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 § 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(s) 1-4, 8, 10-13, 17, and 19-20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Hocquet (WO 2020038872) in view of Upadhyay et al. (U.S. PGPUB 20180190003).
With respect to claim 1, Hocquet discloses a computer-implemented method comprising:
a first operation including generating a list of statically defined augmented reality objects using a central server (paragraph 13, The more virtual objects with their material properties are added to the database, the more materials are shared between the virtual objects, and therefore the more material properties are available to the other virtual objects);
extracting a set of features defining at least one augmented reality object of the list of statically defined augmented reality objects using the central server (paragraph 11, display parameters assigned to a superimposed object are loaded from a database);
generating a list of reusable features from the set of features at the central server (paragraph 12, while the other display parameters remain unchanged. Therefore, when individual display parameters are changed, it is not necessary to reload the entire virtual object, thus reducing the amount of data to be processed);
assigning a unique identifier (ID) to each reusable feature of the list of reusable features and creating a registry correlating each reusable feature to the assigned unique ID (paragraph 12, The display parameters describing a virtual scene can be stored in connection with the overlying virtual object. In particular, the individual files can be named according to a nomenclature, so that they can, for example, be exported separately to a storage medium); and
a second operation including providing an instruction file from the central server, wherein the instruction file defines an augmented reality (AR) object by defining a set of unique IDs and parameters defining the reusable feature corresponding to each unique ID (paragraph 21, In a further development of the process, the material properties assigned to the various grid areas, in particular the tint, the light transmission and the reflection, are changed in real time. By dividing the grid model into different grid sections and by assigning different materials, paragraph 36, Different material properties can be assigned to the different grid sections 2a - 2e. For example, metallic material properties can be assigned to the front frame 2a, while the side brackets 2b can be made of plastic, for example). Although Hocquet discloses a computer (paragraph 4, wherein a three-dimensional, virtual model of the virtual object to be superimposed or displayed is created using a computer) corresponding to a central server; Hocquet does not expressly disclose transmitting the reusable features from the central server to at least one client device and storing the reusable features at the at least one client device; providing an instruction file from the central server to the client device, wherein the instruction file is a text string, and wherein the text string defines an augmented reality (AR) object by defining a set of unique IDs and parameters defining the reusable feature corresponding to each unique ID; and causing the client device to render the AR object using the reusable features according to the text string.
Upadhyay et al., who also deal with augmented reality, disclose a method for transmitting the reusable features from the central server to at least one client device and storing the reusable features at the at least one client device (paragraph 38, A 3D resource may include data that defines one or more 3D environments and virtual objects within the 3D environments. 3D resources can be provided to user devices 106 by 3D application servers 104. For example, the 3D application servers 104 can include servers that host publisher websites. In this example, the user device 106 can initiate a request for a given 3D resource, and the 3D application server 104 that hosts the given 3D resource can respond to the request by transmitting the 3D resource to the user device 106);
providing an instruction file from the central server to the client device (paragraph 38, the 3D application server can provide one or more definition files to the user device 106), wherein the instruction file is a text string (paragraph 58, developers can insert a tag, a script, or executable code to the definition file(s) for a 3D environment that, when executed, instantiates a 3PCE virtual object in the 3D environment in accordance with any parameters specified therein, paragraph 65, when a 3D environment is initially loaded and rendered on the system 302, the rendering engine 308 parses the definition file(s) for the 3D environment), and wherein the text string defines an augmented reality (AR) object (paragraph 65, the rendering engine 308 parses the definition file(s) for the 3D environment, identifies any 3PCE virtual objects that are declared to appear in the 3D environment, and calls the virtual object manager 312 to instantiate each 3PCE virtual object. In calling the virtual object manager 312, the rendering engine 308 can pass the values of any parameters specified in the object declarations to the manager 312); and
causing the client device to render the AR object using the reusable features according to the text string (paragraph 65, The virtual object manager 312 then returns to the rendering engine 308 for presentation in the 3D environment a 3D model that represents the geometry of the 3PCE virtual object and the third-party content that has been selected for display on the object).
Hocquet and Upadhyay et al. are in the same field of endeavor, namely computer graphics.
Before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, it would have been obvious to apply the method of transmitting the reusable features from the central server to at least one client device and storing the reusable features at the at least one client device; providing an instruction file from the central server to the client device, wherein the instruction file is a text string, and wherein the text string defines an augmented reality (AR) object; and causing the client device to render the AR object using the reusable features according to the text string, as taught by Upadhyay et al., to the Hocquet system, because this would implement reducing transmissions of unused third-party content over a network and for efficiently rendering third-party content in a 3D environment (paragraph 3 of Upadhyay et al.).
With respect to claim 2, Hocquet as modified by Upadhyay et al. disclose the computer-implemented method of claim 1, further comprising displaying the AR object to a user of the at least one client device (Upadhyay et al.: paragraph 65, The rendering engine 308 then draws the virtual 3D object in the 3D environment for presentation to a user).
With respect to claim 3, Hocquet as modified by Upadhyay et al. disclose the computer-implemented method of claim 1, further comprising separating the set of features into a plurality of subsets based on at least one feature type classification (Hocquet: paragraph 36, Different material properties can be assigned to the different grid sections 2a - 2e. For example, metallic material properties can be assigned to the front frame 2a, while the side brackets 2b can be made of plastic, for example). Metallic and plastic material properties correspond to different subsets of features.
With respect to claim 4, Hocquet as modified by Upadhyay et al. disclose the computer-implemented method of claim 1, wherein extracting the set of features defining at least one augmented reality object comprises extracting features defining all augmented reality objects on the list of statically defined augmented reality objects (Hocquet: paragraph 36, In Fig. 2, a virtual model according to Fig. 1 is shown decomposed into different grid sections 2a - 2e… The optical representation of the grid sections can be calculated based on the material properties).
With respect to claim 8, Hocquet as modified by Upadhyay et al. disclose the computer-implemented method of claim 1, wherein generating the list of reusable features from the set of features at the central server comprises generating a list of features of a single augmented reality object in the list of statically defined augmented reality objects (Hocquet: paragraph 36, A grid model 1 according to Fig. 1 can be decomposed into different grid sections 2a - 2e, whereby different material properties can be assigned to each grid section 2a - 2e, for example). As shown in Fig. 2, a list of material features is generated from the eyeglass frame.
With respect to claim 10, Hocquet as modified by Upadhyay et al. disclose an augmented reality system comprising: a central server (Hocquet: paragraph 4, wherein a three-dimensional, virtual model of the virtual object to be superimposed or displayed is created using a computer) in communication with at least one augmented reality display (Hocquet: paragraph 4, This enables the insertion or overlay of a three-dimensional, virtual object into or over a real-time video stream and real-time playback on a display), wherein the augmented reality system is configured to execute the method of claim 1; see rationale for rejection of claim 1.
With respect to claim 11, Hocquet as modified by Upadhyay et al. disclose the system of claim 10, for executing the method of claim 2; see rationale for rejection of claim 2.
With respect to claim 12, Hocquet as modified by Upadhyay et al. disclose the system of claim 10, for executing the method of claim 3; see rationale for rejection of claim 3.
With respect to claim 13, Hocquet as modified by Upadhyay et al. disclose the system of claim 10, for executing the method of claim 4; see rationale for rejection of claim 4.
With respect to claim 17, Hocquet as modified by Upadhyay et al. disclose the system of claim 10, for executing the method of claim 8; see rationale for rejection of claim 8.
With respect to claim 19, Hocquet as modified by Upadhyay et al. disclose a computer program product comprising: a non-transitory computer-readable medium storing instructions for causing a computer system to implement an augmented reality system (Hocquet: paragraph 4, wherein a three-dimensional, virtual model of the virtual object to be superimposed or displayed is created using a computer; it is deemed inherent that such a system comprises a computer-readable medium for executing instructions implementing the method) for executing the method of claim 1; see rationale for rejection of claim 1.
With respect to claim 20, Hocquet as modified by Upadhyay et al. disclose the computer program product of claim 19, wherein the computer-readable medium further stores instructions for causing the at least one client device to implement the method of claim 2; see rationale for rejection of claim 2.
Claim(s) 5-7 and 14-16 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Hocquet (WO 2020038872) in view of Upadhyay et al. (U.S. PGPUB 20180190003) and further in view of Mullins (U.S. PGPUB 20140267405).
With respect to claim 5, Hocquet as modified by Upadhyay et al. disclose the computer-implemented method of claim 4. However, Hocquet as modified by Upadhyay et al. do not expressly disclose generating the list of reusable features from the set of features at the central server comprises generating a list of most common features across the augmented reality objects in the list of statically defined augmented reality objects.
Mullins, who also deals with augmented reality, discloses a method for generating the list of reusable features from the set of features at the central server comprises generating a list of most common features across the augmented reality objects in the list of statically defined augmented reality objects (paragraph 40, The analytics and results data 214 may include results data from an analysis of the analytics data with the analytics computation module 206. Results data may include most often used features or most often looked at location of a virtual content generated from one of the experience content dataset 212).
Hocquet, Upadhyay et al., and Mullins are in the same field of endeavor, namely computer graphics.
Before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, it would have been obvious to apply the method of generating the list of reusable features from the set of features at the central server comprises generating a list of most common features across the augmented reality objects in the list of statically defined augmented reality objects, as taught by Mullins, to the Hocquet as modified by Upadhyay et al. system, because the analytics results may be provided to the campaign optimization module to generate an enhanced experience content dataset based on the analytics results. For example, the experience at the device may be customized based on the user device usage history (paragraph 25 of Mullins).
With respect to claim 6, Hocquet as modified by Upadhyay et al. and Mullins disclose the computer-implemented method of claim 4, wherein generating the list of reusable features from the set of features at the central server comprises generating a list of features used to construct a set of most commonly used augmented reality objects in the list of statically defined augmented reality objects (Mullins: paragraph 46, the experience content database builder 306 accesses a three-dimensional virtual content (e.g., a three-dimensional virtual car with animated features) and a two-dimensional virtual content (e.g., a picture) selected based on the analytics data 402 and analytics data 404. The experience content dataset builder 306 associates the physical content model with the virtual content module to generate the optimized experience content dataset 408, paragraph 53, the analytics computation module 206 may determine features most used or clicked on, colors of virtual object clicked on the most or least, areas of the virtual object viewed the most, and so forth. The resulting computation of the analytics computation module 206 may be referred to as analytics results 404).
With respect to claim 7, Hocquet as modified by Upadhyay et al. and Mullins disclose the computer-implemented method of claim 4, wherein generating the list of reusable features from the set of features at the central server comprises generating a list of features whose combination could construct a majority of augmented reality objects in the list of statically defined augmented reality objects (Mullins: paragraph 46, the experience content database builder 306 accesses a three-dimensional virtual content (e.g., a three-dimensional virtual car with animated features) and a two-dimensional virtual content (e.g., a picture) selected based on the analytics data 402 and analytics data 404. The experience content dataset builder 306 associates the physical content model with the virtual content module to generate the optimized experience content dataset 408, paragraph 65, The primary content dataset 610 may include a core set of images or the most popular images determined by the server 110. The core set of images may include a limited number of images identified by the server 110. For example, the core set of images may include the cover image of the ten most popular magazines and the corresponding experiences (e.g., virtual objects). In another example, the server 110 may generate the first set of images based on the most popular or often scanned images received at the server 110). The core set of images corresponds to the most common set of features, which could construct a majority of the augmented reality objects in the experience.
With respect to claim 14, Hocquet as modified by Upadhyay et al. and Mullins disclose the system of claim 13, for executing the method of claim 5; see rationale for rejection of claim 5.
With respect to claim 15, Hocquet as modified by Upadhyay et al. and Mullins disclose the system of claim 13, for executing the method of claim 6; see rationale for rejection of claim 6.
With respect to claim 16, Hocquet as modified by Upadhyay et al. and Mullins disclose the system of claim 13, for executing the method of claim 7; see rationale for rejection of claim 7.
Claim(s) 9 and 18 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Hocquet (WO 2020038872) in view of Upadhyay et al. (U.S. PGPUB 20180190003) and further in view of Hare (U.S. PGPUB 20200359160).
With respect to claim 9, Hocquet as modified by Upadhyay et al. and Hare disclose the computer-implemented method of claim 1, wherein the augmented reality (AR) object defined by the set of unique IDs is a dynamic AR object (Hocquet: paragraph 42, the lenses 2c can be displayed as transparent, but the tint 7, 8 can also be changed in different levels, so that a user can try on different tint levels 7, 8 of sunglasses in real time). However, Hocquet as modified by Upadhyay et al. do not expressly disclose the registry correlating each reusable feature to the assigned unique ID is continuously updated according to a least recently used (LRU) algorithm.
Hare, who also deals with augmented reality, discloses a method wherein the registry correlating each reusable feature to the assigned unique ID is continuously updated according to a least recently used (LRU) algorithm (paragraph 50, the augmented reality device 12 may delete the oldest stored marker information and associated augmented reality content. As another example, the augmented reality device 12 may delete marker information and associated augmented reality content corresponding to a geographical area or location that is furthest away from the current area or location of the augmented reality device. As yet another example, the augmented reality device 12 may delete marker information and associated augmented reality content that is the least frequently used).
Hocquet, Upadhyay et al., and Hare are in the same field of endeavor, namely computer graphics.
Before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, it would have been obvious to apply the method wherein the registry correlating each reusable feature to the assigned unique ID is continuously updated according to a least recently used (LRU) algorithm, as taught by Hare, to the Hocquet as modified by Upadhyay et al. system, because the augmented reality device 12 has finite storage space, previously stored information may be deleted to make room for the marker information (associated with the marker 32) and the associated augmented reality content 34 (paragraph 29 of Hare).
With respect to claim 18, Hocquet as modified by Upadhyay et al. and Hare disclose the system of claim 10, for executing the method of claim 9; see rationale for rejection of claim 9.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to claim(s) 1, 10, and 19 have been considered but are moot in view of the new ground(s) of rejection.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
U.S. PGPUB 20160227172 to Safaei et al. for a method of including instructions for rendering objects common to virtual environments.
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 nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) 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.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ANDREW GUS YANG whose telephone number is (571)272-5514. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 9 AM - 5:30 PM.
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, Kent Chang can be reached at (571)272-7667. 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.
/ANDREW G YANG/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2614
9/22/26
Prosecution Insights