DETAILED ACTION
Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status
The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
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 because the claimed invention is directed to non-statutory subject matter.
Step 1: It must be determined whether the invention falls in one of the four statutory categories of invention. Claims 1 – 10 and 20 are directed towards a device and medium, (machine), and claims 11 - 19 are directed towards a method, (process), which are statutory categories of invention.
Step 2a:
Prong 1: It must be determined whether the invention is directed to judicially recognized exception. Claim 1 is analyzed below with limitations indicating recitations of an abstract idea.
An electronic device comprising: memory storing at least one instruction; and at least one processor configured to execute the at least one instruction, wherein the at least one instruction, when executed by the at least one processor, causes the electronic device to: detect whether a notification event has occurred in a display screen in which an image is displayed, the notification event indicating information that another user is attempting to provide to a user; obtain, based on detecting that the notification event has occurred, an indication comprising at least one of a visual effect or an auditory effect corresponding to the notification event; and provide, to the user, the indication by using at least one of an information display area or an audio output unit.
The abstract idea is defined by the underlined portions exemplary claim 1, with substantially similar features found in claims 15 and 19. Dependent claims 2 – 15, 17, 18, and 20 further define the abstract idea or relate to the implementation of the abstract idea. The abstract idea is defined in at least the following grouping below:
Certain methods of organizing human activity (managing interactions between people)
Mental processes (observation, evaluation, judgment)
The claims are directed towards an abstract idea of managing personal behavior which falls into the category of organizing human activity, (See MPEP 2106/04(a)(2)(II)(C)). More specifically, the claimed invention recites a system that detects a notification event that indicates that a first user is attempting to provide event notification to a second user, wherein the system then provides the notification event to the second user, wherein an indication that corresponds to the notification event comprises a visual or auditory effect. Controlling a system that detects and provides notifications from one user to another represents managing interactions between people. (Intellectual Ventures I LLC v. Capital One Bank (USA), 792 F.3d 1363, 115 USPQ2d 1636 (Fed. Cir. 2015).
The claims are also directed towards a series of steps which can practically be performed by one or more human, which fall into the category of mental processes, (See MPEP 2106.04(a)(2)(III)). More specifically, the claimed invention recites a system that detects that a first user is attempting to send event information to a second user, wherein the system then provides said event information to the second user, wherein an indication that corresponds to the notification event is provided to the second on a display area or through an audio output unit. The claims recite instructions for detecting and sending notifications with these features. Here, a human can observe that a notification event has been provided through an audio or visual effect, wherein a human can then make a determination of a next step to make based on the received notification. For example, in the event that user is playing a video game, a human can observe that observe that a pop-up notification has appeared in a display area of a display screen and then make the determination to either open or ignore the notification. Therefore, since the claimed invention can practically be performed in the human mind, it represents an ineligible abstract mental process. (Intellectual Ventures I LLC v. Symantec Corp., 838 F. 3d 1307).
Prong 2: Does the Claim recite additional elements that integrate the exception in to a practical application of the exception?
The claims recite a generic processor and memory along with instructions that detects a notification event from a first and provides said notification event to a second user through an audio or visual effect, which is viewed as no more than instructions to implement a judicial exception.
These additional limitations do not represent an improvement to the functioning of a computer, or to any other technology or technical field, (MPEP 2106.05(a)). Nor do they apply the exception using a particular machine, (MPEP 2106.05(b)). Furthermore, they do not effect a transformation. (MPEP 2106.05(c)). Rather, these additional limitations amount to an instruction to “apply” the judicial exception using a computer as a tool to perform the abstract idea.
Step 2b: It must be determined whether the claimed invention recites additional elements that amount to significantly more than the judicial exception.
The claim language does recite a processor and memory wherein the claims further disclose detecting and presenting notifications from one user to another. The courts have determined that claims that are directed to data collection and recognition are abstract ideas and is a well-known practice, (See Content Extraction and Transmission LLC v. Wells Fargo Bank (776 F.3d 1343). Therefore, viewed as a whole, these additional elements are indistinguishable from conventional computing elements known in the art. . Therefore, the additional elements fail to supply additional elements that yield significantly more than the underlying abstract idea. Viewing the limitations as an ordered combination adds nothing that is not already present when looking at the elements taken individually. There is no indication that the combination of elements improves the functioning of a computer or improves any other technology.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status.
The following is a quotation of 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 person shall be entitled to a patent unless –
(a)(1) the claimed invention was patented, described in a printed publication, or in public use, on sale, or otherwise available to the public before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claims 1 – 20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a) as being anticipated by George et al. (U.S. 10,105,608).
Regarding claims 1, 11, and 20 George discloses an electronic device, method, and medium (“a game environment may include a game system 100 and multiple client devices; the client devices may include player device(s)”, col. 8, lines 31 – 33 and fig. 1, part 120, wherein the Examiner views the player device as being equivalent to an electronic device), comprising memory storing at least one instruction, (“System memory 2020 may be configured to store instructions”, col. 35, lines 13 – 14), and at least one processor configured to execute the at least one instruction, (“Processors 2010 may be any suitable processors capable of executing instructions, col. 35, lines 4 – 6), wherein the at least one instruction, when executed by the at least one processor, causes the electronic device to detect whether a notification event has occurred, (“a player 130 may send an alert signal to the participant metrics module 106 via the game client on their player device 120, which may in turn signal the alert to one or more spectators 160”, col. 13, lines 53 -56, wherein the Examiner views the participant metrics module receiving an alert signal from a player as being equivalent to the electronic device detecting that a notification event has occurred). George further discloses that the notification event is displayed in a display screen in which an image is displayed, (“the spectator metrics devices react to the feedback signals to provide the feedback or alerts to the respective spectators. In some embodiments, the spectator metrics devices may include one or more indicators (e.g., display screens, lights, speakers, active surface materials, motion or thermal devices, etc.) that may be used to provide feedback or alerts to the spectators in response to the feedback signals received from the participant metrics module. The feedback or alerts provided by the indicators may include, but are not limited to, visual, audio, and/or haptic signals. Visual signals may, for example, include one or more of lights, surface color changes, and on-screen displays”, col. 23, lines 28 – 36, wherein the Examiner views the spectator devices including an indicator such as a display screen receiving alerts from the participant module, wherein the alert includes visual signals as being equivalent to a notification event the notification event being displayed on a display screen in which an image is displayed). George further discloses that the notification event indicates information that another user is attempting to provide to a user, (“a player 130 may send an alert signal to the participant metrics module 106 via the game client on their player device 120, which may in turn signal the alert to one or more spectators 160 via respective spectator metrics devices 170”, col. 13, lines 53 – 57), obtain, based on detecting that the notification event has occurred, an indication comprising at least one of visual effect or an auditory effect corresponding to the notification event, (“The feedback or alerts provided by the indicators may include, but are not limited to, visual, audio, and/or haptic signals. Visual signals may, for example, include one or more of lights, surface color changes, and on-screen displays. Audio signals may, for example, include one or more of beeps, rings, tones, music, and voice” , col. 23, lines 36 - 41), and provide, to the user, the indication, (“may send an alert signal to the participant metrics module 106, which may in turn signal the alert to one or more spectators 160 via respective spectator metrics devices 170”, col. 13, lines 53 – 56), by using at least one of an information display area or an audio output unit, (“The feedback or alerts may include, but are not limited to, visual, audio, and/or haptic signals. Visual signals may, for example, include one or more of lights, surface color changes, and on-screen displays. Audio signals may, for example, include one or more of beeps, rings, tones, music, and voice”, col. 16, lines 51 – 56, wherein the Examiner views the alerts including visual or audio signals as being equivalent the indications provided to a user by using a display area or an audio output unit).
Regarding claims 2 and 12, George discloses wherein the at least one instruction, when executed by the at least one processor, further causes the electronic device to: identify a predefined area in the image displayed in the display screen; and detect the notification event based on the predefined area, (“The feedback or alerts provided by the indicators may include, but are not limited to, visual, audio, and/or haptic signals. Visual signals may, for example, include one or more of lights, surface color changes, and on-screen displays”, col. 23, lines 23 – 40, wherein the Examiner views the alerts being visual signals including on-screen displays as being equivalent to identifying a predetermined area in the image displayed in a display screen and detecting the notification event on the predefined area).
Regarding claims 3 and 13, George discloses wherein the at least one instruction, when executed by the at least one processor, further causes the electronic device to: identify the predefined area by at least one of receiving, from the user, setting information of the predefined area or automatically detecting the predefined area from the image, (“The feedback or alerts provided by the indicators may include, but are not limited to, visual, audio, and/or haptic signals. Visual signals may, for example, include one or more of lights, surface color changes, and on-screen displays”, col. 23, lines 23 – 40, wherein the Examiner views the alerts including visual signals including on-screen displays as being equivalent to identifying and automatically detecting the predefined area from the image).
Regarding claims 4 and 14, George discloses wherein the at least one instruction, when executed by the at least one processor, further causes the electronic device to: detect the notification event by detecting an item image corresponding to the notification event in the predefined area, based on one or more pieces of notification event information, (“The feedback or alerts provided by the indicators may include, but are not limited to, visual, audio, and/or haptic signals. Visual signals may, for example, include one or more of lights, surface color changes, and on-screen displays”, col. 23, lines 23 – 40, wherein the Examiner views the on-screen displays as an item image based on one or more pieces of notification event information).
Regarding claims 5 and 15, George discloses wherein the one or more pieces of notification event information comprise: identification information about the notification event, (“the game system 100 or players 130 may generate alerts that may be signaled to the spectators 160 via the spectator metrics devices 170. For example, in some embodiments, the game engine 102 may detect a significant game event or situation involving one or more players 130 or teams of players 130, and may send an alert signal to the participant metrics module 106, which may in turn signal the alert to one or more spectators 160 via respective spectator metrics devices 170. As another example, in some embodiments, a player 130 may send an alert signal to the participant metrics module 106 via the game client on their player device 120, which may in turn signal the alert to one or more spectators 160 via respective spectator metrics devices 170, col. 13, lines 44 – 53, wherein the Examiner views the significant game event or situation involving game players or teams as being equivalent to identification information about a notification event). George further discloses, as cited above, item image corresponding to the notification event, (“Visual signals may, for example, include one or more of lights, surface color changes, and on-screen displays”, col. 23, lines 23 – 40), and at least one of the visual effect or the auditory effect corresponding to the notification event, (“The feedback or alerts may include, but are not limited to, visual, audio, and/or haptic signals. Visual signals may, for example, include one or more of lights, surface color changes, and on-screen displays. Audio signals may, for example, include one or more of beeps, rings, tones, music, and voice”, col. 16, lines 51 – 56).
Regarding claims 6 and 16, George discloses obtain the indication corresponding to the notification event by referring to registered indications corresponding to the one or more pieces of notification event information and the identification information about the notification event, (“the game system 100 or players 130 may generate alerts that may be signaled to the spectators 160 via the spectator metrics devices 170. For example, in some embodiments, the game engine 102 may detect a significant game event or situation involving one or more players 130 or teams of players 130, and may send an alert signal to the participant metrics module 106, which may in turn signal the alert to one or more spectators 160 via respective spectator metrics devices 170. As another example, in some embodiments, a player 130 may send an alert signal to the participant metrics module 106 via the game client on their player device 120, which may in turn signal the alert to one or more spectators 160 via respective spectator metrics devices 170, col. 13, lines 44 – 53, wherein the Examiner views the alerts corresponding to significant game event or situation involving one or more players as being equivalent to registered indications corresponding to the one or more pieces of notification event information and the identification information about the notification event).
Regarding claims 7 and 17, George discloses wherein the information display area comprises a predetermined area of the display screen in which the image is not displayed, and wherein the at least one instruction, when executed by the at least one processor, further causes the electronic device to provide the visual effect by using the predetermined area, (“The feedback or alerts may include, but are not limited to, visual, audio, and/or haptic signals. Visual signals may, for example, include one or more of lights, surface color changes, and on-screen displays. Audio signals may, for example, include one or more of beeps, rings, tones, music, and voice”, col. 16, lines 51 – 56).
Regarding claims 8 and 19, George discloses wherein the information display area comprises a predetermined area in a display of an external display device configured to share and display at least one portion of the display screen displayed in the electronic device, (fig. 1, part 150), and wherein the at least one instruction, when executed by the at least one processor, further causes the electronic device to provide the visual effect by using the predetermined area in the display of the external display device, (“The feedback or alerts may include, but are not limited to, visual, audio, and/or haptic signals. Visual signals may, for example, include one or more of lights, surface color changes, and on-screen displays. Audio signals may, for example, include one or more of beeps, rings, tones, music, and voice”, col. 16, lines 51 – 56).
Regarding claims 9 and 19, George discloses wherein the at least one portion of the display screen comprises a mini-map area, and wherein the predetermined area in the display of the external display device comprises an area excluding an area in which the mini-map area is displayed, (“a game may be a game in which the players may more passively explore and make discoveries within a complex game universe without any particular goals in mind, or a “world-building” game in which the players may actively modify their environments within the game universe”, col. 6, lines 38 – 43, wherein the Examiner views the exploring a game universe or a world building game as being equivalent to disclosing a mini-map).
Regarding claim 10, George discloses when executed by the at least one processor, further causes the electronic device to: identify a first location in which the notification event has occurred in game content; (“a player 130 may send an alert signal to the participant metrics module 106 via the game client on their player device 120, which may in turn signal the alert to one or more spectators 160”, col. 13, lines 53 -56), and determine a second location in which the indication is to be provided, based on the first location in which the notification event has occurred, (“a player 130 may send an alert signal to the participant metrics module 106 via the game client on their player device 120, which may in turn signal the alert to one or more spectators 160 via respective spectator metrics devices 170”, col. 13, lines 53 – 57).
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ERIC M THOMAS whose telephone number is (571)272-1699. The examiner can normally be reached 9:00am - 5:00pm.
Examiner interviews are available via telephone, in-person, and video conferencing using a USPTO supplied web-based collaboration tool. To schedule an interview, applicant is encouraged to use the USPTO Automated Interview Request (AIR) at http://www.uspto.gov/interviewpractice.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Dmitry Suhol can be reached at 571-272-4430. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300.
Information regarding the status of published or unpublished applications may be obtained from Patent Center. Unpublished application information in Patent Center is available to registered users. To file and manage patent submissions in Patent Center, visit: https://patentcenter.uspto.gov. Visit https://www.uspto.gov/patents/apply/patent-center for more information about Patent Center and https://www.uspto.gov/patents/docx for information about filing in DOCX format. For additional questions, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000.
/E.M.T/ Examiner, Art Unit 3715
/JUSTIN L MYHR/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3715
Prosecution Insights