CTNF 18/919,375 CTNF 81870 DETAILED ACTION Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status 07-03-aia AIA 15-10-aia The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA. Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103 07-06 AIA 15-10-15 In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis (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. 07-20-aia AIA The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 103 which forms the basis for all obviousness rejections set forth in this Office action: A patent for a claimed invention may not be obtained, notwithstanding that the claimed invention is not identically disclosed as set forth in section 102, if the differences between the claimed invention and the prior art are such that the claimed invention as a whole would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which the claimed invention pertains. Patentability shall not be negated by the manner in which the invention was made. 07-21-aia AIA Claim (s) 1-6, 10-14 and 16-20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Giraldi et al. (PGPUB Document No. US 2017/0061694) in view of Vaught et al. (PGPUB Document No. US 2013/0187835) in view of Gao et al. (PGPUB Document No. US 2017/0061694) . Regarding claim 1 , Giraldi teaches a method comprising: At a first device including non-transitory memory (Giraldi: 0076), one or more processors (Giraldi: 0074), a display (Giraldi: 0013), and one or more input devices (Giraldi: 0022): Detecting that video content is playing on a second device , wherein the video content includes a plurality of portions (views a baseball game visually presented via a mobile display device (“second device”) 308D (Giraldi: 0036). The Examiner submits the video content such as the baseball game comprise of a plurality of portions); Obtaining, at the first device via the one or more input devices, a user input indicating a request associated with a current portion of the video content (the components that enables the voice command and gaze detection for initiating the virtual drag and drop operation of the video content (Giraldi: 0037-0038), wherein the virtual drag and drop is done at the wear 302 (“first device”). Note, the request is the user’s desire to watch the video content on a different display device (Giraldi: 0037)); In response to receiving the user input, obtaining from the second device associated with the current portion of the video content (the selection of the video content is indicated by the virtual representation 316 (Giraldi: 0042); Causing presentation of, via the display, the one or more missions or tasks associated with the current portion of the video content within the video content (the user selected video content being displayed in AR space as virtual representation 316 or at the target display 308B (Giraldi: FIG.3C, FIG.3D, 0042, 0044). However, Giraldi does not expressly teach but Vaught teaches, A corresponding plurality of synthesized reality (SR) content associated with the plurality of portions (Vaught teaches the concept of obtaining and displaying information associated with the video content (Vaught: 0022, FIG.6)) Causing presentation of, via the display, the SR content (refer to the display information 504 shown in FIG.6 of Vaught). Therefore, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, it would have been obvious to one of an ordinary skill in the art to modify the teaching of Giraldi such as to display information in the manner taught by Vaught, because this enables an effective way of providing useful information to the user. The combined teachings of Giraldi and Vaught now teaches displaying SR content at the mobile device of Giraldi. However, neither Giraldi or Vaught teach how the SR content at the mobile device is transferred at the target device. Before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, there had been a recognized problem or need in the art to determine how to display SR content when it is being virtually dragged from one device screen to another. There were a finite number of identified and predictable potential solutions to the recognized need or problem were, 1) store SR content together with the virtual representation 316 as the virtual representation is being dragged to another display (requires “obtaining from the second device SR content” as presently claimed) 2) SR content re-generated once the virtual representation has migrated to the other display (SR content is not required to be obtained with the virtual representation when being dragged). One of ordinary skill in the art could have pursued the known potential solutions with a reasonable expectation of success since all solutions provide the ability for effectively display SR content at any destination display device. Therefore, the claimed subject matter would have been obvious to a person living ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention. And further, the combined teachings above do not expressly teach but Gao teaches further obtaining one or more missions or tasks (Gao teaches the concept of generating a task based on an email (Gao: 0033, FIG.3). Applying the teachings to the combined teachings above, enables providing tasks when the user is gazing a selected email message (Vaught: 0018, FIG.2)), Concurrently causing presentation of, via the display, the SR content and the one or more missions or tasks (the combined teachings enable the display SR content ( email list 206 of Vaught) and missions or tasks (task of Gao)). Therefore, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, it would have been obvious to one of an ordinary skill in the art to modify the combined teachings above such as to utilize the task generation teaching of Gao, because this enables the display of additional information useful to the user. Regarding claim 2 , the combined teachings teach the method of claim 1, further comprising: causing presentation of, via the display, an indication of the one or more missions or tasks associated with the current portion of the video content (context information 320 displayed in FIG.3 of Gao corresponds to an indication). Regarding claim 3 , the combined teachings teach the method of claim 1, wherein the SR content is obtained from a library associated with the video content (the Applicant’s Specification defines a remote server…or the like as an example of a library. Therefore, the Examiner submits that the context (used for generating the SR content) of the email of Gao stored on a server corresponds to the “library” as presently claimed.). Regarding claim 4 , the combined teachings teach the method of claim 1, wherein the SR content is generated on-the-fly based at least in part on the current portion of the video content (the task is triggered by the original message/email (Gao: 0031). Note the claim does clarify whether the SR content (task message of Gao) being generated on-the-fly when the system reads/identifies the content, or when the user is viewing/identifying the content)). Regarding claim 5 , the combined teachings teach the method of claim 1, wherein the SR content continues concurrently while causing presentation of the SR content (as stated in the rejection above, displaying information 504 while the user is viewing the content on the television (Vaught: 0022) corresponds to the limitations of claim 5). Regarding claim 6 , the combined teachings teach the method of claim 5, wherein the SR content is paused in response to the user breaching a first threshold region associated with the SR content (stopping the visual content upon a user command or hand gesture (Giraldi: 0037, 0040). The condition for recognizing the user command or hand gesture corresponds to the threshold as presently claimed). Regarding claim 10 , the combined teachings teach the method of claim 1, further comprising, transitioning back to playing the video content on the second device (Giraldi teaches switching between display devices (Giraldi: 0040, claim 11)). Claim(s) 11, 12, 13, 14 and 16 are corresponding device claim(s) of claim(s) 1, 2, 3, 4 and 10. The limitations of claim(s) 11, 12, 13, 14 and 16 are substantially similar to the limitations of claim(s) 1, 2, 3, 4 and 10. Therefore, it has been analyzed and rejected substantially similar to claim(s) 11, 12, 13, 14 and 16. Note, the combined teachings teach a device comprising one or more processors (Giraldi: 0074), non-transitory memory (Giraldi: 0076) and display (Giraldi: 0013) Claim(s) 17, 18, 19 and 20 are corresponding non-transitory memory claim(s) of claim(s) 1, 2, 3 and 4. The limitations of claim(s) 17, 18, 19 and 20 are substantially similar to the limitations of claim(s) 1, 2, 3 and 4. Therefore, it has been analyzed and rejected substantially similar to claim(s) 17, 18, 19 and 20 . 07-21-aia AIA Claim (s) 7 and 8 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Giraldi in view of Vaught in view of Gao as applied to the claim(s) above, and further in view of DeLuca et al. (PGPUB Document No. US 2019/0180483) . Regarding claim 7 , the combined teachings above do not expressly teach but DeLuca teaches the method of claim 1, wherein the SR content is paused while causing presentation of the SR content (DeLuca teaches the concept of toggling on and of virtual overlays (DeLuca: 0077). Applying the teachings of DeLuca to the combined teachings above enables toggling on and off the SR content). Therefore, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, it would have been obvious to one of an ordinary skill in the art to modify the combined teachings above such as to enable toggling of SR content as suggested by DeLuca, because this enables an added level of user customization over information that is to be displayed. Regarding claim 8 , the combined teachings above do not expressly teach but DeLuca teaches the method of claim 1, further comprising: while presenting the SR content and in response to receiving a particular command from the user, ceasing to present the SR content (DeLuca teaches the concept of toggling on and of virtual overlays (DeLuca: 0077). Applying the teachings of DeLuca to the combined teachings above enables toggling on and off the SR content) and continuing causing presentation of the current portion of the video content (stopping the visual content upon a user command or hand gesture (Giraldi: 0037, 0040)). Therefore, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, it would have been obvious to one of an ordinary skill in the art to modify the combined teachings above such as to enable toggling of SR content as suggested by DeLuca, because this enables an added level of user customization over information that is to be displayed . 07-21-aia AIA Claim (s) 9 and 15 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Giraldi in view of Vaught in view of Gao as applied to the claim(s) above, and further in view of Nasi et al. (PGPUB Document No. US 2019/0080514) . Regarding claim 9 , the combined teachings above do not expressly teach but Nasi teaches the method of claim 1, further comprising: while causing presentation of the current portion of the video content, causing presentation, via the display, of an affordance indicating availability of the SR content associated with the current portion of the video content, wherein the user input corresponds to selection of the affordance (Nasi teaches the concept of displaying an overlay 130 that indicates content is available (Nasi: 0018, FIG.1B), wherein taping the overlay presents the content (Nasi: 0021, FIG.1C)). Therefore, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, it would have been obvious to one of an ordinary skill in the art to modify the combined teachings above such as to modify the combined teachings above such as to provide content availability in the manner taught by Nasi, because this enables an effective method of presenting information to the user. Claim 15 is similar in scope to claim 9. The rejection to claim 9 similarly applies to claim 15. Conclusion Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to David H Chu whose telephone number is (571)272-8079. The examiner can normally be reached M-F: 9:30 - 1:30pm, 3:30-8:30pm. 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, Daniel F Hajnik can be reached at (571) 272-7642. 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. /DAVID H CHU/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2616 Application/Control Number: 18/919,375 Page 2 Art Unit: 2616 Application/Control Number: 18/919,375 Page 3 Art Unit: 2616 Application/Control Number: 18/919,375 Page 4 Art Unit: 2616
Prosecution Insights