Detailed Action
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(b):
(b) CONCLUSION. The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention.
Claim 6 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention.
Claim 6 recites the limitation “the memory information.” There is insufficient antecedent basis information for this limitation in the claim.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
The following is a quotation of the appropriate paragraphs of 35 U.S.C. 102 that form the basis for the rejections under this section made in this Office action:
(a) A person shall be entitled to a patent unless—
(2) the claimed invention was described in a patent issued under section 151, or in an application for patent published or deemed published under section 122 (b), in which the patent or application, as the case may be, names another inventor and was effectively filed before the effective filing date of the claimed invention
Claims 1, 2, 5, 11 and 13-15 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) as being anticipated by Shaw (US 2024/0104816 A1).
Regarding claim 1, Shaw discloses an interaction method comprising displaying a virtual scene interface, wherein the virtual scene interface comprises at least one virtual character (109), actions of the virtual character are controlled based on a basic plan (¶ [0218]: designated set of base parameters), the basic plan comprises a basic instruction sequence corresponding to the virtual character (¶ [0218]: designated set of base parameters which may be considered a personality), in response to an interactive operation of a user on a target virtual character in the virtual scene interface (¶ [0165]), acquiring interactive information corresponding to the interactive operation (¶ [0167]), based on the interactive information, determining a target instruction sequence corresponding to the target virtual character, according to the interactive information and character information corresponding to the target virtual character, generating an interactive text corresponding to the target virtual character (¶ [0169]), and controlling the target virtual character to act based on the basic plan and the target instruction sequence, and outputting the interactive text (¶¶ [0169] – [0172]).
Regarding claims 2 and 15, Shaw discloses wherein based on the interactive information, the determining the target instruction sequence corresponding to the target virtual character comprises identifying the interactive information and determining whether the interactive information comprises instruction information (¶ [0109]: user command), and in response to the interactive information comprising the instruction information, determining the target instruction sequence based on the instruction information, a candidate virtual object in a target region where the target virtual character is currently located, and a candidate instruction corresponding to the candidate virtual object (¶ [0109]: Impulsive Behaviors may subtly affect the Avatar's animation, so that it performs the user's commands in a manner consistent with the Avatar's designated mood at that moment).
Regarding claim 5 and 18, Shaw discloses wherein the controlling the target virtual character to act based on the basic plan and the target instruction sequence and outputting the interactive text comprises outputting the interactive text and determining a priority of a current instruction executed by the target virtual character in the basic plan and a priority of the target instruction sequence (¶ [0167]), in response to the priority of the target instruction sequence being higher than the priority of the current instruction (¶ [0167]), controlling the target virtual character to execute an instruction in the target instruction sequence, and after the instruction in the target instruction sequence is completed, controlling the target virtual character to execute the current instruction in the basic plan and an instruction after the current instruction (¶ [0109]: Impulsive Behaviors may subtly affect the Avatar's animation, so that it performs the user's commands in a manner consistent with the Avatar's designated mood at that moment) .
Regarding claim 11, Shaw discloses wherein the outputting the interactive text comprises based on the interactive text, determining expression information corresponding to the target virtual character when the target virtual character outputs the interactive text (¶ [0173]) and controlling a facial expression of the target virtual character based on the expression information (¶ [0175]) and displaying the interactive text in the virtual scene interface and/or playing an interactive voice corresponding to the interactive text (¶ [0173]).
Claims 13 and 14 recite a computer-readable medium and device, respectively, comprising substantially the same limitations as those in claim 1 above. They are accordingly rejected for the same reasons given supra. Further regarding claims 13 and 14, Shaw discloses a non-transitory computer-readable medium having a computer program stored thereon (Fig. 12) wherein the program, when executed by a processing apparatus, implements an interaction method (Abstract) and an electronic device, comprising a storage apparatus having a computer program stored thereon (Fig. 12) and a processing apparatus configured to execute the computer program in the storage apparatus (Fig. 12).
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 103 which forms the basis for all obviousness rejections set forth in this Office action:
A patent for a claimed invention may not be obtained, notwithstanding that the claimed invention is not identically disclosed as set forth in section 102, if the differences between the claimed invention and the prior art are such that the claimed invention as a whole would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which the claimed invention pertains. Patentability shall not be negated by the manner in which the invention was made.
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.
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. If this application names joint inventors, 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 6, 12 and 19 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Shaw in view of Doggett et al (US 2024/0394965 A1).
Regarding claims 6 and 19, Shaw discloses outputting the interactive text and controlling the target virtual character to execute a target instruction in the target instruction sequence, based on the character setup information of the target virtual character (¶¶ [0169] – [0172]), generating a new basic plan corresponding to the target virtual character, and after the instruction in the target instruction sequence is completed, controlling the target virtual character to execute an instruction in the new basic plan (¶ [0218]). Doggett suggests—where Shaw does not disclose—generating a target instruction in the target instruction sequence, based on the memory information of the target virtual character (Fig. 5). It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the invention to combine the disclosures of Shaw and Doggett in order to make the virtual character behave more realistically.
Regarding claim 12, Shaw discloses determining whether the virtual scene comprises an interactive virtual character that needs to perform a conversation interaction (Figs. 8-9), in response to there being the interactive virtual character, generating a conversation text corresponding to the interactive virtual character based on state information (Figs. 8-9), character setup information corresponding to the interactive virtual character (Figs. 8-9), wherein the conversation text comprises an interactive text corresponding to the interactive virtual character (Figs. 8-9), and controlling the interactive virtual character to perform a conversation interaction based on the conversation text (Figs. 8-9). Doggett suggests—where Shaw does not disclose— generating a conversation text corresponding to character memory information (Fig. 5). It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the invention to combine the disclosures of Shaw and Doggett in order to make the virtual character behave more realistically.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 3, 4, 7-10, 16-18 and 20 are objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, but would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
Conclusion
The prior art considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure and not relied upon is made of record on the attached PTO-892 form.
Watson et al (US 20220067556 A1) discloses autonomous virtual agents.
Walsh (US 20220067556 A1) discloses generating virtual characters.
Rogers (US 20170182418 A1) discloses persistent autonomous virtual agents.
Cao (US 20100029382A1) discloses providing persistent character personalities in simulations.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to STEVE ROWLAND whose telephone number is (469) 295-9129. The examiner can normally be reached on M-Th 10-8. If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor Dmitry Suhol can be reached at (571) 272-4430. The fax number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is (571) 273-8300.
Examiner interviews are available via telephone, in-person, and video conferencing using a USPTO supplied web-based collaboration tool. To schedule an interview, applicant is encouraged to use the USPTO Automated Interview Request (AIR) at http://www.uspto.gov/interviewpractice.
Applicant may choose, at his or her discretion, to correspond with Examiner via Internet e-mail. A paper copy of any and all email correspondence will be placed in the appropriate patent application file. Email communication must be authorized in advance. Without a written authorization by applicant in place, the USPTO will not respond via e-mail to any correspondence which contains information subject to the confidentiality requirement as set forth in 35 U.S.C. 122.
Authorization may be perfected by submitting, on a separate paper, the following (or similar) disclaimer:
PNG
media_image1.png
18
19
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Recognizing that Internet communications are not secure, I hereby authorize the USPTO to communicate with me concerning any subject matter of this application by electronic mail. I understand that a copy of these communications will be made of record in the application file.
PNG
media_image1.png
18
19
media_image1.png
Greyscale
See MPEP 502.03 for more information.
Information regarding the status of published or unpublished applications may be obtained from Patent Center. Unpublished application information in Patent Center is available to registered users. To file and manage patent submissions in Patent Center, visit: https://patentcenter.uspto.gov. Visit https://www.uspto.gov/patents/apply/patent-center for more information about Patent Center and https://www.uspto.gov/patents/docx for information about filing in DOCX format. For additional questions, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000.
/STEVE ROWLAND/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3715
Prosecution Insights