DETAILED ACTION
Continued Examination Under 37 CFR 1.114
A request for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, including the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e), was filed in this application after final rejection. Since this application is eligible for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114. Applicant's submission filed on XXXXXXXXXXXXXX has been entered.
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 .
Status of Claims
Claims X are canceled.
Claims X are amended.
Claims X are new.
Claims 1-20 are pending and have been examined.
This action is in reply to the papers filed on 11/16/2024 (effective filing date 11/19/2018).
Information Disclosure Statement
No Information Disclosure Statement has been filed.
The information disclosure statement(s) submitted: xxxxxxxx, has/have been considered by the Examiner and made of record in the application file.
Amendment
The present Office Action is based upon the original patent application filed on xxx as modified by the amendment filed on xxx.
Terminal Disclaimer
The terminal disclaimer filed on xxx disclaiming the terminal portion of any patent granted on this application which would extend beyond the expiration date of US Pat. No. xxxx has been reviewed and has been placed in the file.
Examiner acknowledges Applicant’s filed Terminal Disclaimer to prior art patent McCauley et al. US Pat. No. 5,930,775. A terminal disclaimer may be filed to overcome or obviate a nonstatutory double patenting rejection (37 CFR 1.321; MPEP 706.02; 1490).
Double Patenting - Withdrawn
The double patenting rejection is withdrawn per the filed terminal disclaimer noted above.
Reasons For Allowance
Prior-Art Rejection withdrawn
Claims xxx are allowed. The closest prior art (See PTO-892, Notice of References Cited) does not teach the claimed:
The invention teaches… and the prior-art teaches…, however, the prior-art does not teach…
The closest prior-art (xxx) teach the features as disclosed in Non-final Rejection (xxxx), however, these cited references do not teach and the prior-art does not teach at least the following combination of features and/or elements:
determining, at a second time after associating the information corresponding to the first loyalty card with the logged location, that a second user computing device is located within a specified distance of the logged location using a second positioning system of the second user computing device; in response to determining that the second user computing device is located within the specified distance of the logged location of the first user computing device at the first time of detecting: retrieving information corresponding to a second loyalty card, the second loyalty card being associated with the merchant and the second user computing device; and displaying, by the second user computing device, data describing the second loyalty card.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC §101 - Withdrawn
Per Applicant’s amendments and arguments and considering new guidance in the MPEP, the rejections are withdrawn. Specifically, in Applicant’s Remarks (dated 03/14/2017, pgs. 8-11), Applicant traverses the 35 USC §101 rejections arguing that the amended claims recite new limitations that are not abstract, amount to significantly more, are directed to a practical application, etc… For example, Applicant argues….
In support of their arguments, Applicant cites to the following recent Fed. Cir. court cases (i.e., Alice Corp. v. CLS Bank Int’l, SRI Int’l, Inc. v. Cisco Systems, Inc., Ultramercial, Inc. v. Hulu, LLC, Berkheimer, Core Wireless, McRO, Enfish, Bascom, DDR, etc…).
Double Patenting
The nonstatutory double patenting rejection is based on a judicially created doctrine grounded in public policy (a policy reflected in the statute) so as to prevent the unjustified or improper timewise extension of the “right to exclude” granted by a patent and to prevent possible harassment by multiple assignees. A nonstatutory double patenting rejection is appropriate where the conflicting claims are not identical, but at least one examined application claim is not patentably distinct from the reference claim(s) because the examined application claim is either anticipated by, or would have been obvious over, the reference claim(s). See, e.g., In re Berg, 140 F.3d 1428, 46 USPQ2d 1226 (Fed. Cir. 1998); In re Goodman, 11 F.3d 1046, 29 USPQ2d 2010 (Fed. Cir. 1993); In re Longi, 759 F.2d 887, 225 USPQ 645 (Fed. Cir. 1985); In re Van Ornum, 686 F.2d 937, 214 USPQ 761 (CCPA 1982); In re Vogel, 422 F.2d 438, 164 USPQ 619 (CCPA 1970); In re Thorington, 418 F.2d 528, 163 USPQ 644 (CCPA 1969).
A timely filed terminal disclaimer in compliance with 37 CFR 1.321(c) or 1.321(d) may be used to overcome an actual or provisional rejection based on nonstatutory double patenting provided the reference application or patent either is shown to be commonly owned with the examined application, or claims an invention made as a result of activities undertaken within the scope of a joint research agreement. See MPEP § 717.02 for applications subject to examination under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA as explained in MPEP § 2159. See MPEP § 2146 et seq. for applications not subject to examination under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA . A terminal disclaimer must be signed in compliance with 37 CFR 1.321(b).
The USPTO Internet website contains terminal disclaimer forms which may be used. Please visit www.uspto.gov/patent/patents-forms. The filing date of the application in which the form is filed determines what form (e.g., PTO/SB/25, PTO/SB/26, PTO/AIA /25, or PTO/AIA /26) should be used. A web-based eTerminal Disclaimer may be filled out completely online using web-screens. An eTerminal Disclaimer that meets all requirements is auto-processed and approved immediately upon submission. For more information about eTerminal Disclaimers, refer to www.uspto.gov/patents/process/file/efs/guidance/eTD-info-I.jsp.
Claims 1-20 are rejected on the ground of anticipatory-nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claims 1-20 of U.S. Patent No. 12/175,385.
18/950,016 – Claim 1. A method for adaptively generating a virtual reality experience, the method comprising:
US 12/175,385 – Claim 1. A method for adaptively generating a virtual reality experience, the method comprising:
18/950,016 – Claim 1. selecting, by a media server, a subset of a plurality of digital assets for inclusion in a virtual reality experience displayed at a media processing device of a target user based on respective scores of the plurality of digital assets, each score representing a predicted change in numerical mood responses occurring in one or more other users having user data that is classified with user data of the target user;
US 12/175,385 – Claim 1. selecting, by a media server, a subset of a plurality of digital assets for inclusion in a virtual reality experience displayed at a media processing device of a target user based on respective scores of the plurality of digital assets, each score representing a predicted change in numerical mood responses occurring in one or more other users having user data that is classified with user data of the target user;
18/950,016 – Claim 1. generating, by the media server, the virtual reality experience that includes the selected subset of the plurality of digital assets for display at the media processing device;
US 12/175,385 – Claim 1. generating, by the media server, the virtual reality experience that includes the selected subset of the plurality of digital assets for display at the media processing device;
18/950,016 – Claim 1. obtaining, by the media server, response data from the target user via the media processing device associated with the virtual reality experience, the response data indicative of the change in mood of the target user;
US 12/175,385 – Claim 1. obtaining, by the media server, response data from the target user via the media processing device associated with the virtual reality experience, wherein obtaining the response data comprises:
18/950,016 – Claim 1. updating, by the media server, the scores associated with the subset of the plurality of digital assets for the one or more other users based on the response data from the target user;
US 12/175,385 – Claim 1. updating, by the media server, the scores associated with the subset of the plurality of digital assets for the one or more other users based on the response data from the target user;
18/950,016 – Claim 1. updating, by the media server, the virtual reality experience using the updated scores of the subset of the plurality of digital assets; and
US 12/175,385 – Claim 1. updating, by the media server, the virtual reality experience using the updated scores of the subset of the plurality of digital assets; and
18/950,016 – Claim 1. causing, by the media server, the updated virtual reality experience to be displayed at the media processing device.
US 12/175,385 – Claim 1. causing, by the media server, the updated virtual reality experience to be displayed at the media processing device.
18/950,016 – Claim 2. The method of claim 1, wherein selecting the subset of the plurality of digital assets comprises: identifying user-specified digital assets stored in association with user profile data associated with the target user; and determining the subset of the plurality of digital assets for inclusion in the virtual reality experience based on identifying the user-specified digital assets.
US 12/175,385 – Claim 2. The method of claim 1, wherein selecting the subset of the plurality of digital assets comprises: identifying user-specified digital assets stored in association with user profile data associated with the target user; and determining the subset of the plurality of digital assets for inclusion in the virtual reality experience based on identifying the user-specified digital assets.
18/950,016 – Claim 3. The method of claim 1, wherein selecting the subset of the plurality of digital assets comprises: weighting, using the respective scores of the plurality of digital assets, likelihoods of selecting the plurality of digital assets; and performing a weighted random selection of the plurality of digital assets to obtain the subset of the plurality of digital assets.
US 12/175,385 – Claim 3. The method of claim 1, wherein selecting the subset of the plurality of digital assets comprises: weighting, using the respective scores of the plurality of digital assets, likelihoods of selecting the plurality of digital assets; and performing a weighted random selection of the plurality of digital assets to obtain the subset of the plurality of digital assets.
18/950,016 – Claim 4. The method of claim 1, wherein obtaining the response data from the target user comprises: obtaining biometric data from the target user during the virtual reality experience; and detecting a change in mood based on the biometric data.
US 12/175,385 – Claim 1. obtaining biometric data from the target user during the virtual reality experience, and detecting a change in mood based on the biometric data, the response data indicative of the change in mood of the target user;
18/950,016 – Claim 5. The method of claim 1, wherein obtaining the response data from the target user further comprises: obtaining survey data from the target user before and after the virtual reality experience; and detecting the change in mood further based on the survey data.
US 12/175,385 – Claim 4. The method of claim 1, wherein obtaining the response data from the target user further comprises: obtaining survey data from the target user before and after the virtual reality experience; and detecting the change in mood further based on the survey data.
18/950,016 – Claim 6. The method of claim 1, further comprising: updating the user data of the target user based on the response data.
US 12/175,385 – Claim 5. The method of claim 1, further comprising: updating the user data of the target user based on the response data.
18/950,016 – Claim 7. The method of claim 1, wherein the plurality of digital assets includes at least one of a graphical asset, an audio asset, and a color palette.
US 12/175,385 – Claim 6. The method of claim 1, wherein the plurality of digital assets includes at least one of a graphical asset, an audio asset, and a color palette.
18/950,016 – Claim 8. The method of claim 1, wherein the media processing device comprises a head-mounted display.
US 12/175,385 – Claim 7. The method of claim 1, wherein the media processing device comprises a head-mounted display.
18/950,016 – Claim 9. A non-transitory computer-readable storage medium storing instructions for adaptively generating a virtual reality experience, the instructions when executed by at least one processor cause the at least one processor to:
US 12/175,385 – Claim 8. A non-transitory computer-readable storage medium storing instructions for adaptively generating a virtual reality experience, the instructions when executed by at least one processor cause the at least one processor to:
18/950,016 – Claim 9. select a subset of a plurality of digital assets for inclusion in a virtual reality experience displayed at a media processing device of a target user based on respective scores of the plurality of digital assets, each score representing a predicted change in numerical mood responses occurring in one or more other users having user data that is classified with user data of the target user;
US 12/175,385 – Claim 8. select a subset of a plurality of digital assets for inclusion in a virtual reality experience displayed at a media processing device of a target user based on respective scores of the plurality of digital assets, each score representing a predicted change in numerical mood responses occurring in one or more other users having user data that is classified with user data of the target user;
18/950,016 – Claim 9. generate the virtual reality experience that includes the selected subset of the plurality of digital assets for display at the media processing device;
US 12/175,385 – Claim 8. generate the virtual reality experience that includes the selected subset of the plurality of digital assets for display at the media processing device;
18/950,016 – Claim 9. obtain response data from the target user via the media processing device associated with the virtual reality experience, the response data indicative of the change in mood of the target user;
US 12/175,385 – Claim 8. obtain response data from the target user via the media processing device associated with the virtual reality experience, wherein the instructions that cause the at least one processor to obtain the response data comprise instructions that cause the at least one processor to:
18/950,016 – Claim 9. update the scores associated with the subset of the plurality of digital assets for the one or more other users based on the response data from the target user;
US 12/175,385 – Claim 8. update the scores associated with the subset of the plurality of digital assets for the one or more other users based on the response data from the target user;
18/950,016 – Claim 9. update the virtual reality experience using the updated scores of the subset of the plurality of digital assets; and
US 12/175,385 – Claim 8. update the virtual reality experience using the updated scores of the subset of the plurality of digital assets; and
18/950,016 – Claim 9. cause the updated virtual reality experience to be displayed at the media processing device.
US 12/175,385 – Claim 8. cause the updated virtual reality experience to be displayed at the media processing device.
18/950,016 – Claim 10. The non-transitory computer-readable storage medium of claim 9, wherein the instructions that cause the at least one processor to select the subset of the plurality of digital assets comprises instructions that cause the at least one processor to: identify user-specified digital assets stored in association with user profile data associated with the target user; and determine the subset of the plurality of digital assets for inclusion in the virtual reality experience based on identifying the user-specified digital assets.
US 12/175,385 – Claim 9. The non-transitory computer-readable storage medium of claim 8, wherein the instructions that cause the at least one processor to select the subset of the plurality of digital assets comprises instructions that cause the at least one processor to: identify user-specified digital assets stored in association with user profile data associated with the target user; and determine the subset of the plurality of digital assets for inclusion in the virtual reality experience based on identifying the user-specified digital assets.
18/950,016 – Claim 11. The non-transitory computer-readable storage medium of claim 9, wherein the instructions that cause the at least one processor to select the subset of the plurality of digital assets comprises instructions that cause the at least one processor to: weight, using the respective scores of the plurality of digital assets, likelihoods of selecting the plurality of digital assets; and perform a weighted random selection of the plurality of digital assets to obtain the subset of the plurality of digital assets.
US 12/175,385 – Claim 10. The non-transitory computer-readable storage medium of claim 8, wherein the instructions that cause the at least one processor to select the subset of the plurality of digital assets comprises instructions that cause the at least one processor to: weight, using the respective scores of the plurality of digital assets, likelihoods of selecting the plurality of digital assets; and perform a weighted random selection of the plurality of digital assets to obtain the subset of the plurality of digital assets.
18/950,016 – Claim 12. The non-transitory computer-readable storage medium of claim 9, wherein the instructions that cause the at least one processor to obtain the response data from the target user comprises instructions that cause the at least one processor to: obtain biometric data from the target user during the virtual reality experience; and detect a change in mood based on the biometric data.
US 12/175,385 – Claim 8. obtain biometric data from the target user during the virtual reality experience, and detect the change in mood based on the biometric data, the response data indicative of the change in mood of the target user;
18/950,016 – Claim 13. The non-transitory computer-readable storage medium of claim 9, wherein the instructions that cause the at least one processor to obtain the response data from the target user further comprises instructions that cause the at least one processor to: obtain survey data from the target user before and after the virtual reality experience; and detect the change in mood further based on the survey data.
US 12/175,385 – Claim 11. The non-transitory computer-readable storage medium of claim 8, wherein the instructions that cause the at least one processor to obtain the response data from the target user further comprises instructions that cause the at least one processor to: obtain survey data from the target user before and after the virtual reality experience; and detect the change in mood further based on the survey data.
18/950,016 – Claim 14. The non-transitory computer-readable storage medium of claim 9, wherein the instructions further comprise instructions that cause the at least one processor to: update the user data of the target user based on the response data.
US 12/175,385 – Claim 12. The non-transitory computer-readable storage medium of claim 8, wherein the instructions further comprise instructions that cause the at least one processor to: update the user data of the target user based on the response data.
18/950,016 – Claim 15. The non-transitory computer-readable storage medium of claim 9, wherein the plurality of digital assets includes at least one of a graphical asset, an audio asset, and a color palette.
US 12/175,385 – Claim 13. The non-transitory computer-readable storage medium of claim 8, wherein the plurality of digital assets includes at least one of a graphical asset, an audio asset, and a color palette.
18/950,016 – Claim 16. A method for adaptively generating a virtual reality experience, the method comprising:
US 12/175,385 – Claim 14. A method for adaptively generating a virtual reality experience, the method comprising:
18/950,016 – Claim 16. selecting, by a media processing device of a target user, a first subset of a plurality of digital assets for inclusion in a virtual reality experience displayed at the media processing device based on respective scores of the plurality of digital assets, each score representing a predicted change in numerical mood responses occurring in one or more other users having user data that is classified with user data of the target user;
US 12/175,385 – Claim 14. selecting, by a media processing device of a target user, a first subset of a plurality of digital assets for inclusion in a virtual reality experience displayed at the media processing device based on respective scores of the plurality of digital assets, each score representing a predicted change in numerical mood responses occurring in one or more other users having user data that is classified with user data of the target user;
18/950,016 – Claim 16. displaying, by the media processing device, the virtual reality experience that includes the first subset of the plurality of digital assets;
US 12/175,385 – Claim 14. displaying, by the media processing device, the virtual reality experience that includes the first subset of the plurality of digital assets;
18/950,016 – Claim 16. obtaining, by the media processing device, response data from the target user, the response data indicative of the change in mood of the target user;
US 12/175,385 – Claim 14. obtaining, by the media processing device, response data from the target user, wherein obtaining the response data comprises:
/950,016 – Claim 16. updating, by the media processing device, the scores associated with the subset of the plurality of digital assets for the one or more other users based on the response data from the target user;
US 12/175,385 – Claim 14. updating, by the media processing device, the scores associated with the subset of the plurality of digital assets for the one or more other users based on the response data from the target user;
18/950,016 – Claim 16. selecting, by the media processing device, a second subset of the plurality of digital assets based on the updated scores for the first subset of the plurality of digital assets; and
US 12/175,385 – Claim 14. selecting, by the media processing device, a second subset of the plurality of digital assets based on the updated scores for the first subset of the plurality of digital assets; and
18/950,016 – Claim 16. displaying, by the media processing device, an updated virtual reality experience comprising the second subset of the plurality of digital assets.
US 12/175,385 – Claim 14. displaying, by the media processing device, an updated virtual reality experience comprising the second subset of the plurality of digital assets.
18/950,016 – Claim 17. The method of claim 16, wherein selecting the first subset of the plurality of digital assets comprises: identifying user-specified digital assets stored in association with user profile data associated with the target user; and determining the subset of the plurality of digital assets for inclusion in the virtual reality experience based on identifying the user-specified digital assets.
US 12/175,385 – Claim 15. The method of claim 14, wherein selecting the first subset of the plurality of digital assets comprises: identifying user-specified digital assets stored in association with user profile data associated with the target user; and determining the subset of the plurality of digital assets for inclusion in the virtual reality experience based on identifying the user-specified digital assets.
18/950,016 – Claim 18. The method of claim 16, wherein selecting the first subset of the plurality of digital assets comprises: weighting, using the respective scores of the plurality of digital assets, likelihoods of selecting the plurality of digital assets; and performing a weighted random selection of the plurality of digital assets to obtain the first subset of the plurality of digital assets.
US 12/175,385 – Claim 16. The method of claim 14, wherein selecting the first subset of the plurality of digital assets comprises: weighting, using the respective scores of the plurality of digital assets, likelihoods of selecting the plurality of digital assets; and performing a weighted random selection of the plurality of digital assets to obtain the first subset of the plurality of digital assets.
18/950,016 – Claim 19. The method of claim 16, wherein obtaining the response data from the target user comprises: obtaining biometric data from the target user during the virtual reality experience; and detecting a change in mood based on the biometric data.
US 12/175,385 – Claim 14. obtaining biometric data from the target user during the virtual reality experience, and detecting the change in mood based on the biometric data, the response data indicative of the change in mood of the target user;
18/950,016 – Claim 20. The method of claim 16, wherein the media processing device comprises a head-mounted display.
US 12/175,385 – Claim 17. The method of claim 14, wherein the media processing device comprises a head-mounted display.
The remaining independent claims contain feature similar to that of claim 1 and are rejected accordingly. The dependent claims are further rejected for their dependency upon a rejected independent base claim.
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 1-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 101 as being directed to non-statutory subject matter because the claimed invention is directed to an abstract idea without significantly more. These claims recite a method and computer readable medium for adapting a virtual reality experience for a user based on a mood improvement score.
Claim 1 recites [a] method for adaptively generating a virtual reality experience, the method comprising: selecting, by a media server, a subset of a plurality of digital assets for inclusion in a virtual reality experience displayed at a media processing device of a target user based on respective scores of the plurality of digital assets, each score representing a predicted change in numerical mood responses occurring in one or more other users having user data that is classified with user data of the target user; generating, by the media server, the virtual reality experience that includes the selected subset of the plurality of digital assets for display at the media processing device; obtaining, by the media server, response data from the target user via the media processing device associated with the virtual reality experience, the response data indicative of the change in mood of the target user; updating, by the media server, the scores associated with the subset of the plurality of digital assets for the one or more other users based on the response data from the target user; updating, by the media server, the virtual reality experience using the updated scores of the subset of the plurality of digital assets; and causing, by the media server, the updated virtual reality experience to be displayed at the media processing device.
The claims are being rejected according to the 2019 Revised Patent Subject Matter Eligibility Guidance (Federal Register, Vol. 84, No. 5, p. 50-57 (Jan. 7, 2019)).
Step 1: Does the Claim Fall within a Statutory Category?
Yes. Claims 1-8 and 16-20 recite a method and, therefore, are directed to the statutory class of a process. Claims 9-15 recite a non-transitory computer readable medium/computer product and, therefore, are directed to the statutory class of a manufacture.
Step 2A, Prong One: Is a Judicial Exception Recited?
Yes. The following tables identify the specific limitations that recite an abstract idea. The column that identifies the additional elements will be relevant to the analysis in step 2A, prong two, and step 2B.
Claim 1: Identification of Abstract Idea and Additional Elements, using Broadest Reasonable Interpretation
Claim Limitation
Abstract Idea
Additional Element
1. A method for adaptively generating a virtual reality experience, the method comprising:
No additional elements are positively claimed.
selecting, by a media server, a subset of a plurality of digital assets for inclusion in a virtual reality experience displayed at a media processing device of a target user based on respective scores of the plurality of digital assets, each score representing a predicted change in numerical mood responses occurring in one or more other users having user data that is classified with user data of the target user;
This limitation includes the step(s) of: selecting, by a media server, a subset of a plurality of digital assets for inclusion in a virtual reality experience displayed at a media processing device of a target user based on respective scores of the plurality of digital assets, each score representing a predicted change in numerical mood responses occurring in one or more other users having user data that is classified with user data of the target user.
But for the media server and/or media processing device, this limitation is directed to selecting information to facilitate adapting a virtual reality experience for a user based on a mood improvement score which may be categorized as any of the following:
mental process – concepts performed in the human mind (including an observation, evaluation, judgment, opinion)
and/or
certain method of organizing human activity –
fundamental economic principles or practices (including hedging, insurance, mitigating risk), and/or
commercial or legal interactions (including agreements in the form of contracts; legal obligations; advertising, marketing or sales activities or behaviors; business relations), and/or
managing personal behavior or relationships or interactions between people (including social activities, teaching, and following rules or instructions).
selecting, by a media server, a subset of a plurality of digital assets for inclusion in a virtual reality experience displayed at a media processing device of a target user …
generating, by the media server, the virtual reality experience that includes the selected subset of the plurality of digital assets for display at the media processing device;
This limitation includes the step(s) of: generating, by the media server, the virtual reality experience that includes the selected subset of the plurality of digital assets for display at the media processing device.
But for the media server and/or media processing device, this limitation is directed to generating an experience to facilitate adapting a virtual reality experience for a user based on a mood improvement score which may be categorized as any of the following:
mental process – concepts performed in the human mind (including an observation, evaluation, judgment, opinion)
and/or
certain method of organizing human activity –
fundamental economic principles or practices (including hedging, insurance, mitigating risk), and/or
commercial or legal interactions (including agreements in the form of contracts; legal obligations; advertising, marketing or sales activities or behaviors; business relations), and/or
managing personal behavior or relationships or interactions between people (including social activities, teaching, and following rules or instructions).
generating, by the media server, the virtual reality experience that includes the selected subset of the plurality of digital assets for display at the media processing device
obtaining, by the media server, response data from the target user via the media processing device associated with the virtual reality experience, the response data indicative of the change in mood of the target user;
This limitation includes the step(s) of: obtaining, by the media server, response data from the target user via the media processing device associated with the virtual reality experience, the response data indicative of the change in mood of the target user.
But for the media server and/or media processing device, this limitation is directed to processing and/or communicating known information (e.g., obtaining response data) to facilitate adapting a virtual reality experience for a user based on a mood improvement score which may be categorized as any of the following:
mental process – concepts performed in the human mind (including an observation, evaluation, judgment, opinion)
and/or
certain method of organizing human activity –
fundamental economic principles or practices (including hedging, insurance, mitigating risk), and/or
commercial or legal interactions (including agreements in the form of contracts; legal obligations; advertising, marketing or sales activities or behaviors; business relations), and/or
managing personal behavior or relationships or interactions between people (including social activities, teaching, and following rules or instructions).
obtaining, by the media server, response data from the target user via the media processing device associated with the virtual reality experience…
updating, by the media server, the scores associated with the subset of the plurality of digital assets for the one or more other users based on the response data from the target user;
This limitation includes the step(s) of: updating, by the media server, the scores associated with the subset of the plurality of digital assets for the one or more other users based on the response data from the target user.
But for the media server and/or media processing device, this limitation is directed to updating scores to facilitate adapting a virtual reality experience for a user based on a mood improvement score which may be categorized as any of the following:
mental process – concepts performed in the human mind (including an observation, evaluation, judgment, opinion)
and/or
certain method of organizing human activity –
fundamental economic principles or practices (including hedging, insurance, mitigating risk), and/or
commercial or legal interactions (including agreements in the form of contracts; legal obligations; advertising, marketing or sales activities or behaviors; business relations), and/or
managing personal behavior or relationships or interactions between people (including social activities, teaching, and following rules or instructions).
updating, by the media server, the scores…
updating, by the media server, the virtual reality experience using the updated scores of the subset of the plurality of digital assets; and
This limitation includes the step(s) of: updating, by the media server, the virtual reality experience using the updated scores of the subset of the plurality of digital assets.
But for the media server and/or media processing device, this limitation is directed to updating an experience to facilitate adapting a virtual reality experience for a user based on a mood improvement score which may be categorized as any of the following:
mental process – concepts performed in the human mind (including an observation, evaluation, judgment, opinion)
and/or
certain method of organizing human activity –
fundamental economic principles or practices (including hedging, insurance, mitigating risk), and/or
commercial or legal interactions (including agreements in the form of contracts; legal obligations; advertising, marketing or sales activities or behaviors; business relations), and/or
managing personal behavior or relationships or interactions between people (including social activities, teaching, and following rules or instructions).
updating, by the media server, the virtual reality experience…
causing, by the media server, the updated virtual reality experience to be displayed at the media processing device.
This limitation includes the step(s) of: causing, by the media server, the updated virtual reality experience to be displayed at the media processing device.
But for the media server and/or media processing device, this limitation is directed to processing and/or communicating known information (e.g., displaying a VR experience) to facilitate adapting a virtual reality experience for a user based on a mood improvement score which may be categorized as any of the following:
mental process – concepts performed in the human mind (including an observation, evaluation, judgment, opinion)
and/or
certain method of organizing human activity –
fundamental economic principles or practices (including hedging, insurance, mitigating risk), and/or
commercial or legal interactions (including agreements in the form of contracts; legal obligations; advertising, marketing or sales activities or behaviors; business relations), and/or
managing personal behavior or relationships or interactions between people (including social activities, teaching, and following rules or instructions).
causing, by the media server, the updated virtual reality experience to be displayed at the media processing device
As shown above, under Step 2A, Prong One, the claims recite a judicial exception (an abstract idea). The claims are directed to the abstract idea of adapting a virtual reality experience for a user based on a mood improvement score, which, pursuant to MPEP 2106.04, is aptly categorized as a mental process and/or a method of organizing human activity. Therefore, under Step 2A, Prong One, the claims recite a judicial exception.
Next, the aforementioned claims recite additional functional elements that are associated with the judicial exception, including: a media processing device for displaying information. Examiner understands these limitations to be insignificant extrasolution activity. (See Accenture, 728 F.3d 1336, 108 U.S.P.Q.2d 1173 (Fed. Cir. 2013), citing Cf. Diamond v. Diehr, 450 U.S. 175, 191-192 (1981) ("[I]nsignificant post-solution activity will not transform an unpatentable principle in to a patentable process.”).
The aforementioned claims also recite additional technical elements including: a server and processing device to execute the method and a “non-transitory computer-readable storage medium” for storing executable instructions. These limitations are recited at a high level of generality and appear to be nothing more than generic computer components. Claims that amount to nothing more than an instruction to apply the abstract idea using a generic computer do not render an abstract idea eligible. Alice Corp., 134 S. Ct. at 2358, 110 USPQ2d at 1983. See also 134 S. Ct. at 2389, 110 USPQ2d at 1984.
Step 2A, Prong Two: Is the Abstract Idea Integrated into a Practical Application?
No. The judicial exception is not integrated into a practical application. The additional elements listed above that relate to computing components are recited at a high level of generality (i.e., as generic components performing generic computer functions such as communicating, receiving, processing, analyzing, and outputting/displaying data) such that they amount to no more than mere instructions to apply the exception using generic computing components. Simply implementing the abstract idea on a generic computer is not a practical application of the abstract idea. Additionally, the claims do not purport to improve the functioning of the computer itself. There is no technological problem that the claimed invention solves. Rather, the computer system is invoked merely as a tool. Accordingly, the additional elements do not integrate the abstract idea into a practical application because they do not impose any meaningful limits on practicing the abstract idea. Therefore, these claims are directed to an abstract idea.
Furthermore, looking at the elements individually and in combination, under Step 2A, Prong Two, the claims as a whole do not integrate the judicial exception into a practical application because they fail to: improve the functioning of a computer or a technical field, apply the judicial exception in the treatment or prophylaxis of a disease, apply the judicial exception with a particular machine, effect a transformation or reduction of a particular article to a different state or thing, or apply the judicial exception beyond generally linking the use of the judicial exception to a particular technological environment. Rather, the claims merely use a computer as a tool to perform the abstract idea(s), and/or add insignificant extra-solution activity to the judicial exception, and/or generally link the use of the judicial exception to a particular technological environment.
Step 2B: Does the Claim Provide an Inventive Concept?
Next, under Step 2B, the claims do not include additional elements that are sufficient to amount to significantly more than the judicial exception because the additional elements, when considered both individually and as an ordered combination, do not amount to significantly more than the abstract idea. Furthermore, looking at the limitations as an ordered combination adds nothing that is not already present when looking at the elements taken individually. Simply put, as noted above, there is no indication that the combination of elements improves the functioning of a computer (or any other technology), and their collective functions merely provide conventional computer implementation. As discussed above with respect to integration of the abstract idea into a practical application, the additional elements relating to computing components amount to no more than applying the exception using a generic computing components. Mere instructions to apply an exception using a generic computing component cannot provide an inventive concept. Furthermore, the broadest reasonable interpretation of the claimed computer components (i.e., additional elements) includes any generic computing components that are capable of being programmed to communicate, receive, send, process, analyze, output, or display data. Furthermore, Applicant’s Specification (PGPub. 2025/0077914 [0021]) refers to a general computer system, but they do not include any technically-specific computer algorithm or code.
Additionally, pursuant to the requirement under Berkheimer, the following citations are provided to demonstrate that the additional elements, identified as extra-solution activity, amount to activities that are well-understood, routine, and conventional. See MPEP 2106.05(d).
Capturing an image (code) with an RFID reader. Ritter, US Patent No. 7734507 (Col. 3, Lines 56-67); “RFID: Riding on the Chip” by Pat Russo. Frozen Food Age. New York: Dec. 2003, vol. 52, Issue 5; page S22.
Receiving or transmitting data over a network. Symantec, 838 F.3d at 1321, 120 USPQ2d at 1362; OIP Techs., Inc., v. Amazon.com, Inc., 788 F.3d 1359, 1363, 115 USPQ2d 1090, 1093 (Fed. Cir. 2015) (sending messages over a network); buySAFE, Inc. v. Google, Inc., 765 F.3d 1350, 1355, 112 USPQ2d 1093, 1096 (Fed. Cir. 2014).
Storing and retrieving information in memory. Versata Dev. Group, Inc. v. SAP Am., Inc., 793 F.3d 1306, 1334, 115 USPQ2d 1681, 1701 (Fed. Cir. 2015); OIP Techs., 788 F.3d at 1363, 115 USPQ2d at 1092-93.
Outputting/Presenting data to a user. Mayo, 566 U.S. at 79, 101 USPQ2d at 1968; OIP Techs., Inc. v. Amazon.com, Inc., 788 F.3d 1359, 1363, 115 USPQ2d 1090, 1092-93 (Fed. Cir. 2015); MPEP 2106.05(g)(3).
Using a machine learning model to determine user segment characteristics for an ad campaign. https://whites.agency/blog/how-to-use-machine-learning-for-customer-segmentation/.
Thus, taken alone and in combination, the additional elements do not amount to significantly more than the above-identified judicial exception (the abstract idea), and are ineligible under 35 USC 101.
Independent method claims 16 and CRM claim 9 also contains the identified abstract ideas, with the additional elements of a processor and storage medium, which are a generic computer components, and thus not significantly more for the same reasons and rationale above.
Dependent claims 2-8, 10-15, and 17-20 further describe the abstract idea. The additional elements of the dependent claims fail to integrate the abstract idea into a practical application and do not amount to significantly more than the abstract idea. Thus, as the dependent claims remain directed to a judicial exception, and as the additional elements of the claims do not amount to significantly more, the dependent claims are not patent eligible.
As such, the claims are not patent eligible.
Invention Could be Performed Manually
It is conceivable that the invention could be performed manually without the aid of machine and/or computer. For example, Applicant claims selecting information, generating an experience, obtaining response data, updating scores, displaying an updated experience. Each of these features could be performed manually and/or with the aid of a simple generic computer to facilitate the transmission of data.
See also Leapfrog Enterprises, Inc. v. Fisher-Price, Inc., and In re Venner, which stand for the concept that automating manual activity and/or applying modern electronics to older mechanical devices to accomplish the same result is not sufficient to distinguish over the prior art. Here, applicant is merely claiming computers to facilitate and/or automate functions which used to be commonly performed by a human.
Leapfrog Enterprises, Inc. v. Fisher-Price, Inc., 485 F.3d 1157, 82 USPQ2d 1687 (Fed. Cir. 2007) "[a]pplying modern electronics to older mechanical devices has been commonplace in recent years…"). The combination is thus the adaptation of an old idea or invention using newer technology that is commonly available and understood in the art.
In In re Venner, 262 F.2d 91, 95, 120 USPQ 193, 194 (CCPA 1958), the court held that broadly providing an automatic or mechanical means to replace manual activity which accomplished the same result is not sufficient to distinguish over the prior art. MPEP 2144.04, III Automating a Manual Activity.
MPEP 2144.04 III - Automating a Manual Activity and In re Venner, 262 F.2d 91, 95, 120 USPQ 193, 194 (CCPA 1958) further stand for and provide motivation for using technology, hardware, computer, or server to automate a manual activity.
Therefore, the Office finds no improvements to another technology or field, no improvements to the function of the computer itself, and no meaningful limitations beyond generally linking the use of an abstract idea to a particular technological environment. Therefore, based on the two-part Alice Corp. analysis, there are no limitations in any of the claims that transform the exception (i.e., the abstract idea) into a patent eligible application.
Claim Rejections - Not an Ordered Combination
None of the limitations, considered as an ordered combination provide eligibility, because taken as a whole, the claims simply instruct the practitioner to implement the abstract idea with routine, conventional activity.
Claim Rejections - Preemption
Allowing the claims, as presently claimed, would preempt others from adapting a virtual reality experience for a user based on a mood improvement score. Furthermore, the claim language only recites the abstract idea of performing this method, there are no concrete steps articulating a particular way in which this idea is being implemented or describing how it is being performed.
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 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 of this title, 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 set forth in Graham v. John Deere Co., 383 U.S. 1, 148 USPQ 459 (1966), that are applied for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized as follows:
1. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art.
2. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue.
3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art.
4. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness.
This application currently names joint inventors. In considering patentability of the claims the examiner presumes that the subject matter of the various claims was commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the claimed invention(s) absent any evidence to the contrary. Applicant is advised of the obligation under 37 CFR 1.56 to point out the inventor and effective filing dates of each claim that was not commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the later invention in order for the examiner to consider the applicability of 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(C) for any potential 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) prior art against the later invention.
Claims 1, 9, 16 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over: Shuster et al. 2016/0035132; in view of Barnett et al. 2018/0300917; in further view of Xu et al. 2020/0125163; in even further view of Breitenfeld et al. 2017/0318126.
18/950,016 – Claim 1. Shuster et al. 2016/0035132 teaches A method for adaptively generating a virtual reality experience (Shuster et al. 2016/0035132, aka: Empire [Fig. 1; 0005 – method][0010 - method for creation and modification of augmented reality objects based on biometric feedback][0215 - creating an augmented reality experience]), the method comprising: selecting, by a media server, a subset of a plurality of digital assets for inclusion in a virtual reality experience displayed at a media processing device of a target user based on respective scores of the plurality of digital assets (Shuster et al. 2016/0035132 [0002 - disclosure relates generally to augmented reality objects] The subject disclosure relates generally to augmented reality objects and, also generally, to augmented reality objects based on biometric feedback. [0098 - According to some implementations, there may be a scoring element] An analysis monitor 208 may be configured to detect a response to an output of the at least one representation of the at least one virtual object. The response may include an indication that the at least one representation of the at least one virtual object is an unexpected representation. However, it is noted that the response need not be binary (e.g., expected, unexpected). According to some implementations, there may be a scoring element where a user's “normal” response to an unexpected object is used to establish subjective adjustments to a threshold. For example, a user who is taking prescription beta blockers will have a far more subtle biological response to an unexpected element than would somebody taking prescription stimulants, such as methylphenidate. The level of response may also be used to predict the level of adjustment that should be applied. For example, an object that feels (to the user) a little bit wrong might need a more nuanced adjustment than an object that feels (to the user) entirely wrong. [0107 - may change the scoring of the various inputs used by the system to determine how to present environmental elements and/or may present environmental elements in a manner that matches the user's expectations] According to some aspects, biometric feedback may be used to predict the behavior that a user desires or expects. For example, if a user is on a level portion of a virtual roller coaster, and if the user's heart rate increases, it may be inferred that the user expects the car to soon enter a more intense portion of the ride. In a similar manner, returning to the example of the drink spilled on a tilted marble surface, the user may look in the direction she expects the water to flow, may place a hand to block flow in the direction the user expects the water to flow, may move a dry item away from the direction the water is expected to flow, or otherwise takes one or more actions that may be used to inform the system as to the user's expectations. In response to such data, the system may change the scoring of the various inputs used by the system to determine how to present environmental elements and/or may present environmental elements in a manner that matches the user's expectations. In some instances, it may be desirable to surprise the user, in which case such data (e.g., biometric data generally as described herein) may be used to determine how to best deliver an unexpected result to the user.), each score representing a predicted change in numerical mood responses occurring in one or more other users having user data that is classified with user data of the target user (Shuster et al. 2016/0035132 [0023 – biometric data of the user may be collected and analyzed to determine the effect the object, or multiple objects, has on the user (interpreted as user data of the target user)… positive versus negative response (interpreted as change in mood responses)] As provided herein, various aspects relate to refining augmented reality objects based on biometric feedback from one or more users. For example, an object may be output by itself, or in combination with one or more other objects, or a user might interact with a virtual object. At about the same time (or at a different time) as the object is being output to a user (or the user interacts with the object), biometric data of the user may be collected and analyzed to determine the effect the object, or multiple objects, has on the user. If the biometric response is positive, modification of the object or one or more other objects might not need needed. However, if the biometric response is determined to be negative, modification of the object, one or more of the other objects, or both, might be made and one or more additional biometric responses might be solicited from a same user or a different user. [0049 – first, second, and third responses to an object is interpreted as predicted change in mood responses] According to another example, the method may also include determining the at least one object for modification based on an aggregation of the first response data and third response data representative of a third response received in response to the data representative of the first virtual object, the second virtual object, and the first set of object data. The first response data and the third response data may be received from different sources of input. [0079 - if the first response data indicates the object(s) are not represented as expected, one or more changes, modifications, or adjustments may be made to provide a more accurate or expected representation] At block 104, modify at least one object of the first object data to create a second set of object data associated with another simulation of the interaction between the first virtual object and the second virtual object. For example, if the first response data indicates the object(s) are not represented as expected, one or more changes, modifications, or adjustments may be made to provide a more accurate or expected representation. Such changes may include, for example, reversing a direction of a flow of water, altering a speed at which a car is moving, and so on. Such changes may be based on how a similar item might react. [0098 - An analysis monitor 208 may be configured to detect a response to an output of the at least one representation of the at least one virtual object. … The level of response may also be used to predict the level of adjustment that should be applied.] An analysis monitor 208 may be configured to detect a response to an output of the at least one representation of the at least one virtual object. The response may include an indication that the at least one representation of the at least one virtual object is an unexpected representation. However, it is noted that the response need not be binary (e.g., expected, unexpected). According to some implementations, there may be a scoring element where a user's “normal” response to an unexpected object is used to establish subjective adjustments to a threshold. For example, a user who is taking prescription beta blockers will have a far more subtle biological response to an unexpected element than would somebody taking prescription stimulants, such as methylphenidate. The level of response may also be used to predict the level of adjustment that should be applied. For example, an object that feels (to the user) a little bit wrong might need a more nuanced adjustment than an object that feels (to the user) entirely wrong. [0122 - These disparate responses may be considered when changes to the output of the one or more objects are being made. For example, the responses may be aggregated and changes made based on the aggregation] Further, each of the different participants might have different responses. It is noted that with biological responses, each of the responses will be unique. However, there most likely will be a cluster near the “correct” response. Further, there will be outliers, which might be represented in a manner similar to a bell curve. For example, one participant might have a response that indicates the output is correct, while another participant has a response that indicates the output is incorrect. These disparate responses may be considered when changes to the output of the one or more objects are being made. For example, the responses may be aggregated and changes made based on the aggregation. Thus, if more participants indicate the output is correct than those participants that indicate the object is incorrect, the object might not be modified. In another example, consideration may be given to various characteristics of participants and/or measurement devices, as will be discussed in further detail below.); generating, by the media server, the virtual reality experience that includes the selected subset of the plurality of digital assets for display at the media processing device (Shuster et al. 2016/0035132, aka: Empire [0120 - An output component may be configured to convey the at least one representation of the virtual object (or more than one virtual object) to one or more participants][Figs. 1, 3-11]); obtaining, by the media server, response data from the target user via the media processing device associated with the virtual reality experience, the response data indicative of the change in mood of the target user (Shuster et al. 2016/0035132, aka: Empire [0043 - Biometric feedback may further be utilized to drive, modify, and/or otherwise influence or create a storyline or set of events within a virtual environment, based on the likelihood that the user is in a certain state of mind or has responded positively to stimuli][0075 - Based on feedback data, a combination of appearance data that provides the greatest indication of arousal in the user (e.g., pupils dilate, heart rate increases, and so on) may be determined][0159 - a change in heart rate may be more probative of a stress response than a change in breathing rate, both of which are more probative than tensing of the hand muscles][0167 - receive at least one of biometric response data or sensory response data][Figs. 1, 6-10]); updating, by the media server, the scores associated with the subset of the plurality of digital assets for the one or more other users based on the response data from the target user (Shuster et al. 2016/0035132, aka: Empire [0087 - Augmented reality objects based on biometric feedback may be implemented in a variety of augmented reality spaces, including entertainment, business, and personal uses. The disclosed aspects allow for almost constantly updated object data, texture data, object interaction data, and texture interaction data that matches any number of objects, whether known, unknown, or arbitrary. Such updates may occur until positive responses are received for nearly all renderings on the one or more outputs. Such updates may also be made using different metrics for different cultural groups or other groups][0098 - scoring element][Figs. 8, 11]); updating, by the media server, the virtual reality experience using the updated scores of the subset of the plurality of digital assets (Shuster et al. 2016/0035132 [0043 - feedback may further be utilized to drive, modify, and/or otherwise influence or create a storyline or set of events within a virtual environment] Biometric feedback may further be utilized to drive, modify, and/or otherwise influence or create a storyline or set of events within a virtual environment, based on the likelihood that the user is in a certain state of mind or has responded positively to stimuli. For example, two avatars are presented to a user, one male and one female, and both are dressed provocatively. A user may be monitored for signs of sexual stimulation or interest, such as dilated pupils, blood flow to the genital area, increased respiration rate, and so on. The user's gaze direction may further be analyzed to determine whether the male, the female, or both avatars are of interest to the user. Based on that data, the user may be presented with additional environmental elements that are consistent, such as additional male avatars for a user who is stimulated by the male, and/or additional female avatars for a user who is stimulated by the female. Similar analysis may be made to determine the kinds of virtual clothing the user likes to wear and to see, the kinds of environments that the user finds most exhilarating, events that the user finds uninteresting, and so on. [0098 - there may be a scoring element where a user's “normal” response to an unexpected object is used to establish subjective adjustments to a threshold…] An analysis monitor 208 may be configured to detect a response to an output of the at least one representation of the at least one virtual object. The response may include an indication that the at least one representation of the at least one virtual object is an unexpected representation. However, it is noted that the response need not be binary (e.g., expected, unexpected). According to some implementations, there may be a scoring element where a user's “normal” response to an unexpected object is used to establish subjective adjustments to a threshold. For example, a user who is taking prescription beta blockers will have a far more subtle biological response to an unexpected element than would somebody taking prescription stimulants, such as methylphenidate. The level of response may also be used to predict the level of adjustment that should be applied. For example, an object that feels (to the user) a little bit wrong might need a more nuanced adjustment than an object that feels (to the user) entirely wrong. [0215 - feedback loops allows for the modification of the objects without the need for manual updates, which conserves time and other resources, while creating a augmented reality experience that is robust and appealing to a multitude of participants] As discussed herein, various non-limiting embodiments are directed to augmented reality objects based on biometric feedback. The objects might be objects that have a corresponding representation in the real world and/or objects that have no corresponding real-world presence. Further, representations of the virtual objects may be altered based on measurable responses received from one or more participants that perceive the objects, either singularly or in combination (e.g., an interaction between objects). This feedback loops allows for the modification of the objects without the need for manual updates, which conserves time and other resources, while creating a augmented reality experience that is robust and appealing to a multitude of participants.); and causing, by the media server, the updated virtual reality experience to be displayed at the media processing device (Shuster et al. 2016/0035132 [0152 - a participant may interact with the system 400 through various interface devices. Examples of interface devices include…] For example, a participant may interact with the system 400 through various interface devices. Examples of interface devices include, but are not limited to, a cellular telephone, a cordless telephone, a Session Initiation Protocol (SIP) phone, a smart phone, a feature phone, a wireless local loop (WLL) station, a personal digital assistant (PDA), a laptop, a handheld communication device, a handheld computing device, a netbook, a tablet, a satellite radio, a data card, a wireless modem card, a wearable display (e.g., a wearable computer, which may be embodied on glasses, for example), an immersive display (e.g., a virtual reality head mounted display), and/or another processing device for communicating over a wireless system.).
Shuster et al. 2016/0035132 may not expressly disclose “updating the virtual reality experience,” however, Breitenfeld et al. 2017/0318126 teaches these features as follows (Breitenfeld et al. 2017/0318126 [0120 - update may be performed while media player device 500 is presenting the immersive virtual reality experience to user] In some examples, after the specification file has already been transmitted by system 400 to media player device 500, system 500 may detect an update that is to be made to the specification file that will affect the immersive virtual reality experience being provided by media player device 500 at a future point in time. For example, while media player device 500 is using the specification file to provide the immersive virtual reality experience to a user, a virtual reality content creator may provide a request for system 400 to update the specification file to include an additional or alternative element, event, and/or behavior. In response, system 400 may dynamically update a version of the specification file that is maintained by system 400. System 400 may also dynamically update the version of specification file being used by media player device 500 with the requested update (e.g., by transmitting a command to media player device 500 for device to update the specification file being used by media player device 500 with the requested update). This dynamic update may be performed while media player device 500 is presenting the immersive virtual reality experience to user 202 in a manner that does not interfere with the presentation of the immersive virtual reality experience to user 202.). Before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, it would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art to have modified Shuster et al. 2016/0035132 to include the features as taught by Breitenfeld et al. 2017/0318126. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to do so to provide improved management of the virtual reality experience which should prove to improve user experience, maximize profits, and optimize revenue (i.e., advertisement optimization / improve user experience).
Shuster et al. 2016/0035132 may not expressly disclose the “selecting digital asset based on score” features, however, Barnett et al. 2018/0300917 teaches (Barnett et al. 2018/0300917, aka: Facebook [0121 - identifying a subset of the set of augmented reality elements, wherein identifying the subset includes: calculating a score for each of the set of augmented reality elements, and wherein the subset of augmented reality elements comprise a threshold number of top scoring augmented reality elements][0122 - calculating a score for each of the set of augmented reality elements includes, for each augmented reality element in the set of augmented reality elements, adding a weighted value to a score for the augmented reality element] Furthermore, in one or more embodiments, calculating a score for each of the set of augmented reality elements includes, for each augmented reality element in the set of augmented reality elements, adding a weighted value to a score for the augmented reality element, wherein the weighted value represents a correlation between metadata associated with the augmented reality element and a plurality of display factors associated with the mobile computing device. In at least one embodiment, the plurality of display factors includes a resolution of a display of the mobile computing device, whether an image frame taken from the camera viewfinder display is crowded, and whether the user of the mobile computing device is likely to interact with the augmented reality element. Thus, in at least one embodiment, presenting the one or more augmented reality elements within the camera viewfinder display includes presenting the subset of augmented reality elements. Additionally, in at least one embodiment, presenting one or more augmented reality elements within a camera viewfinder display of the mobile computing device can include presenting third party augmented reality elements that correspond with a location of the mobile computing device. [Fig. 8]). Before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, it would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art to have modified Shuster et al. 2016/0035132 to include the features as taught by Barnett et al. 2018/0300917. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to do so to provide improved management of the virtual reality experience which should prove to improve user experience, maximize profits, and optimize revenue (i.e., advertisement optimization / improve user experience).
Shuster et al. 2016/0035132 may not expressly disclose the “predicting change in mood responses” features, however, Xu et al. 2020/0125163 teaches (Xu et al. 2020/0125163 [0016 - embodiments described herein can perform real-time emotion detection by analyzing and predicting personal emotional state and changes, and implementing the AR device to adjust the colors of the objects in real-time based on the emotion detection] The embodiments described herein provide for systems and methods that can use augmented reality (AR) technology to dynamically augment an environment, in real-time, by modifying colors of objects in the environment viewed through an AR device to improve the emotional state of a user. Illustratively, the embodiments described herein can dynamically adjust the colors of objects viewed through the AR device to increase the happiness of a sad user, increase the relaxation of a stressed user, provide a state of serenity to an angry user, etc. For example, the embodiments described herein can perform real-time emotion detection by analyzing and predicting personal emotional state and changes, and implementing the AR device to adjust the colors of the objects in real-time based on the emotion detection. In an illustrative embodiment, the augmented reality system can be implemented as a depression and anxiety relieving system (DARS) integrated with an AR device to relieve depression and anxiety of a user based on the real-time emotional state of the user.). Before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, it would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art to have modified Shuster et al. 2016/0035132 to include the features as taught by Xu et al. 2020/0125163. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to do so to provide improved management of the virtual reality experience which should prove to improve user experience, maximize profits, and optimize revenue (i.e., advertisement optimization / improve user experience).
18/950,016 – Claim 9. A non-transitory computer-readable storage medium storing instructions for adaptively generating a virtual reality experience, the instructions when executed by at least one processor cause the at least one processor to:
select a subset of a plurality of digital assets for inclusion in a virtual reality experience displayed at a media processing device of a target user based on respective scores of the plurality of digital assets, each score representing a predicted change in numerical mood responses occurring in one or more other users having user data that is classified with user data of the target user;
generate the virtual reality experience that includes the selected subset of the plurality of digital assets for display at the media processing device;
obtain response data from the target user via the media processing device associated with the virtual reality experience, the response data indicative of the change in mood of the target user;
update the scores associated with the subset of the plurality of digital assets for the one or more other users based on the response data from the target user;
update the virtual reality experience using the updated scores of the subset of the plurality of digital assets; and
cause the updated virtual reality experience to be displayed at the media processing device.
Claim 9, has similar limitations as of Claim(s) 1, therefore it is REJECTED under the same rationale as Claim(s) 1.
18/950,016 – Claim 16. A method for adaptively generating a virtual reality experience, the method comprising:
selecting, by a media processing device of a target user, a first subset of a plurality of digital assets for inclusion in a virtual reality experience displayed at the media processing device based on respective scores of the plurality of digital assets, each score representing a predicted change in numerical mood responses occurring in one or more other users having user data that is classified with user data of the target user;
displaying, by the media processing device, the virtual reality experience that includes the first subset of the plurality of digital assets;
obtaining, by the media processing device, response data from the target user, the response data indicative of the change in mood of the target user;
updating, by the media processing device, the scores associated with the subset of the plurality of digital assets for the one or more other users based on the response data from the target user;
selecting, by the media processing device, a second subset of the plurality of digital assets based on the updated scores for the first subset of the plurality of digital assets; and
displaying, by the media processing device, an updated virtual reality experience comprising the second subset of the plurality of digital assets.
Claim 16, has similar limitations as of Claim(s) 1, therefore it is REJECTED under the same rationale as Claim(s) 1.
Claims 2, 10, 17 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over: Shuster et al. 2016/0035132; in view of Barnett et al. 2018/0300917; in further view of Xu et al. 2020/0125163; in even further view of Breitenfeld et al. 2017/0318126.
18/950,016 – Claim 2. The method of claim 1, Shuster et al. 2016/0035132 may not expressly disclose the following, however, Barnett et al. 2018/0300917 teaches wherein selecting the subset of the plurality of digital assets comprises: identifying user-specified digital assets stored in association with user profile data associated with the target user; and determining the subset of the plurality of digital assets for inclusion in the virtual reality experience based on identifying the user-specified digital assets (Barnett et al. 2018/0300917, aka: Facebook [0194 - one or more of the content objects of the online social network may be associated with a privacy setting. The privacy settings (or 'access settings') for an object may be stored in any suitable manner, such as, for example, in association with the object, in an index on an authorization server, in another suitable manner, or any combination thereof. A privacy setting of an object may specify how the object (or particular information associated with an object) can be accessed (e.g., viewed or shared) using the online social network. Where the privacy settings for an object allow a particular user to access that object, the object may be described as being 'visible' with respect to that user. As an example and not by way of limitation, a user of the online social network may specify privacy settings for a user-profile page identify a set of users that may access the work experience information on the user - profile page, thus excluding other users from accessing the information. In particular embodiments, the privacy settings may specify a ‘blocked list' of users that should not be allowed to access certain information associated with the object. In other words, the blocked list may specify one or more users or entities for which an object is not visible. As an example, a user may specify a set of users that may not access photos albums associated with the user, thus excluding those users from accessing the photo albums (while also possibly allowing certain users not within the set of users to access the photo albums)]). Before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, it would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art to have modified Shuster et al. 2016/0035132 to include the features as taught by Barnett et al. 2018/0300917. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to do so to provide improved management of the virtual reality experience which should prove to improve user experience, maximize profits, and optimize revenue (i.e., advertisement optimization / improve user experience).
18/950,016 – Claim 10. The non-transitory computer-readable storage medium of claim 9, wherein the instructions that cause the at least one processor to select the subset of the plurality of digital assets comprises instructions that cause the at least one processor to:
identify user-specified digital assets stored in association with user profile data associated with the target user; and
determine the subset of the plurality of digital assets for inclusion in the virtual reality experience based on identifying the user-specified digital assets.
Claim 10, has similar limitations as of Claim(s) 2, therefore it is REJECTED under the same rationale as Claim(s) 2.
18/950,016 – Claim 17. The method of claim 16, wherein selecting the first subset of the plurality of digital assets comprises:
identifying user-specified digital assets stored in association with user profile data associated with the target user; and
determining the subset of the plurality of digital assets for inclusion in the virtual reality experience based on identifying the user-specified digital assets.
Claim 17, has similar limitations as of Claim(s) 2, therefore it is REJECTED under the same rationale as Claim(s) 2.
Claims 3, 11, 18 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over: Shuster et al. 2016/0035132; in view of Barnett et al. 2018/0300917; in further view of Xu et al. 2020/0125163; in even further view of Breitenfeld et al. 2017/0318126.
18/950,016 – Claim 3. Shuster et al. 2016/0035132 further teaches The method of claim 1, wherein selecting the subset of the plurality of digital assets comprises: weighting, using the respective scores of the plurality of digital assets, likelihoods of selecting the plurality of digital assets; and performing a weighted random selection of the plurality of digital assets to obtain the subset of the plurality of digital assets (Shuster et al. 2016/0035132, aka: Empire [0120 - An output component 314 may be configured to convey the at least one representation of the virtual object (or more than one virtual object) to one or more participants][0160 - The system 500 may determine whether presenting identical characteristics for multiple objects triggers a biometric response that indicates identical characteristics are unexpected or incorrect. Thus, data may be utilized by the system 500 to determine a range within which the characteristics should fall. The system 500 may then randomize within that range, or quasi-randomize, but weight the outcomes so that the actual range follows a bell curve when measured against frequency][Figs. 1, 3-11]).
18/950,016 – Claim 11. The non-transitory computer-readable storage medium of claim 9, wherein the instructions that cause the at least one processor to select the subset of the plurality of digital assets comprises instructions that cause the at least one processor to:
weight, using the respective scores of the plurality of digital assets, likelihoods of selecting the plurality of digital assets; and
perform a weighted random selection of the plurality of digital assets to obtain the subset of the plurality of digital assets.
Claim 11, has similar limitations as of Claim(s) 3, therefore it is REJECTED under the same rationale as Claim(s) 3.
18/950,016 – Claim 18. The method of claim 16, wherein selecting the first subset of the plurality of digital assets comprises:
weighting, using the respective scores of the plurality of digital assets, likelihoods of selecting the plurality of digital assets; and
performing a weighted random selection of the plurality of digital assets to obtain the first subset of the plurality of digital assets.
Claim 18, has similar limitations as of Claim(s) 3, therefore it is REJECTED under the same rationale as Claim(s) 3.
Claims 4, 12, 20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over: Shuster et al. 2016/0035132; in view of Barnett et al. 2018/0300917; in further view of Xu et al. 2020/0125163; in even further view of Breitenfeld et al. 2017/0318126.
18/950,016 – Claim 4. Shuster et al. 2016/0035132 further teaches The method of claim 1, wherein obtaining the response data from the target user comprises: obtaining biometric data from the target user during the virtual reality experience; and detecting a change in mood based on the biometric data (Shuster et al. 2016/0035132, aka: Empire [0043 - Biometric feedback may further be utilized to drive, modify, and/or otherwise influence or create a storyline or set of events within a virtual environment, based on the likelihood that the user is in a certain state of mind or has responded positively to stimuli][0075 - Based on feedback data, a combination of appearance data that provides the greatest indication of arousal in the user (e.g., pupils dilate, heart rate increases, and so on) may be determined][0159 - a change in heart rate may be more probative of a stress response than a change in breathing rate, both of which are more probative than tensing of the hand muscles][0167 - At 604, receive at least one of biometric response data or sensory response data][Figs. 1, 6-10]).
18/950,016 – Claim 12. The non-transitory computer-readable storage medium of claim 9, wherein the instructions that cause the at least one processor to obtain the response data from the target user comprises instructions that cause the at least one processor to:
obtain biometric data from the target user during the virtual reality experience; and
detect a change in mood based on the biometric data.
Claim 12, has similar limitations as of Claim(s) 4, therefore it is REJECTED under the same rationale as Claim(s) 4.
18/950,016 – Claim 19. The method of claim 16, wherein obtaining the response data from the target user comprises:
obtaining biometric data from the target user during the virtual reality experience; and
detecting a change in mood based on the biometric data.
Claim 20, has similar limitations as of Claim(s) 4, therefore it is REJECTED under the same rationale as Claim(s) 4.
Claims 5 and 13 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over: Shuster et al. 2016/0035132; in view of Barnett et al. 2018/0300917; in further view of Xu et al. 2020/0125163; in even further view of Breitenfeld et al. 2017/0318126; in even further view of Kuhl et al. 2019/0254522.
18/950,016 – Claim 5. The method of claim 1, Shuster et al. 2016/0035132 may not expressly disclose the following, however, Kuhl et al. 2018/0050170 teaches wherein obtaining the response data from the target user further comprises: obtaining survey data from the target user before and after the virtual reality experience; and detecting the change in mood further based on the survey data (Kuhl et al. 2018/0050170, aka: Waterfalls [0041-0042 – stress level tests][0041] A study was conducted to compare known stress reduction methods to that of an exemplary embodiment of method 100 (FIG. 1) (referred to below as method 100 for ease of reading). Participants in the study were recruited through an advertisement for volunteers. Twenty-seven individuals with age range from 18 to 73 with a mean age of 50.4 participated. Participants were asked to complete a questionnaire upon arrival in a neutral environment with no photos, neutral colors, at a plain table. Sheldon Cohen's Perceived Stress Scale was used to gather baseline chronic stress for the previous 30 days and for comparison. [0042] Participants were then asked to give a number between 0 and 10 as to their current stress level, 0 being absolutely no stress, 10 being an overwhelming amount of stress. Once the current perceived stress number was determined, a therapist randomly picked from one of the four individual treatments; aromatherapy, guided meditation, color therapy, or nature pictures to use with the individual. The therapist followed the protocol for that treatment. A perceived second stress scale value was gathered for comparison following completion of the individual treatment.). Before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, it would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art to have modified Shuster et al. 2016/0035132 to include the features as taught by Kuhl et al. 2018/0050170. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to do so to provide improved management of the virtual reality experience which should prove to improve user experience, maximize profits, and optimize revenue (i.e., advertisement optimization / improve user experience).
18/950,016 – Claim 13. The non-transitory computer-readable storage medium of claim 9, wherein the instructions that cause the at least one processor to obtain the response data from the target user further comprises instructions that cause the at least one processor to:
obtain survey data from the target user before and after the virtual reality experience; and
detect the change in mood further based on the survey data.
Claim 13, has similar limitations as of Claim(s) 5, therefore it is REJECTED under the same rationale as Claim(s) 5.
Claims 6 and 14 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over: Shuster et al. 2016/0035132; in view of Barnett et al. 2018/0300917; in further view of Xu et al. 2020/0125163; in even further view of Breitenfeld et al. 2017/0318126; in view of Brancaccio et al. 2019/0254522.
18/950,016 – Claim 6. The method of claim 1, Shuster et al. 2016/0035132 may not expressly disclose the following, however, Brancaccio et al. 2019/0254522 teaches further comprising: updating the user data of the target user based on the response data (Brancaccio et al. 2019/0254522 [0033 - system updates the user record for goal tracking based upon the user response information] Regardless of the response or lack of response to the prompt by the user, at 216 the system server is operable to create a new time period setting for the next prompt interval to be used by the device by activating a pseudo-randomization algorithm to calculate a new prompt time period utilizing tracked on and off task time percentage and the user's goals. At 218, the system server resets the prompt time period in the internal database and transmits this new time period value to the device. The device replaces the previous prompt time interval with the newly received prompt time interval and begins checking for elapsed time against the prompt time interval. At 220 the system updates the user record for goal tracking based upon the user response information.). Before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, it would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art to have modified Shuster et al. 2016/0035132 to include the features as taught by Brancaccio et al. 2019/0254522. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to do so to provide improved management of the virtual reality experience which should prove to improve user experience, maximize profits, and optimize revenue (i.e., advertisement optimization / improve user experience).
18/950,016 – Claim 14. The non-transitory computer-readable storage medium of claim 9, wherein the instructions further comprise instructions that cause the at least one processor to:
update the user data of the target user based on the response data.
Claim 14, has similar limitations as of Claim(s) 7, therefore it is REJECTED under the same rationale as Claim(s) 7.
Claims 7 and 15 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over: Shuster et al. 2016/0035132; in view of Barnett et al. 2018/0300917; in further view of Xu et al. 2020/0125163; in even further view of Breitenfeld et al. 2017/0318126.
18/950,016 – Claim 7. Shuster et al. 2016/0035132 further teaches The method of claim 1, wherein the plurality of digital assets includes at least one of a graphical asset, an audio asset, and a color palette (Shuster et al. 2016/0035132, aka: Empire [0126 - information and corresponding virtual objects rendered on a display, output audibly through speakers).
18/950,016 – Claim 15. The non-transitory computer-readable storage medium of claim 9, wherein the plurality of digital assets includes at least one of a graphical asset, an audio asset, and a color palette.
Claim 15, has similar limitations as of Claim(s) 7, therefore it is REJECTED under the same rationale as Claim(s) 7.
Claims 8 and 20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over: Shuster et al. 2016/0035132; in view of Barnett et al. 2018/0300917; in further view of Xu et al. 2020/0125163; in even further view of Breitenfeld et al. 2017/0318126.
18/950,016 – Claim 8. Shuster et al. 2016/0035132 further teaches The method of claim 1, wherein the media processing device comprises a head-mounted display (Shuster et al. 2016/0035132 [0152 - a participant may interact with the system 400 through various interface devices … Examples of interface devices include, but are not limited to … an immersive display (e.g., a virtual reality head mounted display)] For example, a participant may interact with the system 400 through various interface devices. Examples of interface devices include, but are not limited to, a cellular telephone, a cordless telephone, a Session Initiation Protocol (SIP) phone, a smart phone, a feature phone, a wireless local loop (WLL) station, a personal digital assistant (PDA), a laptop, a handheld communication device, a handheld computing device, a netbook, a tablet, a satellite radio, a data card, a wireless modem card, a wearable display (e.g., a wearable computer, which may be embodied on glasses, for example), an immersive display (e.g., a virtual reality head mounted display), and/or another processing device for communicating over a wireless system.).
18/950,016 – Claim 20. The method of claim 16, wherein the media processing device comprises a head-mounted display.
Claim 20, has similar limitations as of Claim(s) 8, therefore it is REJECTED under the same rationale as Claim(s) 8.
Examiner’s Response to Arguments
Per Applicants’ amendments/arguments, the rejections are withdrawn.
Applicant's arguments have been considered but are moot in view of the new ground(s) of rejection.
Applicants’ amendments have necessitated the new grounds of rejection noted above.
Examiner’s Response: Claim Rejections – 35 USC §112
Per Applicants’ amendments/arguments, the rejections are withdrawn.
Applicant's arguments have been considered but are moot in view of the new ground(s) of rejection.
Applicants’ amendments have necessitated the new grounds of rejection noted above.
Examiner’s Response: Claim Rejections – 35 USC §101
Per Applicants’ amendments/arguments, the rejections are withdrawn. See notes above for additional reasoning and rationale for dropping 35 USC 101 rejection including Applicant’s amendments, arguments, lack of abstract idea, and practical integration.
Applicant's arguments have been considered but are moot in view of the new ground(s) of rejection.
Applicants’ amendments have necessitated the new grounds of rejection noted above.
Regarding Claims 1-15, on page(s) 6-12 of Applicant’s Remarks (dated 12/27/2016), Applicants traverse the 35 USC §101 rejections arguing the following:
Examiner’s Response: Claim Rejections – 35 USC § 102 / § 103
Per Applicants’ amendments/arguments, the rejections are withdrawn. See notes above for additional reasoning and rationale for dropping prior-art rejection including Applicant’s amendments and arguments and unique combination of features and elements not taught by the prior-art without hindsight reasoning.
Applicant's arguments have been considered but are moot in view of the new ground(s) of rejection.
Applicants’ amendments have necessitated the new grounds of rejection noted above.
Regarding Claim X, on page(s) 8-9 of Applicant’s Remarks / After Final Amendments (dated 07/15/2011), Applicant(s) argues that the cited reference(s) (Ellis and Vandermolen) fails to teach, describe, or suggest the amended features. Specifically, Applicant(s) argues that cited reference(s) do not teach, describe, or suggest the following: . With respect, Applicant’s arguments are deemed unpersuasive and the amended feature(s) remain rejected as follows.
With respect, Applicant’s arguments are deemed unpersuasive and the amended feature(s) remain rejected as follows.
Any comments considered necessary by applicant must be submitted no later than the payment of the issue fee and, to avoid processing delays, should preferably accompany the issue fee. Such submissions should be clearly labeled “Comments on Statement of Reasons for Allowance.”
Conclusion
PERTINENT PRIOR ART – Patent Literature
The prior-art made of record and considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Primus et al. 2018/0314321 [0011] Various embodiments described herein provide for dynamic scoring (e.g., audio, visual, haptic, etc.) of a digital experience, such as a virtual reality experience (VRE), for a participant based on the participant's past or present emotional response to the digital experience. The dynamic scoring of the digital experience can determine (via narrative paths) a narrative orientation of a digital experience that involves a narrative, or can determine experience elements (e.g., cinematic elements) expressed or applied to the digital experience. For some embodiments, the emotional response of a participant is determined based on tracking the head (e.g., movement, distance, direction of change, etc.) of the participant. The tracking data may, in some instances, come from a sensor of a head-mounted display that a participant is utilizing to experience the digital experience. Using various embodiments, a digital experience can attempt to illicit a set of emotional responses from a participant, observe which of the emotional responses is actually provided by the participant, map the observed emotional response to some sort of optional or alternative element of the digital experience, and serve the mapped element to the participant as feedback to the motion response.
Chee et al. 2015/0178624 [0089] The user prediction module 406 can infer a goal of a particular mood such as relaxed, happy, or any other mood based on images, user input, user setting, or combination thereof. Learning based on data from the user data module 402 can also provide a basis to discover inconsistent input such as facial recognition inconsistent with mood or behavior. The user prediction module 406 can provide predictions or act based on a combination of moods, goals and resources.
PERTINENT PRIOR ART – Non-Patent Literature (NPL)
The NPL prior-art made of record and considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Baratè, G. Haus, L. A. Ludovico and P. Perlasca, "Managing Intellectual Property in a Music Fruition Environment," in IEEE MultiMedia, vol. 23, no. 2, pp. 84-94, Apr.-June 2016, doi: 10.1109/MMUL.2015.92.
Conclusion
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 extension fee 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.
THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL
Applicant’s amendment necessitated new grounds of rejection and FINAL Rejection.
Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP § 706.07(a). 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 extension fee 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 date of this final action.
Contact Information
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to MATTHEW T. SITTNER whose telephone number is (571) 270-7137 and email: matthew.sittner@uspto.gov. The examiner can normally be reached on Monday-Friday, 8:00am - 5:00pm (Mountain Time Zone). Please schedule interview requests via email: matthew.sittner@uspto.gov
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Sarah M. Monfeldt can be reached on (571) 270-1833.
Information regarding the status of an application may be obtained from the Patent Application Information Retrieval (PAIR) system. Status information for published applications may be obtained from either Private PAIR or Public PAIR. Status information for unpublished applications is available through Private PAIR only. For more information about the PAIR system, see http://pair-direct.uspto.gov. Should you have questions on access to the Private PAIR system, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative or access to the automated information system, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000.
/MATTHEW T SITTNER/
Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3629b