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 .
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.
Claim Objections
Claim 20 is objected to because of the following informalities:
Claim 20 recites “a display information obtainer, wherein the display information obtainer comprises: a display information obtainer”. As the highlighted term is already in the preamble so the highlighted term should be “the display information obtainer”.
Appropriate correction is required.
Claim Interpretation
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(f):
(f) Element in Claim for a Combination. – An element in a claim for a combination may be expressed as a means or step for performing a specified function without the recital of structure, material, or acts in support thereof, and such claim shall be construed to cover the corresponding structure, material, or acts described in the specification and equivalents thereof.
The following is a quotation of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph:
An element in a claim for a combination may be expressed as a means or step for performing a specified function without the recital of structure, material, or acts in support thereof, and such claim shall be construed to cover the corresponding structure, material, or acts described in the specification and equivalents thereof.
The claims in this application are given their broadest reasonable interpretation using the plain meaning of the claim language in light of the specification as it would be understood by one of ordinary skill in the art. The broadest reasonable interpretation of a claim element (also commonly referred to as a claim limitation) is limited by the description in the specification when 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is invoked.
As explained in MPEP § 2181, subsection I, claim limitations that meet the following three-prong test will be interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph:
(A) the claim limitation uses the term “means” or “step” or a term used as a substitute for “means” that is a generic placeholder (also called a nonce term or a non-structural term having no specific structural meaning) for performing the claimed function;
(B) the term “means” or “step” or the generic placeholder is modified by functional language, typically, but not always linked by the transition word “for” (e.g., “means for”) or another linking word or phrase, such as “configured to” or “so that”; and
(C) the term “means” or “step” or the generic placeholder is not modified by sufficient structure, material, or acts for performing the claimed function.
Use of the word “means” (or “step”) in a claim with functional language creates a rebuttable presumption that the claim limitation is to be treated in accordance with 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph. The presumption that the claim limitation is interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is rebutted when the claim limitation recites sufficient structure, material, or acts to entirely perform the recited function.
Absence of the word “means” (or “step”) in a claim creates a rebuttable presumption that the claim limitation is not to be treated in accordance with 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph. The presumption that the claim limitation is not interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is rebutted when the claim limitation recites function without reciting sufficient structure, material or acts to entirely perform the recited function.
Claim limitations in this application that use the word “means” (or “step”) are being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, except as otherwise indicated in an Office action. Conversely, claim limitations in this application that do not use the word “means” (or “step”) are not being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, except as otherwise indicated in an Office action.
This application includes one or more claim limitations that do not use the word “means,” but are nonetheless being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, because the claim limitation(s) uses a generic placeholder that is coupled with functional language without reciting sufficient structure to perform the recited function and the generic placeholder is not preceded by a structural modifier. Such claim limitation(s) is/are: a first obtainer, a second obtainer, a displayer, a state determiner, a state information generator, a scenario sub-determiner, a factor sub-determiner, state sub-setter, an environment information obtainer, an environment information obtainer, a priority determiner, a depth information determiner, a content displayer, a posture information sub-obtainer, a position information sub-determiner, a content sub-displayer, an intent sub-determiner, a first sub-setter, a second sub-setter, a display information obtainer, a first sub-obtainer and a second sub-obtainer coupled with functional language without reciting sufficient structure to perform the recited function and the generic placeholder is not preceded by a structural modifier in claims 11-20.
There is no structural support for these generic placeholder in the specification.
Because this/these claim limitation(s) is/are being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, it/they is/are being interpreted to cover the corresponding structure described in the specification as performing the claimed function, and equivalents thereof.
If applicant does not intend to have this/these limitation(s) interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, applicant may: (1) amend the claim limitation(s) to avoid it/them being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph (e.g., by reciting sufficient structure to perform the claimed function); or (2) present a sufficient showing that the claim limitation(s) recite(s) sufficient structure to perform the claimed function so as to avoid it/them being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph.
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.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph:
The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the applicant regards as his invention.
Claims 10, 11-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor (or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the applicant), regards as the invention.
Claim 10 recites “wherein prior to obtaining the display state information of the extended reality device, the method further comprises:
obtaining an original display information;
if the display state of the extended reality device represents that information display condition is satisfied”. Here both the underlined portions contradict each other. Because prior to obtaining the display state information, there should not be any display state. However claim is referring “the display state” in the second limitation. So the claim is indefinite.
Claims 11-20 invoke 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph. However, the written description fails to disclose the corresponding structure, material, or acts for performing the entire claimed function and to clearly link the structure, material, or acts to the function.
The generic placeholders are “a first obtainer, a second obtainer, a displayer, a state determiner, a state information generator, a scenario sub-determiner, a factor sub-determiner, state sub-setter, an environment information obtainer, an environment information obtainer, a priority determiner, a depth information determiner, a content displayer, a posture information sub-obtainer, a position information sub-determiner, a content sub-displayer, an intent sub-determiner, a first sub-setter, a second sub-setter, a display information obtainer, a first sub-obtainer and a second sub-obtainer”.
There is no structural support for these generic placeholder in the specification.
Therefore, the claim is indefinite and is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, second paragraph.
Applicant may:
(a) Amend the claim so that the claim limitation will no longer be interpreted as a limitation under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph;
(b) Amend the written description of the specification such that it expressly recites what structure, material, or acts perform the entire claimed function, without introducing any new matter (35 U.S.C. 132(a)); or
(c) Amend the written description of the specification such that it clearly links the structure, material, or acts disclosed therein to the function recited in the claim, without introducing any new matter (35 U.S.C. 132(a)).
If applicant is of the opinion that the written description of the specification already implicitly or inherently discloses the corresponding structure, material, or acts and clearly links them to the function so that one of ordinary skill in the art would recognize what structure, material, or acts perform the claimed function, applicant should clarify the record by either:
(a) Amending the written description of the specification such that it expressly recites the corresponding structure, material, or acts for performing the claimed function and clearly links or associates the structure, material, or acts to the claimed function, without introducing any new matter (35 U.S.C. 132(a)); or
(b) Stating on the record what the corresponding structure, material, or acts, which are implicitly or inherently set forth in the written description of the specification, perform the claimed function. For more information, see 37 CFR 1.75(d) and MPEP §§ 608.01(o) and 2181.
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 person shall be entitled to a patent unless –
(a)(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.
Claim(s) 1-4 and 11-14 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) as being anticipated by ZAHID et al. (US Pat. Pub. No. 20240320908 “Zahid”).
Regarding claim 11 Zahid teaches A device for controlling an extended reality content display, applied to an extended reality device (“0010] FIG. 2 illustrates an example of a user viewing a virtual car dealership through a virtual reality device, according to one or more embodiments shown and described herein”), the device comprising:
a first obtainer (Fig. 3 integral part of element 118 “[0032]…… The processor of the user vehicle 134 may be communicatively coupled to the controller 106 (depicted in FIG. 3). As such, the controller 106 may monitor a plurality of driving metrics recorded by the processor of the user vehicle 134 and classify the plurality of driving metrics as the at least one user metric. For example, the at least one user metric may include a number of miles the user vehicle has been driven. The number of miles the user vehicle has been driven may include a total number of miles that the user vehicle has been driven. The number of miles of the user vehicle may be transmitted from the processor of the user vehicle 134 to the controller 106 in real time”) configured to obtain a display state information of the extended reality device, wherein the display state information indicates a display state of the extended reality device (“[0040] Referring now to FIG. 4, a flowchart for the method 400 for displaying the virtual space 102 is depicted. The method 400 includes receiving the user information from the user profile in block 402. As discussed hereinabove, the user information includes the user location, the user design preference, and the at least one user metric.”);
a second obtainer (Fig. 3 integral part of element 118) configured to obtain an information to be displayed if the display state of the extended reality device represents that an information display condition is satisfied (“[0040]… The method 400 further includes determining the display conditions based on the user information in block 404.determining user accessibility to the virtual features based on the at least one user metric in block 406”) and
a displayer (Fig. 3 integral part of element 118) configured to control an optical display module of the extended reality device to display an extended reality content corresponding to the information to be displayed (“[0040]….. displaying the virtual space 102 including the virtual features on the graphical user interface 104 based on the display conditions and the user accessibility in block 408”).
Claim 1 is directed to a method claim and its steps are similar in scope and functions performed by the elements of the device claim 11 and therefore claim 1 is also rejected with the same rationale as specified in the rejection of claim 11.
Regarding claims 2 and 12 Zahid teaches wherein the first obtainer comprises: an information determiner configured to determine a usage scenario information of the extended reality device (“[0028] The user information may include a user location, a user design preference, current vehicle information, at least one user metric, or any other user information that may be stored on the user profile”);
a state determiner configured to determine the display state of the extended reality device according to the usage scenario information and at least one preset trigger reference condition (“[0032] The at least one user metric may be based on metrics of a user vehicle. The user vehicle may be a vehicle including an automobile or any other passenger or non-passenger vehicle such as, for example, a terrestrial, aquatic, and/or airborne vehicle. [0034] As discussed hereinabove, after receiving the user information from the user profile, the controller 106 may also be programmed to determine display conditions based on the user information. The display conditions correspond to how the virtual space 102 appears to the user through the graphical user interface 104”);
a state information generator configured to generate the display state information according to the display state of the extended reality device (“[0037] In some embodiments, the user accessibility to the virtual features (i.e. the threshold condition) may be based on whether the user vehicle has entered within a defined location. For example, user accessibility to virtual features of a beach background in the virtual space 102 may be based on whether the user vehicle has travelled within 5 miles of an ocean coastline”).
Regarding claims 3 and 13 Zahid teaches: a scenario sub-determiner (Fig. 3 integral part of element 118) configured to identify a scenario type corresponding to the usage scenario information and determine a target trigger reference condition from at least one preset trigger reference condition based on the scenario type; a factor sub-determiner (Fig. 3 integral part of element 118) configured to determine a display control reference factor according to the target trigger reference condition, wherein the display control reference factor comprises at least one of time, a location, a posture, a user manipulation, a power, a user emotion, or a program operating state; and a state sub-setter (Fig. 3 integral part of element 118) configured to determine a real-time reference information of the display control reference factor under the usage scenario information and set the information display condition to the display state of the extended reality device if the real-time reference information satisfies the target trigger reference condition (Here display condition is set as real time display state. For ex. display condition is set based on current time which is 9 pm. Scenario type is time or location, comes from user information.
“[0034] As discussed hereinabove, after receiving the user information from the user profile, the controller 106 may also be programmed to determine display conditions based on the user information. The display conditions correspond to how the virtual space 102 appears to the user through the graphical user interface 104. The display conditions may directly correspond to the user information from the user profile in order to replicate an environment the user is in. For example, if the user information includes that the user location as Denver, Colorado, and the user design preference is modern, the display conditions may include a mountainous background and virtual buildings 108 in the virtual space 102 may be rendered in a modern architectural style. The display conditions may also include a weather condition or a time of day.
[0035] The time of day may change the display conditions in the virtual space 102, such as an amount of sunlight. For example, if the time of day is 9 PM, no sunlight may be displayed in the virtual space 102 and the display conditions may be adjusted to nighttime. The weather condition may also effect the display conditions in the virtual space 102. The weather condition may be retrieved from the weather reporting system 116 communicatively coupled to the controller 106 through the communication path 132 (depicted in FIG. 2). The controller 106 may obtain information from the weather reporting system 116 by querying the weather reporting system 116 with the user location. The controller 106 may then adjust the display conditions in the virtual space 102 based on the weather conditions at the user location”).
Regarding claims 4 and 14 Zahid teaches wherein the second obtainer comprises: an environment information obtainer configured to obtain an attribute information of a target user holding the extended reality device (“[0029] The user information may also include user demographic information on the user profile. The user demographic information may include age, gender, marital status, or any other demographic information that may be stored on the user profile”) and
an environmental scenario information where the target user is currently located (“[0028] The user information may include a user location, a user design preference, current vehicle information, at least one user metric, or any other user information that may be stored on the user profile. The user location may be determined through a global positioning system (GPS) of the user device 111”); and
a display information determiner configured to determine the information to be displayed according to the environmental scenario information and the attribute information (“[0017] The virtual car dealership 103 may render virtual vehicles 107, virtual buildings 108, or virtual users 110 in the virtual space 102. The virtual car dealership 103 may appear similar to a physical car dealership. [0034] As discussed hereinabove, after receiving the user information from the user profile, the controller 106 may also be programmed to determine display conditions based on the user information. The display conditions correspond to how the virtual space 102 appears to the user through the graphical user interface 104. The display conditions may directly correspond to the user information from the user profile in order to replicate an environment the user is in. For example, if the user information includes that the user location as Denver, Colorado, and the user design preference is modern, the display conditions may include a mountainous background and virtual buildings 108 in the virtual space 102 may be rendered in a modern architectural style. The display conditions may also include a weather condition or a time of day”).
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.
Claim 5 and 15 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Zahid in view of YOO et al. (US Pat. Pub. No. 20110115880 “Yoo”).
Regarding claims 5 and 15 Zahid is silent about a priority determiner configured to determine a display priority according to the attribute information and an information type of the information to be displayed; a depth information determiner configured to determine a display depth information of the information to be displayed according to the display priority; and a content displayer configured to present an extended reality content corresponding to the information to be displayed through the optical display module according to the display depth information.
Yoo teaches a priority determiner (integral part of processor 170) configured to determine a display priority according to attribute information and an information type of information to be displayed (“[0136] Alternatively, if a search word is input to the image display apparatus 100 via the internet, an event for displaying search results that are relevant to the input search word may occur. In this case, the priority levels of 3D objects corresponding to the search results may be determined according to the relevance of the search results to the search word. [0138] A user may determine or change the priority level of a 3D object. For example, a user may set the priority level of a 3D object for displaying a channel browser-related menu as a highest priority-3D object”);
a depth information determiner (integral part of processor 170) configured to determine a display depth information of the information to be displayed according to the display priority (“[0133]….. Thereafter, the image display apparatus 100 may process an image signal corresponding to the 3D object such that the 3D object can be displayed at a depth level corresponding to the determined priority level (S15)”);
Yoo and Zahid are analogous art as both of them are related to content processing.
Therefore it would have been obvious for an ordinary skilled person in the art before the effective filing date of claimed invention to have modified Zahid by determining a display priority according to attribute information and an information type of the information to be displayed; determining a display depth information of the information to be displayed according to the display priority as taught by Yoo.
The motivation for the above is to control the visibility of virtual content.
Zahid modified by Yoo teaches a content displayer (Zahid integral part of element 106) configured to present an extended reality content corresponding to the information to be displayed through the optical display module according to the display depth information (Yoo “may process a corresponding image signal so that the 3D object can be displayed on the display unit 180 at a depth level corresponding to the determined priority level”.
Zahid “[0040]…… displaying the virtual space 102 including the virtual features on the graphical user interface 104 based on the display conditions and the user accessibility in block 408”).
Claims 6-7 and 16-17 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Zahid modified by Yoo as applied to claims 5 and 15 above and further in view of OZAWA et al. (US Pat. Pub. No. 20180249086 “Ozawa”).
Regarding claims 6 and 16 Zahid modified by Yoo is silent about a posture information sub-obtainer configured to obtain a posture information of the extended reality device; a position information sub-determiner configured to determine a display position information of the information to be displayed according to the posture information and the display priority;
Ozawa teaches a posture information sub-obtainer (Fig. 2 a posture sensor 348) configured to obtain a posture information of extended reality device (“[0275] The HMD control section 141 acquires position information of the HMD 100A (step S62). [0282]…… the HMD control section 141 may detect a movement of the image display section 20 on the basis of detection values of the six-axis sensor 235 and/or the magnetic sensor 237 and detect the movement of the image display section 20 and a posture of the user as operation. The operation detecting section 157 may detect the movement of the image display section 20 and the posture of the user on the basis of a change in a captured image of the HMD camera 61”);
a position information sub-determiner ( HMD control section 141 ) configured to determine a display position information of information to be displayed according to the posture information and display priority (“[0276] The HMD control section 141 performs, on the basis of the information acquired in steps S61 and S62, ranking of importance degrees with respect to image data related to images displayed in the display region V1 (step S63)……. The HMD control section 141 determines display positions and display sizes of the images based on the image data according to the ranking of the importance degrees determined in step S63 (step S64) and updates the display (step S65)”);
Ozawa and Zahid modified by Yoo are analogous art as both of them are related to content processing.
Therefore it would have been obvious for an ordinary skilled person in the art before the effective filing date of claimed invention to have modified Zahid modified by Yoo by obtaining a posture information of extended reality device and determining a display position information of information to be displayed according to the posture information and display priority as taught by Ozawa.
The motivation for the above is to position the display content for better visibility.
Zahid modified by Yoo and Ozawa teaches a content sub-displayer (Zahid Fig. 3 integral part of element 118) configured to present the extended reality content corresponding to the information to be displayed through the optical display module according to the display depth information and the display position information (Ozawa “[0276]….. The HMD control section 141 determines display positions and display sizes of the images based on the image data according to the ranking of the importance degrees determined in step S63 (step S64) and updates the display (step S65)”
Yoo “may process a corresponding image signal so that the 3D object can be displayed on the display unit 180 at a depth level corresponding to the determined priority level”.).
Regarding claims 7 and 17 Zahid modified by Yoo and Ozawa teaches determine a display style information of the information to be displayed according to the display priority; and present the extended reality content corresponding to the information to be displayed through the optical display module according to the display depth information, the display position information, and the display style information (Ozawa “display size” is claimed style. information Ozawa “[0276]….. The HMD control section 141 determines display positions and display sizes of the images based on the image data according to the ranking of the importance degrees determined in step S63 (step S64) and updates the display (step S65)”
Yoo “may process a corresponding image signal so that the 3D object can be displayed on the display unit 180 at a depth level corresponding to the determined priority level”.).
Claims 8 and 18 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Zahid modified by Yoo and Ozawa as applied to claims 6 and 16 above and further in view of Kazui (US Pat. Pub. No. 20180204067 “Kazui”).
Regarding claims 8 and 18 Zahid modified by Yoo and Ozawa is silent about the content sub-displayer is further configured to: capture a preview image through a camera of the extended reality device that previews a content through the optical display module; determine a background content information corresponding to the information to be displayed from the preview image according to the display position information; adjust an initial display style information of the information to be displayed according to a content tone of the background content information to obtain a target display style information;
Kazui teaches capture a preview image through a camera that previews a content through optical display module; determine a background content information corresponding to the information to be displayed from the preview image; adjust an initial display style information of the information to be displayed according to a content tone of the background content information to obtain a target display style information (“[0024] The image capturing unit 10 captures scene images on which recognition such as person detection is to be performed, and transmits video image signals of the captured images to the autonomous learning unit 30. Further, video image adjustment parameters are output to the video image adjustment parameter analysis unit 20. The video image adjustment parameters are determined based on the state (indoor, outdoor, background color) of the scene captured by the image capturing unit 10, illumination conditions, presence/absence of persons, and methods of adjusting and correcting video images of the camera”);
Kazui and Zahid modified by Yoo and Ozawa are analogous art as both of them are related to content processing.
Therefore it would have been obvious for an ordinary skilled person in the art before the effective filing date of claimed invention to have modified Zahid modified by Yoo and Ozawa by capturing a preview image through a camera of the extended reality device that previews a content through the optical display module; determine a background content information corresponding to the information to be displayed from the preview image according to the display position information; adjust an initial display style information of the information to be displayed according to a content tone of the background content information to obtain a target display style information similar to capturing a preview image through a camera that previews a content through optical display module; determining a background content information corresponding to the information to be displayed from the preview image; adjusting an initial display style information of the information to be displayed according to a content tone of the background content information to obtain a target display style information as taught by Kazui.
The motivation for the above is to make virtual content more natural.
Zahid modified by Yoo and Ozawa and Kazui teaches present the extended reality content corresponding to the information to be displayed through the optical display module according to the display depth information, the display position information, and the target display style information (After including Kazui’s teaching now Zahid modified by Yoo and Ozawa teaches video adjustment parameter which is claimed target display style information.
(Ozawa “[0276]….. The HMD control section 141 determines display positions and display sizes of the images based on the image data according to the ranking of the importance degrees determined in step S63 (step S64) and updates the display (step S65)”
Yoo “may process a corresponding image signal so that the 3D object can be displayed on the display unit 180 at a depth level corresponding to the determined priority level”.).
Claim 9 and 19 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Zahid in view of Mulligan et al. (US Pat. Pub. No. 20240267344 “Mulligan”).
Regarding claims 9 and 19 Zahid is silent about the display information determiner comprises: an intent sub-determiner configured to determine a behavioral intent of the target user according to the environmental scenario information and the attribute information; a first sub-setter configured to set a content information corresponding to the behavioral intent in a preset memory as the information to be displayed; and/or a second sub-setter configured to output the information to be displayed corresponding to the behavioral intent through an intent-content relationship model.
Mulligan teaches an intent sub-determiner (integral part of 0450] The machine 1300 may include processors 1304) configured to determine a behavioral intent of target user according to environmental scenario information and attribute information (“[0216] In some examples, a user utilizes the chatbot system 300 as a primary user interface with the interactive system hosting the chatbot system 300. As the chatbot system 300 infers the user intent from interactions with the user and has a conversation state that is saved, the chatbot system 300 also infers what a user is interested in interested in based on what the chatbot system 300 learns from the chats it has access to (including 1:1 chat threads with the chatbot system 300), a user's general usage of the interactive system hosting the chatbot system 300, other third-party communications with the user, how the user communicates, who the user's friends are, as well as those friends' user intents, profiles, geographic location(s), interests, and the chatbot system 300 helps the user learn about, create, and engage in new activities”);
a first sub-setter (integral part of 0450] The machine 1300 may include processors 1304) configured to set a content information corresponding to the behavioral intent in a preset memory as the information to be displayed (“[0107] In some examples, the intent vector is an additional dimension which will be used to refresh and update an intent profile stored in the user profile database 354. [0111] In operation 308, the chatbot system 300 determines advertising content 358 based on the user intent 366 and the response 370 as more fully described in reference to FIG. 3D”);
Mulligan and Zahid are analogous art as both of them are related to content processing.
Therefore it would have been obvious for an ordinary skilled person in the art before the effective filing date of claimed invention to have modified Zahid by determining a behavioral intent of target user according to environmental scenario information and attribute information; setting a content information corresponding to the behavioral intent in a preset memory as the information to be displayed as taught by Mulligan.
The motivation for the above is to create virtual content most suitable to user.
Claim 10 and 20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Zahid in view of KIM et al. (US Pat. Pub. No. 20190341952 “Kim”).
Regarding claim 20 Zahid is silent about a display information obtainer, wherein the display information obtainer comprises: a display information obtainer configured to obtain an original display information; wherein the second obtainer comprises: a first sub-obtainer configured to set the original display information as the information to be displayed if the display state of the extended reality device represents that an information display condition is satisfied; or a second sub-obtainer configured to generate a display content control information and filter the information to be displayed from the original display information according to the display content control information if the display state of the extended reality device represents that the information display condition is satisfied.
Kim teaches a display information obtainer (Fig. 3 integral part of element 350), wherein the display information obtainer comprises: a display information obtainer configured to obtain an original display information (“[0094] The controller 350 controls an overall operation of the wearable device 300. The controller 350 selects at least one of a plurality of previously stored strings representing a text message upon receiving a touch input via the touch input unit 320. The plurality of strings may be mapped with various information and stored”);
wherein the second obtainer comprises: a first sub-obtainer (Fig. 3 integral part of element 350), configured to set the original display information as the information to be displayed if the display state of the extended reality device represents that an information display condition is satisfied (“[0130] Alternatively, the wearable device 300 may sense a pattern of a movement of the user based on the information about a movement of the user to thereby determine a type of the movement of the user.
[0131] For example, when the user is driving, the wearable device 300 may sense a pattern of a movement of the arms of the user operating the steering wheel of a car and determine that the user is driving. Alternatively, when the user is walking, the wearable device 300 may sense a periodic pattern of a movement of the user and a variation in a location of the user and determine that the user is walking. When a speed at which a location of the wearable device 300 changes is equal to or greater than a threshold speed, the wearable device 300 may determine that the user is running.
[0132] The wearable device 300 may select at least one string from among a plurality of strings based on the determined type of the movement. The selected at least one string corresponds to the determined type of the movement”).
Kim and Zahid are analogous art as both of them are related to content processing.
Therefore it would have been obvious for an ordinary skilled person in the art before the effective filing date of claimed invention to have modified Zahid by obtaining an original display information; setting the original display information as the information to be displayed if the display state of the extended reality device represents that an information display condition is satisfied as taught by Kim.
The motivation for the above is retrieve information quickly thereby saving generation time.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Tominaga et al. (US Pat. Pub. No. 20210088793 ) teaches wearable device and displays content based on operating state of wearable device and state of the user is met;
CHOI (US Pat. Pub. No. 20160357386) teaches HMD and state information of the user and preset condition;
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to SAPTARSHI MAZUMDER whose telephone number is (571)270-3454. The examiner can normally be reached 8 am-4 pm PST.
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, Said Broome can be reached at (571)272-2931. 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.
/SAPTARSHI MAZUMDER/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2612
Prosecution Insights