
However, Hsu teaches the grouping of cells is a square (Hsu, Column 6, Line 37-41; "the initial boundary lines are uniformly spaced boundary lines, and the first plurality of tiles are uniform square tiles").
Hsu and DeCoro are analogous since both of them are dealing with partitioning three-dimensional meshes into discrete regions (cells/tiles) for simplification and rendering. DeCoro provided a way of dividing a mesh into a grid of rectilinear cells (cubic grid structure) for performing mesh simplification. Hsu provided a way of dividing a mesh into tiles that are explicitly uniform square tiles defined by boundary lines. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention was made to incorporate square tile (cell) structures taught by Hsu into modified invention of DeCoro such that the grid cells used for mesh simplification include square-shaped cells (tiles), thereby providing a well-defined and uniform partitioning structure for processing geometric shapes. The motivation is to provide uniform and structured partitioning of meshes that simplifies processing and ensures consistent simplification behavior across regions.
Regarding Claim 8, the combination of DeCoro and Hsu teaches the invention of Claim 1.
The combination further teaches wherein to determine the first geometric shape in the grouping of geometric shapes and the second geometric shape in the grouping of geometric shapes the one or more processing units further overlay the grouping of cells onto the grouping of geometric shapes (DeCoro, Paragraph [0042], "At step 104, a bounding box is placed around the original input mesh 150 and divided into a grid 152 (e.g., a 9×9×9 grid of cells)."; [0004], "placing an input mesh into a bounding box, and dividing the box into a grid"; "; [0003], "In general, mesh simplification entails transforming an input mesh containing a number of triangles <read on a grouping of geometric shapes>”).
Regarding Claim 9, the combination of DeCoro and Hsu teaches the invention of Claim 1.
The combination further teaches wherein to modify the one or more edges … the one or more processing units further: discard the first geometric shape when the first geometric shape has at least one edge fully inside the boundaries of the cell, and discard the second geometric shape when the second geometric shape has at least one edge fully inside the boundaries of the cell (DeCoro, Paragraph [0004], "all vertices in a given cube or cell being replaced with a single representative vertex... Faces that become degenerate are removed" — when both vertices of an edge collapse to the same point, that edge (which was fully inside the cell) becomes degenerate).
Hsu further teaches the same limitation (Hsu, Column 7, Line 15-27, “In an embodiment, for at least one tile of the first plurality of tiles, vertex reducing engine 320 reduces the vertices toward a center of the tile to simplify the mesh included in the tile while maintaining vertices along a perimeter of the tile. For example, vertex reducing engine 320 may reduce the vertices toward a center of tile 429 while maintaining vertices along a perimeter of the tile. As such, the vertices along boundary lines 405, 410, 415, and 420 remain fixed and are not simplified. In an embodiment, for each of the first plurality of tiles, vertex reducing engine 320 reduces the vertices toward a center of the tile to simplify the mesh included in the tile while maintaining vertices along a perimeter of the tile”).
As explained in rejection of Claim 1, the obviousness for combining of parallel and localized mesh simplification (tile-based processing) of Hsu into grid-based mesh simplification of DeCoro is provided above.
Regarding Claim 10, the combination of DeCoro and Hsu teaches the invention of Claim 9.
The combination further teaches wherein the one or more processing units are to create an intermediate grouping of geometric shapes when at least one of the first geometric shape or the second geometric shape is discarded (DeCoro, Paragraph [0062], "The geometry shader 56 culls (step 316) those triangles that become degenerate because of the remapping."; [0064], "The vertices of the resulting new triangles stored in the stream output buffer 72 comprise a simplified version of the original input mesh 150."; [0004], “Faces that become degenerate are removed from the resulting simplified mesh”; it is noted DeCoro teaches that after culling/discarding degenerate triangles, the remaining set of primitives in the stream output buffer constitutes an intermediate grouping of geometric shapes — the stage between the original input mesh and the final rendered output mesh. The multi-pass process explicitly creates intermediate mesh states at each pass (e.g., "The decimated mesh 160" generated at step 120 before final display at step 124).).
Regarding Claim 11, the combination of DeCoro and Hsu teaches the invention of Claim 10.
The combination further teaches wherein to modify the one or more edges … the one or more processing units further: determine a selected vertex from one or more vertices of the intermediate grouping of geometric shapes that are located within the boundaries of the cell; and replace the one or more vertices of the intermediate grouping of geometric shapes that are located within the boundaries of the cell with the selected vertex to create the modified grouping of geometric shapes." (DeCoro, Paragraph [0059], "the optimal representative vertex position <read on selected vertex > for each cluster cell is computed and stored in a render target 158"; [0060], "The representative vertex position is saved (step 262) into a render target 158, which is used in the next pass."; [0062], "The vertex shader 54 remaps (step 308) the vertices of the original mesh 150 to the simplified (i.e., representative) vertex positions"; [0004], "all vertices in a given cube or cell being replaced with a single representative vertex (i.e., clustered)").
Hsu further teaches the limitation (Hsu, Column 7, Line 15-30, “In an embodiment, for at least one tile of the first plurality of tiles, vertex reducing engine 320 reduces the vertices toward a center of the tile to simplify the mesh included in the tile while maintaining vertices along a perimeter of the tile. For example, vertex reducing engine 320 may reduce the vertices toward a center of tile 429 while maintaining vertices along a perimeter of the tile. As such, the vertices along boundary lines 405, 410, 415, and 420 remain fixed and are not simplified. In an embodiment, for each of the first plurality of tiles, vertex reducing engine 320 reduces the vertices toward a center of the tile to simplify the mesh included in the tile while maintaining vertices along a perimeter of the tile”).
As explained in rejection of Claim 1, the obviousness for combining of parallel and localized mesh simplification (tile-based processing) of Hsu into grid-based mesh simplification of DeCoro is provided above.
Regarding Claim 12, the combination of DeCoro and Hsu teaches the invention of Claim 10.
The combination further teaches wherein the selected vertex is determined based on one or more criteria that includes minimum error criteria (DeCoro, Paragraph [0043], "For each grid cell 154, also called a cluster cell, a quadric error metric is computed (step 108) for each vertex in that cluster cell. The quadric characterizes the error at that vertex and can be used as a measure of mesh quality."; [0060], "the optimal representative vertex <read on selected vertex> position for each cluster cell is computed and stored"; [0061], "The optimal representative vertex position for a cluster cell is the position that minimizes the sum of squared volumes of the tetrahedron formed by the vertex position and the triangles in the cluster cell.").
Regarding Claim 13, the combination of DeCoro and Hsu teaches the invention of Claim 11.
The combination further teaches wherein a vertex that results in a minimum error metric over one or more geometric shapes when used to replace one or more other vertices within the boundaries of the cell is selected as the selected vertex (DeCoro, Paragraph [0061], "The optimal representative vertex position for a cluster cell is the position that minimizes the sum of squared volumes of the tetrahedron formed by the vertex position and the triangles < read on geometric shapes > in the cluster cell."; [0060], "the pixel shader 60 retrieves (step 254) the values of the error quadrics Qc from the render targets 156 and computes (step 258) the optimal representative vertex position for each cluster cell 154.", ; "The quadric characterizes the error at that vertex and can be used as a measure of mesh quality").
Regarding Claim 14, the combination of DeCoro and Hsu teaches the invention of Claim 10.
The combination further teaches wherein to modify the one or more edges … the one or more processing units are to: collapse at least two geometric shapes in the intermediate grouping of geometric shapes into a single geometric shape to create the modified grouping of geometric shapes (DeCoro, Paragraph [0004], "all vertices in a given cube or cell being replaced with a single representative vertex (i.e., clustered). Faces that become degenerate are removed from the resulting simplified mesh"; [0062–0063]: "The vertex shader 54 remaps (step 308) the vertices of the original mesh 150 to the simplified (i.e., representative) vertex positions" and "The geometry shader 56 culls (step 316) those triangles that become degenerate because of the remapping."; it is noted when multiple triangles sharing vertices within the same cell all have their vertices remapped to a single representative vertex, degenerate triangles are removed and what were two or more triangles effectively collapse into a single triangle).
Regarding Claim 15, the combination of DeCoro and Hsu teaches the invention of Claim 1.
The combination further teaches wherein the modified grouping of geometric shapes has a level of detail that is reduced with respect to a level of detail of the grouping of geometric shapes (DeCoro, Paragraph [0029], "Each simplified mesh is an explicit representation of the object 24 at a different lower level of detail (LOD).", ; [0008], "a graphics-processing unit … to decimate a data set for an input mesh that describes a three dimensional object to produce a simplified mesh that describes the three-dimensional graphics object in less detail than the input mesh.").
Regarding Claim 16, the combination of DeCoro and Hsu teaches the invention of Claim 1.
The combination further teaches wherein a size of at least one cell in the grouping of cells is determined based on a desired level of detail for the modified grouping of geometric shapes (DeCoro, Paragraph [0056], "the GPU 16 receives the input mesh 150, the bounding box 152, and a user-specified number of subdivisions <read on size of at least one cell > along each dimension (such user-specified input may be a specific value or a general descriptor—e.g., 'high quality', 'medium quality', 'low quality' or the like set by access to a user interface control or command)."; [0031], "the GPU 16 can produce the multiple LODs of a high-resolution model"; [0064], "When the resolution of the sampling grid is reduced by half, we can omit Pass 1, and instead create the quadric cluster map by appropriate down-sampling").
Regarding Claim 17, the combination of DeCoro and Hsu teaches the invention of Claim 1.
The combination further teaches wherein in parallel with creating the modified grouping of geometric shapes, the one or more processing units further: determine a third geometric shape [ [in the grouping of geometric shapes ]] and a fourth geometric shape [ [in the grouping of geometric shapes ]] that are each at least partially within boundaries of a same second cell [ [in the grouping of cells ]]; and modify [[based on determining the third geometric shape and the fourth geometric shape as each being at least partially within the boundaries of the same second cell in the grouping of cells, ]] one or more edges of at least one of the third geometric shape or the fourth geometric shape to create a second modified grouping of geometric shapes; wherein the image of the scene that is rendered further includes the second modified grouping of geometric shapes (DeCoro, Paragraph [0020], "The large-scale parallelism of the streaming architecture of current graphics-processing units (GPUs)"; [0026], "Although FIG. 1 shows only one GPU 16, multiple GPUs on the same graphics card or on separate interconnected graphics cards can perform mesh simplification"; [0031], "the GPU 16 can produce the multiple LODs of a high-resolution model…an order of magnitude faster than the CPU 18 can produce a single simplified level of detail”; It is noted streaming GPU architecture is intrinsic concept of using different meshlets parallel with creating the modified grouping of geometric shapes).
But DeCoro does not explicitly disclose [[ metric shape ]] in the grouping of geometric shapes [[ and a fourth geometric shape ]] in the grouping of geometric shapes [[ that are each at least partially within boundaries of a same second cell ]] in the grouping of cells ; and modify based on determining the third geometric shape and the fourth geometric shape as each being at least partially within the boundaries of the same second cell in the grouping of cells,
However, Hsu teaches metric shape in the grouping of geometric shapes and a fourth geometric shape in the grouping of geometric shapes that are each at least partially within boundaries of a same second cell in the grouping of cells; and modify based on determining the third geometric shape and the fourth geometric shape as each being at least partially within the boundaries of the same second cell in the grouping of cells (Hsu, Column 7, Line 35-40, "Vertex reducing engine 320 may reduce the vertices of the tiles in parallel. For example, vertex reducing engine 320 may reduce the vertices in each of tiles 425-433 in parallel."; Column 8, Line 32-35, "The simplified meshes may be independently generated in each subtile").
As explained in rejection of Claim 1, the obviousness for combining of parallel and localized mesh simplification (tile-based processing) of Hsu into grid-based mesh simplification of DeCoro is provided above.
Regarding Claim 18, the combination of DeCoro and Hsu teaches the invention of Claim 1.
The combination further teaches the image is rendered within at least one of: a video game or a virtual reality application (DeCoro, Paragraph [0003], "interactive rendering of such massive geometry in computer games or other applications can be impractical"; [0066], "One application of adaptive simplification, referred to as view-dependent simplification, is to preserve greater detail in regions of the mesh that are closer to the viewer"; [0027], "Examples of application programs include, but are not limited to, standalone and networked computer and video games, simulation programs"; [0031], “the application program is a user interactive program that enables the user to specify input parameters and other criteria to the application program and observe the results of such mesh simplification on the object in real-time”).
Regarding Claim 19, it recites limitations similar in scope to the limitations of claim 1, but in a processor. As shown in the rejection, the combination of DeCoro and Hsu disclose the limitations of claims 1. Additionally, DeCoro discloses an processor that maps to Paragraph [0024], [0026] (DeCoro, Paragraph [0024], “the CPU 18 is implemented with an AMD® Athlon® processor manufactured by Advanced Micro Devices, Inc. of Sunnyvale, Calif.” [0026], “the GPU 16 has a streaming computing architecture and operates as a streaming coprocessor; that is, the GPU 16 executes data-parallel operations, called kernels, on collections of data or records called streams”). Thus, Claim 19 is met by DeCoro according to the mapping presented in the rejection of claim 1, given the system corresponds to the processor.
Regarding Claim 20, it recites limitations similar in scope to the limitations of Claim 1 but as a method and the combination of DeCoro and Hsu teaches all the limitations as of Claim 1. Therefore is rejected under the same rationale.
Regarding Claim 21, the combination of DeCoro and Hsu teaches the invention of Claim 1 as set forth above.
The combination further teaches: wherein determining the first geometric shape and the second geometric shape includes: determining, from the grouping of cells and the corresponding grouping of geometric shapes, a subgroup of geometric shapes comprised of a first geometric shape in the grouping of geometric shapes and a second geometric shape in the grouping of geometric shapes that are each at least partially within boundaries of a same cell in the grouping of cells (DeCoro, Paragraph [0042], "a bounding box is placed around the original input mesh 150 and divided into a grid 152 (e.g., a 9x9x9 grid of cells)"; Paragraph [0045], " A technique for computing cluster quadrics includes performing the following for each triangle F in the input mesh: 1. Compute the face quadric QF. 2. For each vertex v in the triangle F: (a) Compute the cluster C containing the vertex v; and (b) Add QF to the cluster quadric QC. "; Paragraph [0061], "The optimal representative vertex position for a cluster cell is the position that minimizes the sum of squared volumes of the tetrahedron formed by the vertex position and the triangles <read on subgroup of geometric shapes comprised of a first geometric shape ... and a second geometric shape> in the cluster cell <read on same cell in the grouping of cells>"; it is noted DeCoro identifies, per cluster cell, the set/subgroup of triangles (including at least a first triangle and a second triangle) whose vertices map into that same cluster cell, which is used to compute the cell's cluster quadric and representative vertex); and wherein the modifying of the one or more edges is performed for the subgroup (DeCoro, Paragraph [0062], "The vertex shader 54 remaps (step 308) the vertices of the original mesh 150 to the simplified (i.e., representative) vertex positions"; "The geometry shader 56 culls (step 316) those triangles <read on subgroup> that become degenerate because of the remapping"; Paragraph [0063], "the geometry shader 56 determines if the three vertices of a remapped triangle are in different cluster cells. If the three vertices are not in three different cluster cells, the geometry shader 56 culls the triangle"; it is noted the remap-and-cull operation is applied to those triangles (i.e., the subgroup) whose vertices lie in the same cluster cell, so that edges of triangles in the subgroup are modified/collapsed to form the simplified mesh).
Hsu further teaches wherein the modifying of the one or more edges is performed for the subgroup (Hsu, Column 7, Line 15-30, "vertex reducing engine 320 reduces the vertices toward a center of the tile <read on same cell> to simplify the mesh <read on subgroup of geometric shapes> included in the tile while maintaining vertices along a perimeter of the tile"; Column 8, Line 32-35, "The simplified meshes may be independently generated in each subtile"; it is noted Hsu corroborates that vertex/edge modification is carried out on the subgroup of geometric shapes included within a single tile/cell.)
Hsu and DeCoro are analogous since both of them are dealing with partitioning three-dimensional meshes into discrete regions (cells/tiles) and locally simplifying the subset of geometric primitives contained within each region. DeCoro provided a way of identifying, per grid cell, the set of triangles whose vertices map into that cell and then remapping/culling those triangles to form the simplified mesh. Hsu provided a way of localizing the vertex-reduction/edge-modification operation to the mesh included within an individual tile while preserving boundary consistency. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention was made to incorporate the tile-localized subgroup-based vertex/edge reduction taught by Hsu into the modified invention of DeCoro such that the remap-and-cull edge modification of DeCoro is expressly carried out on the subgroup of geometric shapes (triangles) determined to lie at least partially within the boundaries of a same cluster cell. The motivation is to enable localized, region-by-region mesh simplification that can be executed in parallel on independent subgroups of primitives while preserving structural continuity across cell boundaries, as expressly discussed by Hsu in Column 7, Line 35-40 ("Vertex reducing engine 320 may reduce the vertices of the tiles in parallel").
Regarding Claim 22, the combination of DeCoro and Hsu teaches the invention of Claim 1 as set forth above.
The combination further teaches: wherein determining the first geometric shape and the second geometric shape includes: determining, from the grouping of cells and the corresponding grouping of geometric shapes, a pairing of geometric shapes comprised of a first geometric shape in the grouping of geometric shapes and a second geometric shape in the grouping of geometric shapes that are each at least partially within boundaries of a same cell in the grouping of cells (DeCoro, Paragraph [0042], "a bounding box is placed around the original input mesh 150 and divided into a grid 152 (e.g., a 9x9x9 grid of cells)"; Paragraph [0045], " A technique for computing cluster quadrics includes performing the following for each triangle F in the input mesh: 1. Compute the face quadric QF. 2. For each vertex v in the triangle F: (a) Compute the cluster C containing the vertex v; and (b) Add QF to the cluster quadric QC "; Paragraph [0061], "The optimal representative vertex position for a cluster cell is the position that minimizes the sum of squared volumes of the tetrahedron formed by the vertex position and the triangles <read on pairing of geometric shapes comprised of a first geometric shape ... and a second geometric shape> in the cluster cell <read on same cell in the grouping of cells>"; it is noted DeCoro identifies, per cluster cell, plural triangles whose vertices map into that same cluster cell and utilizes at least a pair (first and second) of such triangles in the per-cell cluster-quadric/representative-vertex computation); wherein the modifying of the one or more edges is performed for the pairing (DeCoro, Paragraph [0062], "The vertex shader 54 remaps (step 308) the vertices of the original mesh 150 to the simplified (i.e., representative) vertex positions"; "The geometry shader 56 culls (step 316) those triangles <read on pairing> that become degenerate because of the remapping"; Paragraph [0063], "the geometry shader 56 determines if the three vertices of a remapped triangle are in different cluster cells. If the three vertices are not in three different cluster cells, the geometry shader 56 culls the triangle"; it is noted the remap-and-cull operation acts upon the pair of triangles (first and second) whose vertices lie in the same cluster cell, thereby modifying edges of the pairing to produce the simplified mesh).
Hsu further teaches wherein the modifying of the one or more edges is performed for the pairing (Hsu, Column 7, Line 15-30, "vertex reducing engine 320 reduces the vertices toward a center of the tile <read on same cell> to simplify the mesh <read on pairing of geometric shapes> included in the tile while maintaining vertices along a perimeter of the tile"; Column 8, Line 32-35, "The simplified meshes may be independently generated in each subtile"; it is noted Hsu corroborates that the edge/vertex modification is confined to the geometric shapes (including at least a pair of triangles) contained within a single tile/cell.)
Hsu and DeCoro are analogous since both of them are dealing with partitioning three-dimensional meshes into discrete regions (cells/tiles) and locally simplifying the geometric primitives contained within each region. DeCoro provided a way of collecting, per cluster cell, the triangles (i.e., at least a pair thereof) whose vertices map into that cell and applying the vertex-remap/degenerate-cull operation to that pair to produce the simplified mesh. Hsu provided a way of restricting the vertex-reduction/edge-modification operation to the mesh included within a single tile while preserving boundary continuity. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention was made to incorporate the tile-localized pair-based vertex/edge reduction taught by Hsu into the modified invention of DeCoro such that the remap-and-cull edge modification of DeCoro is expressly performed for the pairing (first and second geometric shape) determined to lie at least partially within the boundaries of a same cluster cell. The motivation is to enable localized, region-by-region mesh simplification that can be executed in parallel on independent pairs/subsets of primitives while preserving structural continuity across cell boundaries, as expressly discussed by Hsu in Column 7, Line 35-40 ("Vertex reducing engine 320 may reduce the vertices of the tiles in parallel").
Response to Arguments
The rejection of Claims 1-20 under Nonstatutory Double Patenting are withdrawn in view of Applicant filed eTerminal/Terminal Disclaimer on 8/20/2026.
Applicant’s arguments with respect to claims 1, 19, and 20 filed on 8/20/2026, with respect to rejection under 35 USC § 103 have been fully considered but are not persuasive.
Applicant asserts that the prior art does not teach the limitation "determining a first geometric shape in the grouping of geometric shapes and a second geometric shape in the grouping of geometric shapes that are each at least partially within boundaries of a same cell in the grouping of cells".
In response to the argument, As described in rejection of claim 1 above. These limitations are taught by combination of DeCoro and Hsu. In particular, DeCoro in Paragraph [0042] teaches placing a bounding box around the input mesh and dividing it into a grid of cells (e.g., 9x9x9 grid), and further in Paragraph [0045] teaches "For each triangle F in the input mesh: ... For each vertex v in the triangle F: (a) Compute the cluster C containing the vertex v", which necessarily identifies multiple triangles (a first geometric shape and a second geometric shape) each having at least one vertex located within the boundaries of the same cluster cell — i.e., each being at least partially within the same cell. Paragraph [0063] further teaches "the geometry shader 56 determines if the three vertices of a remapped triangle are in different cluster cells", confirming that DeCoro's method inherently performs a per-triangle determination of cell-containment relative to the grid cells. Under broadest reasonable interpretation, a triangle having a vertex in a given cell is "at least partially within" that cell as claimed. Hence the combination of prior arts fully anticipate the limitations. Therefore applicant's remark cannot be considered persuasive.
Applicant further asserts that the prior art does not teach the limitation "modifying, based on determining the first geometric shape and the second geometric shape to be at least partially within the same cell, one or more edges of at least one of the first geometric shape or the second geometric shape to create a modified grouping of geometric shapes".
In response to the argument, As described in rejection of claim 1 above. These limitations are taught by combination of DeCoro and Hsu. In particular, DeCoro in Paragraph [0062] teaches "The vertex shader 54 remaps (step 308) the vertices of the original mesh 150 to the simplified (i.e., representative) vertex positions" and "The geometry shader 56 culls (step 316) those triangles that become degenerate because of the remapping", and Paragraph [0004] teaches "all vertices in a given cube or cell being replaced with a single representative vertex (i.e., clustered). Faces that become degenerate are removed from the resulting simplified mesh". When two triangles (the first and second geometric shape) each have a vertex located within the same cluster cell, DeCoro's method modifies edges of those triangles by remapping the shared vertex/vertices to the cell's representative position — the modification being directly caused by (i.e., "based on") the vertices being classified into the same cluster cell. Applicant's own admission at Remarks page 10-11 that "DeCoro computes one representative vertex per cell as a function of all faces in the cell" confirms that DeCoro processes all faces having a vertex in a given cell, which necessarily encompasses any first and second shape recited in the claim. Hsu in Column 7, Lines 15-30 further teaches reducing/modifying vertices of a mesh within a tile (cell) to simplify the mesh, reinforcing the edge-modification step in a cell-based simplification context. The claim does not require a pairwise-specific trigger nor exclude batch per-cell processing; the "based on determining" language is satisfied by the causal link between the cell-containment determination and the edge modification, which DeCoro plainly discloses. Hence the combination of prior arts fully anticipate the limitations. Therefore applicant's remark cannot be considered persuasive.
Applicant further asserts that "it would not be obvious to combine the DeCoro and Hsu references, as [they] disclose entirely different solutions to the same problem of mesh simplification".
In response to the argument, As described in the motivation statement in the rejection of claim 1 above. DeCoro and Hsu are analogous art since both are directed to three-dimensional mesh simplification and level-of-detail (LOD) generation for graphical rendering, and both employ spatial partitioning of a mesh into discrete regions (cells/tiles) for localized simplification. Contrary to Applicant's assertion, the fact that two references disclose different solutions to the same problem does not weigh against combinability; rather, under KSR Int'l Co. v. Teleflex Inc., 550 U.S. 398 (2007), the existence of a finite number of known, predictable solutions to a recognized problem provides a proper rationale for combining the teachings. DeCoro provides the grid-of-cells framework for vertex remapping and degenerate-triangle culling, and Hsu provides tile-based vertex reduction with perimeter preservation and explicit uniform square tile geometry (Column 6, Lines 37-41). A person of ordinary skill in the art would be motivated to incorporate Hsu's localized tile-based vertex reduction into DeCoro's grid-based mesh simplification to improve simplification efficiency, preserve visual continuity across regions, and reduce computational cost for rendering different levels of detail — as expressly articulated in the rejection. Hence the combination of prior arts is proper and fully anticipates the limitations. Therefore applicant's remark cannot be considered persuasive.
In regard to Claims 2-18 they directly/indirectly depends on independent Claim 1. Applicant does not argue anything other than the independent claim 1. The limitations in those claims in conjunction with combination previously established as explained.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
US 20170357406 A1 Medical image display system and method for providing user interface enabling three-dimensional mesh to be edited on three-dimensional volume
US 6445390 B1 Triangle geometry processing for surface modeling and cartesian grid generation
THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. 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 the examiner should be directed to YUJANG TSWEI whose telephone number is (571)272-6669. The examiner can normally be reached 8:30am-5:30pm EST.
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, Kent Chang can be reached at (571)272-7667. 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.
/YuJang Tswei/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2614
