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 Objections
Claims 11 and 22 are objected to because of the following informalities.
• Claim 11, line 4, “a relevancy level” should read as “the relevancy level”.
• Claim 22, lines 3-4, “a relevancy level” should read as “the relevancy level”.
Appropriate correction is required.
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 1-22 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 101 because the claimed invention is directed to an abstract idea without significantly more.
Step 1: Does the claimed invention fall inside one of the four statutory categories (process, machine, manufacture, or composition of matter)? Yes for claims 1-22.
Claims 1-11 are drawn to a system for processing external communications in a video game (i.e., a manufacture). Claims 12-22 are drawn to a method for processing external communications in a video game (i.e., a process).
Step 2A - Prong One: Do the claims recite a judicial exception (an abstract idea enumerated in the 2019 PEG, a law of nature, or a natural phenomenon)? Yes, for claims 1-22.
Claim 1 recites:
A system for processing external communications in a video game, comprising: a computer processor configured to receive a communication from a source external to a video game;
a computer memory configured to store the received communication;
a first artificial intelligence (AI) engine configured to process the received communication stored in the computer memory to determine a manner and a timing for conveyance of the received communication to a player of the video game who is currently playing the video game;
and a second AI engine configured to implement a non-player character within the video game through which the received communication is conveyed, the computer processor configured to direct conveyance of the received communication to the player of the video game by way of the non-player character in accordance with the manner and the timing as determined by the first AI engine.
These steps amount to a form of mental process and organizing human activity (i.e., an abstract idea) because a human player of a video game can receive communications from an external source and subsequently determine how and when to acknowledge the external communications. Applicant of claimed invention discloses “it is often generally beneficial for the player of the video game to receive external communications during play of the video game” [0016].
Independent claim 12 describes similar steps as claim 1 (and therefore recite limitations that fall within this subject matter of grouping abstract ideas), and these claims are therefore determined to recite an abstract idea under the same analysis. Dependent claims 2-11 and 13-22 are directed towards mini-tasks (AI engine configurations to determine subject matter of external communication, determine urgency of external communication, determine when to include a non-player character, etc.) for a system and method for processing external communications in a video game. Each claim amounts to a form of collecting, generating, and analyzing information, and therefore falls within the scope of a method for organizing human activity, (i.e., an abstract idea). As such, the Examiner concludes that claims 2-11 and 13-22 recite an abstract idea.
Step 2A – Prong Two: Do the claims recite additional elements that integrate the exception into a practical application of the exception? No
In prong two of step 2A, an evaluation is made whether a claim recites any additional element, or combination of additional elements, that integrate the exception into a practical application of that exception. An “additional element” is an element that is recited in the claim in addition to (beyond) the judicial exception (i.e., an element/limitation that sets forth an abstract idea is not an additional element). The phrase “integration into a practical application” is defined as requiring an additional element or a combination of additional elements in the claim to apply, rely on, or use the judicial exception in a manner that imposes a meaningful limit on the judicial exception, such that it is more than a drafting effort designed to monopolize the exception.
The requirement to execute the claimed steps/functions using computing devices (independent claims 1 and 12 and dependent claims 2-11 and 13-22) is equivalent to adding the words “apply it” on a computer and/or mere instructions to implement the abstract idea on a computer. Similarly, the limitations of a computer processor, a computer memory, and an artificial intelligence engine (independent claims 1 and 12 and dependent claims 2-11 and 13-22) are recited at a high level of generality and amount to no more than mere instructions to apply the exception using computer components. These limitations do not impose any meaningful limits on practicing the abstract idea, and therefore do not integrate the abstract idea into a practical application (see MPEP 2106.05(f)).
Use of a computer, processor, memory or other machinery in its ordinary capacity for economic or other tasks (e.g., to receive, store, or transmit data) or simply adding a computer or computer components after the fact to an abstract idea (e.g., a fundamental economic practice or mathematical equation) does not integrate a judicial exception into a practical application or provide significantly more. See Affinity Labs v. DirecTV, 838 F.3d 1253, 1262, 120 USPQ2d 1201, 1207 (Fed. Cir. 2016) (cellular telephone); TLI Communications LLC v. AV Auto, LLC, 823 F.3d 607, 613, 118 USPQ2d 1744, 1748 (Fed. Cir. 2016) (computer server and telephone unit). Intellectual Ventures I LLC v. Capital One Bank (USA), 792 F.3d 1363, 1367, 115 USPQ2d 1636, 1639 (Fed. Cir. 2015) (See MPEP 2106.05(f)).
Further, the additional limitations beyond the abstract idea identified above, serve merely to generally link the use of the judicial exception to a particular technological environment or field of use. Specifically, they serve to limit the application of the abstract idea to a computerized environment (e.g., receiving, storing, processing, etc.) performed by a computer processor, a computer memory, an artificial intelligence engine, etc. This reasoning was demonstrated in Intellectual Ventures I LLC v. Capital One Bank (Fed. Cir. 2015), where the court determined “an abstract idea does not become nonabstract by limiting the invention to a particular field of use or technological environment, such as the Internet [or] a computer”). These limitations do not impose any meaningful limits on practicing the abstract idea, and therefore do not integrate the abstract idea into a practical application (see MPEP 2106.05(h)).
Dependent claims 2-11 and 13-22 fail to include any additional elements. In other words, each of the limitations/elements recited in respective dependent claims are further part of the abstract idea as identified by the Examiner for each respective independent claim (i.e., they are part of the abstract idea recited in each respective claim). The Examiner has therefore determined that the additional elements, or combination of additional elements, do not integrate the abstract idea into a practical application. Accordingly, the claims are directed to an abstract idea.
Step 2B: Does the claim as a whole amount to significantly more than the judicial exception? i.e., Are there any additional elements (features/limitations/step) recited in the claim beyond the abstract idea? No
In step 2B, the claims are analyzed to determine whether any additional element, or combination of additional elements, are sufficient to ensure that the claims amount to significantly more than the judicial exception. This analysis is also termed a search for an “inventive concept.” An “inventive concept” is furnished by an element or combination of elements that is recited in the claim in addition to (beyond) the judicial exception, and is sufficient to ensure that the claim as a whole amount to significantly more than the judicial exception itself. Alice Corp., 573 U.S. at 27-18, 110 USPQ2d at 1981 (citing Mayo, 566 U.S. at 72-73, 101 USPQ2d at 1966). As discussed above in “Step 2A – Prong Two”, the identified additional elements in independent claims 1 and 12 and dependent claims 2-11 and 13-22 are equivalent to adding the words “apply it” on a computer, and/or generally link the use of the judicial exception to a particular technological environment or field of use. Therefore, the claims as a whole do not amount to significantly more than the judicial exception itself.
Viewing the additional limitations in combination also shows that they fail to ensure the claims amount to significantly more than the abstract idea. When considered as an ordered combination, the additional components of the claims add nothing that is not already present when considered separately, and thus simply append the abstract idea with words equivalent to “apply it” on a computer and/or mere instructions to implement the abstract idea on a computer or/and append the abstract idea with insignificant extra solution activity associated with the implementation of the judicial exception, (e.g., mere data gathering, post-solution activity) and/or simply appending well-understood, routine, conventional activities previously known to the industry, specified at a high level of generality, to the judicial exception.
Dependent claims 2-11 and 13-22 fail to include any additional elements. In other words, each of the limitations/elements recited in respective independent claims are further part of the abstract idea as identified by the Examiner for each respective dependent claim (i.e. they are part of the abstract idea recited in each respective claim).
The Examiner has therefore determined that no additional element, or combination of additional claims elements are sufficient to ensure the claims amount to significantly more than the abstract idea identified above. Therefore, claims 1-22 are not eligible subject matter under 35 USC 101.
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.
The factual inquiries for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized as follows:
Determining the scope and contents of the prior art.
Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue.
Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art.
Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness.
Claims 1-6, 8, 10, 12-17, 19, and 21 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable under US 20200289937 A1 (“Osman”) in view of US 20200029028 A1 (“Kim”).
In regards to claim 1, Osman discloses the following limitations with the exception of the underlined limitation.
A system for processing external communications in a video game, comprising ([0197], “the NCD ([0181], “network communication device (NCD)”) … applies the external communication protocol … sends … packets … to the … game engine system”): a computer processor configured to receive a communication from a source external to a video game ([0037], “Each server includes … processors”);
a computer memory configured to ([0037], “Each server includes … memory devices”) store the received communication ([0071], “positions … data … orientations … are stored … in the memory”);
a first artificial intelligence (AI) engine configured to process the received communication stored in the computer memory ([0045], “the virtual object or the virtual background are controlled by AI ([0036], “artificial intelligence (AI)”)”) to determine a manner and a timing for conveyance of the received communication ([0089], “user input … is received by the node … while or during a time period in which the node … is in a process of applying … its … prediction engine”) to a player of the video game who is currently playing the video game ([0036], “players access the video game”);
and a second AI engine configured to implement a non-player character within the video game through which the received communication is conveyed ([0036], “in the … game there can be non-playable characters … which are controlled by artificial intelligence (AI)”), the computer processor configured to direct conveyance of the received communication to the player of the video game by way of the non-player character in accordance with the manner and the timing as determined by the first AI engine.
Kim discloses
the computer processor configured to direct conveyance of the received communication to the player of the video game by way of the non-player character in accordance with the manner and the timing as determined by the first AI engine ([0009], “a video call providing device includes: a … processor configured to execute the computer readable instructions to receive a … signal between the video call providing device and an external communication device”).
Osman and Kim are considered analogous to the claimed invention because they are in the fields of distributed game engines and video call providers. Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the applicant’s invention for a system for processing external communications in a video game, comprising: a computer processor configured to receive a communication from a source external to a video game; a computer memory configured to store the received communication; a first artificial intelligence (AI) engine configured to process the received communication stored in the computer memory to determine a manner and a timing for conveyance of the received communication to a player of the video game who is currently playing the video game; and a second AI engine configured to implement a non-player character within the video game through which the received communication is conveyed, as disclosed by Osman, the computer processor configured to direct conveyance of the received communication to the player of the video game by way of the non-player character in accordance with the manner and the timing as determined by the first AI engine, as disclosed by Kim, to provide a video call providing device for a method, system, and/or a non-transitory computer readable medium storing a computer program. One skilled in the art would recognize and value the addition of a video call providing device for a method, system, and/or a non-transitory computer readable medium storing a computer program.
In regards to claim 2, Osman discloses
wherein the first AI engine is configured to determine a subject matter of the received communication ([0041], “Each AI engine AI1 through AIn ... is a portion of the distributed game engine system ... an engine ... is a software engine. The software engine is a library, software development kit ... to denote a block of functionality”).
In regards to claim 3, Osman discloses
wherein the first AI engine is configured to determine an urgency of the received communication based on the subject matter of the received communication ([0041], “Each AI engine AI1 through AIn ... is a portion of the distributed game engine system ... an engine ... is a software engine. The software engine is a library, software development kit ... to denote a block of functionality”).
In regards to claim 4, Osman discloses
wherein the second AI engine is configured to implement the non-player character based on the subject matter and the urgency of the received communication as determined by the first AI engine ([0036], “in the … game there can be non-playable characters (NPCs), which are controlled by artificial intelligence (AI)”).
In regards to claim 5, Osman discloses
wherein the non-player character is from a population of non-player characters normally present within a context of the video game ([0036], “in the multiplayer game there can be non-playable characters”).
In regards to claim 6, Osman discloses
wherein the non-player character is generated by the second AI engine ([0036], “in the multiplayer game there can be non-playable characters … which are controlled by artificial intelligence”).
In regards to claim 8, Osman discloses
wherein the first AI engine is configured to determine that the subject matter of the received communication is related to ([0045], “the virtual object or the virtual background are controlled by AI”) a real-world context, wherein the manner and the timing for conveyance of the received communication to the player of the video game is based on the real-world context ([0182], “Examples of the real-world environment include a room, a warehouse, a cubicle, and an enclosed space, etc.”).
In regards to claim 10, Osman discloses
wherein the first AI engine is configured to collectively process ([0045], “the virtual object or the virtual background are controlled by AI”) multiple received communications stored in the computer memory to identify redundant communications and generate a consolidated communication for conveyance to the player of the video game in lieu of the redundant communications ([0076], “user input … is stored by the internal communication device … in the memory”).
In regards to claim 12, Osman discloses the following limitations with the exception of the underlined limitation.
A method for processing external communications in a video game, comprising ([0197], “the NCD … applies the external communication protocol … sends … packets … to the … game engine system”): receiving a communication from a source external to a video game ([0037], “Each server includes … processors”);
processing the received communication through a first artificial intelligence (AI) engine ([0045], “the virtual object or the virtual background are controlled by AI ([0036], “artificial intelligence (AI)”)”) to determine a manner and a timing for conveyance of the received communication ([0089], “user input … is received by the node … while or during a time period in which the node … is in a process of applying … its … prediction engine”) to a player of the video game who is currently playing the video game ([0036], “players access the video game”);
executing a second AI engine to implement a non-player character within the video game for conveyance of the received communication ([0036], “in the … game there can be non-playable characters … which are controlled by artificial intelligence (AI)”), and conveying the received communication through the non-player character to the player of the video game in accordance with the manner and the timing as determined by the first AI engine.
Kim discloses
and conveying the received communication through the non-player character to the player of the video game in accordance with the manner and the timing as determined by the first AI engine ([0009], “a video call providing device includes: a … processor configured to execute the computer readable instructions to receive a … signal between the video call providing device and an external communication device”).
Osman and Kim are considered analogous to the claimed invention because they are in the fields of distributed game engines and video call providers. Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the applicant’s invention for a method for processing external communications in a video game, comprising: receiving a communication from a source external to a video game; processing the received communication through a first artificial intelligence (AI) engine to determine a manner and a timing for conveyance of the received communication to a player of the video game who is currently playing the video game;
executing a second AI engine to implement a non-player character within the video game for conveyance of the received communication, as disclosed by Osman, and conveying the received communication through the non-player character to the player of the video game in accordance with the manner and the timing as determined by the first AI engine, as disclosed by Kim, to provide a video call providing device for a method, system, and/or a non-transitory computer readable medium storing a computer program. One skilled in the art would recognize and value the addition of a video call providing device for a method, system, and/or a non-transitory computer readable medium storing a computer program.
In regards to claim 13, Osman discloses
further comprising: processing the received communication through the first AI engine to determine a subject matter of the received communication ([0041], “Each AI engine AI1 through AIn ... is a portion of the distributed game engine system ... an engine ... is a software engine. The software engine is a library, software development kit ... to denote a block of functionality”).
In regards to claim 14, Osman discloses
further comprising: processing the received communication through the first AI engine to determine an urgency of the received communication based on the subject matter of the received communication ([0041], “Each AI engine AI1 through AIn ... is a portion of the distributed game engine system ... an engine ... is a software engine. The software engine is a library, software development kit ... to denote a block of functionality”).
In regards to claim 15, Osman discloses
wherein the second AI engine implements the non-player character based on the subject matter and the urgency of the received communication as determined by the first AI engine ([0036], “in the … game there can be non-playable characters (NPCs), which are controlled by artificial intelligence (AI)”).
In regards to claim 16, Osman discloses
wherein the non-player character is from a population of non-player characters normally present within a context of the video game ([0036], “in the multiplayer game there can be non-playable characters”).
In regards to claim 17, Osman discloses
wherein the non-player character is generated by the second AI engine ([0036], “in the multiplayer game there can be non-playable characters … which are controlled by artificial intelligence”).
In regards to claim 19, Osman discloses
further comprising: executing the first AI engine to determine that the subject matter of the received communication is related to ([0045], “the virtual object or the virtual background are controlled by AI”) a real-world context, wherein the manner and the timing for conveyance of the received communication to the player of the video game is based on the real-world context ([0182], “Examples of the real-world environment include a room, a warehouse, a cubicle, and an enclosed space, etc.”).
In regards to claim 21, Osman discloses
further comprising: executing the first AI engine to collectively process ([0045], “the virtual object or the virtual background are controlled by AI”) multiple received communications to identify redundant communications and generate a consolidated communication for conveyance to the player of the video game in lieu of the redundant communications ([0076], “user input … is stored by the internal communication device … in the memory”).
Claims 7, 11, 18, and 22 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable under Osman in view of Kim and US 12643047 B2 (“Eatedali”).
In regards to claim 7, Osman does not disclose wherein the first AI engine is configured to process current game play state data of the video game to determine a relevancy level of the subject matter of the received communication to a current video game play context associated with the player of the video game, wherein the manner and the timing for conveyance of the received communication to the player of the video game is based on the relevancy level.
Eatedali discloses
wherein the first AI engine is configured to process current game play state data of the video game to determine a relevancy level of the subject matter of the received communication to a current video game play context associated with the player of the video game, wherein the manner and the timing for conveyance of the received communication to the player of the video game is based on the relevancy level (column 9, lines 64-67 and column 10, lines 1-3, “AI engine ... may be configured to associate ... game ... data, such as an amount of time a game is played, an amount of virtual resources earned, lost, or exchanged, a score, a time of completion, a number of levels achieved, or other metrics indicative of engagement, with a reaction time”).
Osman and Eatedali are considered analogous to the claimed invention because they are in the fields of distributed game engines and styling systems for non-player characters. Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the applicant’s invention for a system for processing external communications in a video game, comprising: a computer processor configured to receive a communication from a source external to a video game; a computer memory configured to store the received communication; a first artificial intelligence (AI) engine configured to process the received communication stored in the computer memory to determine a manner and a timing for conveyance of the received communication to a player of the video game who is currently playing the video game; and a second AI engine configured to implement a non-player character within the video game through which the received communication is conveyed, as disclosed by Osman, wherein the first AI engine is configured to process current game play state data of the video game to determine a relevancy level of the subject matter of the received communication to a current video game play context associated with the player of the video game, wherein the manner and the timing for conveyance of the received communication to the player of the video game is based on the relevancy level, as disclosed by Eatedali, to provide an AI engine for systems and methods for styling generic non-player characters in video games based on behavior and actions of real players. One skilled in the art would recognize and value the addition of an AI engine for systems and methods for styling generic non-player characters in video games based on behavior and actions of real players.
In regards to claim 11, Osman discloses the following limitation with the exception of the underlined limitation.
wherein the first AI engine is configured to determine a subject matter of the consolidated communication ([0045], “the virtual object or the virtual background are controlled by AI”), wherein the first AI engine is configured to process current game play state data of the video game to determine a relevancy level of the subject matter of the consolidated communication to a current video game play context associated with the player of the video game, wherein a manner and a timing for conveyance of the consolidated communication to the player of the video game is based on the relevancy level.
Eatedali discloses
wherein the first AI engine is configured to process current game play state data of the video game to determine a relevancy level of the subject matter of the consolidated communication to a current video game play context associated with the player of the video game, wherein a manner and a timing for conveyance of the consolidated communication to the player of the video game is based on the relevancy level (column 9, lines 64-67 and column 10, lines 1-3, “AI engine ... may be configured to associate ... game ... data, such as an amount of time a game is played, an amount of virtual resources earned, lost, or exchanged, a score, a time of completion, a number of levels achieved, or other metrics indicative of engagement, with a reaction time”).
Osman and Eatedali are considered analogous to the claimed invention because they are in the fields of distributed game engines and styling systems for non-player characters. Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the applicant’s invention for a system for processing external communications in a video game, comprising: a computer processor configured to receive a communication from a source external to a video game; a computer memory configured to store the received communication; a first artificial intelligence (AI) engine configured to process the received communication stored in the computer memory to determine a manner and a timing for conveyance of the received communication to a player of the video game who is currently playing the video game; and a second AI engine configured to implement a non-player character within the video game through which the received communication is conveyed, wherein the first AI engine is configured to collectively process multiple received communications stored in the computer memory to identify redundant communications and generate a consolidated communication for conveyance to the player of the video game in lieu of the redundant communications, wherein the first AI engine is configured to determine a subject matter of the consolidated communication, as disclosed by Osman, wherein the first AI engine is configured to process current game play state data of the video game to determine a relevancy level of the subject matter of the consolidated communication to a current video game play context associated with the player of the video game, wherein a manner and a timing for conveyance of the consolidated communication to the player of the video game is based on the relevancy level, as disclosed by Eatedali, to provide an AI engine for systems and methods for styling generic non-player characters in video games based on behavior and actions of real players. One skilled in the art would recognize and value the addition of an AI engine for systems and methods for styling generic non-player characters in video games based on behavior and actions of real players.
In regards to claim 18, Osman does not disclose further comprising: executing the first AI engine to process current game play state data of the video game to determine a relevancy level of the subject matter of the received communication to a current video game play context associated with the player of the video game, wherein the manner and the timing for conveyance of the received communication to the player of the video game is based on the relevancy level.
Eatedali discloses
further comprising: executing the first AI engine to process current game play state data of the video game to determine a relevancy level of the subject matter of the received communication to a current video game play context associated with the player of the video game, wherein the manner and the timing for conveyance of the received communication to the player of the video game is based on the relevancy level (column 9, lines 64-67 and column 10, lines 1-3, “AI engine ... may be configured to associate ... game ... data, such as an amount of time a game is played, an amount of virtual resources earned, lost, or exchanged, a score, a time of completion, a number of levels achieved, or other metrics indicative of engagement, with a reaction time”).
Osman and Eatedali are considered analogous to the claimed invention because they are in the fields of distributed game engines and styling systems for non-player characters. Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the applicant’s invention for a method for processing external communications in a video game, comprising: receiving a communication from a source external to a video game; processing the received communication through a first artificial intelligence (AI) engine to determine a manner and a timing for conveyance of the received communication to a player of the video game who is currently playing the video game; executing a second AI engine to implement a non-player character within the video game for conveyance of the received communication, as disclosed by Osman, further comprising: executing the first AI engine to process current game play state data of the video game to determine a relevancy level of the subject matter of the received communication to a current video game play context associated with the player of the video game, wherein the manner and the timing for conveyance of the received communication to the player of the video game is based on the relevancy level, as disclosed by Eatedali, to provide an AI engine for systems and methods for styling generic non-player characters in video games based on behavior and actions of real players. One skilled in the art would recognize and value the addition of an AI engine for systems and methods for styling generic non-player characters in video games based on behavior and actions of real players.
In regards to claim 22, Osman discloses the following limitation with the exception of the underlined limitation.
further comprising: executing the first AI engine to determine a subject matter of the consolidated communication ([0045], “the virtual object or the virtual background are controlled by AI”);
executing the first AI engine to process current game play state data of the video game to determine a relevancy level of the subject matter of the consolidated communication to a current video game play context associated with the player of the video game;
and executing the first AI engine to determine a manner and a timing for conveyance of the consolidated communication to the player of the video game based on the relevancy level.
Eatedali discloses
executing the first AI engine to process current game play state data of the video game to determine a relevancy level of the subject matter of the consolidated communication to a current video game play context associated with the player of the video game (column 9, lines 64-67 and column 10, lines 1-3, “AI engine ... may be configured to associate ... game ... data, such as an amount of time a game is played, an amount of virtual resources earned, lost, or exchanged, a score, a time of completion, a number of levels achieved, or other metrics indicative of engagement”);
and executing the first AI engine to determine a manner and a timing for conveyance of the consolidated communication to the player of the video game based on the relevancy level (column 9, lines 64-67 and column 10, lines 1-3, “AI engine ... may be configured to associate ... game ... data, such as an amount of time a game is played, an amount of virtual resources earned, lost, or exchanged, a score, a time of completion, a number of levels achieved, or other metrics indicative of engagement, with a reaction time”).
Osman and Eatedali are considered analogous to the claimed invention because they are in the fields of distributed game engines and styling systems for non-player characters. Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the applicant’s invention for a method for processing external communications in a video game, comprising: receiving a communication from a source external to a video game; processing the received communication through a first artificial intelligence (AI) engine to determine a manner and a timing for conveyance of the received communication to a player of the video game who is currently playing the video game; executing a second AI engine to implement a non-player character within the video game for conveyance of the received communication, further comprising: executing the first AI engine to determine a subject matter of the consolidated communication, as disclosed by Osman, further comprising: executing the first AI engine to process current game play state data of the video game to determine a relevancy level of the subject matter of the received communication to a current video game play context associated with the player of the video game, wherein the manner and the timing for conveyance of the received communication to the player of the video game is based on the relevancy level, executing the first AI engine to process current game play state data of the video game to determine a relevancy level of the subject matter of the consolidated communication to a current video game play context associated with the player of the video game; and executing the first AI engine to determine a manner and a timing for conveyance of the consolidated communication to the player of the video game based on the relevancy level, as disclosed by Eatedali, to provide an AI engine for systems and methods for styling generic non-player characters in video games based on behavior and actions of real players. One skilled in the art would recognize and value the addition of an AI engine for systems and methods for styling generic non-player characters in video games based on behavior and actions of real players.
Claims 9 and 20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable under Osman in view of Kim, Eatedali, and US 20080096533 A1 (“Manfredi”).
In regards to claim 9, Osman discloses the following limitation with the exception of the underlined limitations.
wherein the first AI engine is configured to determine ([0045], “the virtual object or the virtual background are controlled by AI”) one or more of a tone, an emotion, and an emphasis associated with the subject matter of the received communication, wherein the manner and the timing for conveyance of the received communication to the player of the video game is based on one or more of the tone, the emotion, and the emphasis associated with the subject matter of the received communication.
Manfredi discloses
one or more of a tone, an emotion ([0082], “the Right Brain engine is able to directly act … on words to be used, on tone of voice or on expressions to be used to communicate emotions”), and an emphasis associated with the subject matter of the received communication, wherein the manner and the timing for conveyance of the received communication to the player of the video game is based on one or more of the tone, the emotion, and the emphasis associated with the subject matter of the received communication ([0175], “it is important … to create … symbols that do not belong to a user's cultural skill but that might be proposed to a user to help him giving an emotional emphasis to concepts expressed.”).
Osman and Manfredi are considered analogous to the claimed invention because they are in the fields of distributed game engines and emotion-detecting virtual assistants. Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the applicant’s invention for a system for processing external communications in a video game, comprising: a computer processor configured to receive a communication from a source external to a video game; a computer memory configured to store the received communication; a first artificial intelligence (AI) engine configured to process the received communication stored in the computer memory to determine a manner and a timing for conveyance of the received communication to a player of the video game who is currently playing the video game; and a second AI engine configured to implement a non-player character within the video game through which the received communication is conveyed, wherein the first AI engine is configured to determine, as disclosed by Osman, one or more of a tone, an emotion, and an emphasis associated with the subject matter of the received communication, wherein the manner and the timing for conveyance of the received communication to the player of the video game is based on one or more of the tone, the emotion, and the emphasis associated with the subject matter of the received communication, as disclosed by Manfredi, to provide a right brain engine and symbols for virtual assistants that respond to detected user emotion. One skilled in the art would recognize and value the addition of a right brain engine and symbols for virtual assistants that respond to detected user emotion.
In regards to claim 20, Osman discloses the following limitation with the exception of the underlined limitations.
further comprising: executing the first AI engine is configured to determine ([0045], “the virtual object or the virtual background are controlled by AI”) one or more of a tone, an emotion, and an emphasis associated with the subject matter of the received communication, wherein the manner and the timing for conveyance of the received communication to the player of the video game is based on one or more of the tone, the emotion, and the emphasis associated with the subject matter of the received communication.
Manfredi discloses
one or more of a tone, an emotion ([0082], “the Right Brain engine is able to directly act … on words to be used, on tone of voice or on expressions to be used to communicate emotions”), and an emphasis associated with the subject matter of the received communication, wherein the manner and the timing for conveyance of the received communication to the player of the video game is based on one or more of the tone, the emotion, and the emphasis associated with the subject matter of the received communication ([0175], “it is important … to create … symbols that do not belong to a user's cultural skill but that might be proposed to a user to help him giving an emotional emphasis to concepts expressed.”).
Osman and Manfredi are considered analogous to the claimed invention because they are in the fields of distributed game engines and emotion-detecting virtual assistants. Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the applicant’s invention for a method for processing external communications in a video game, comprising: receiving a communication from a source external to a video game; processing the received communication through a first artificial intelligence (AI) engine to determine a manner and a timing for conveyance of the received communication to a player of the video game who is currently playing the video game; executing a second AI engine to implement a non-player character within the video game for conveyance of the received communication, further comprising: processing the received communication through the first AI engine to determine a subject matter of the received communication, as disclosed by Osman, one or more of a tone, an emotion, and an emphasis associated with the subject matter of the received communication, wherein the manner and the timing for conveyance of the received communication to the player of the video game is based on one or more of the tone, the emotion, and the emphasis associated with the subject matter of the received communication, as disclosed by Manfredi, to provide a right brain engine and symbols for virtual assistants that respond to detected user emotion. One skilled in the art would recognize and value the addition of a right brain engine and symbols for virtual assistants that respond to detected user emotion.
Contact Information
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the
examiner should be directed to Lisa Antoine whose telephone number is
(571) 272-4252 and whose email address is lantoine@uspto.gov. The examiner can be reached Monday-Thursday, 7:30 am-5:30 pm CT. 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, Xuan Thai, can be reached on (571) 272-7147. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is (571) 273-8300.
Publication Information
Information regarding the status of published or unpublished applications may be
obtained from the Patent Center. Unpublished application information in the Patent
Center is available to registered users. To file and manage patent submissions in the
Patent Center, visit: https://patentcenter.uspto.gov. Visit
https://www.uspto.gov/patents/apply/patent-center for more information about the
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.
/LISA H ANTOINE/
Examiner, Art Unit 3715
Prosecution Insights