DETAILED ACTION
This action is in response to the Applicant filings received on January 8, 2025, February 7, 2025, and March 26, 2026. Claims 1-2, 4-14, 16-17, and 21-25 are pending with claims 3, 15, and 18-20 canceled, claims 1, 6-8, 14, and 16-17 currently amended, and claims 21-25 newly presented. This office action is the first action on the merits of the instant application.
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 Objections
Claims 21 and 25 are objected to because of the following informalities:
Claim 21 recites, “wireless transmitted” in line 7; however, the claim should recite, “wirelessly transmitted”.
Claim 25 recites, “wireless transmitted” in line 7; however, the claim should recite, “wirelessly transmitted”.
Appropriate correction is required.
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 2, 17, and 25 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 2 is rejected for ambiguity within the claim language. Claims 1 and 2 recite “a system”, yet claim 2 depends on claim 1. It is unclear whether the claims are intending to recite a new and separate system for each claim or whether the claims are all referring to the same system; therefore, the recited system in claim 2 is indefinite.
For the purposes of examination, the Examiner assumes the Applicant intended for claims 1 and 2 to refer to the same system.
Claim 17 recites the limitation “the motion of motion capture markers” in lines 3-4. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
The Examiner notes “tracking motion capture markers” is properly introduced within claim 9; however, claim 17 directly depends on claim 14, which directly depends on claim 1. Therefore, the limitations of claim 9 are not imported into claim 17.
Claim 25 recites the limitation “the one or more processors” in line 2. There is insufficient antecedent basis 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 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.
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.
Claims 1-2, 4-5, 7-14, 16-17, and 21-25 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Stein [US9838119B1].
Regarding claim 1 (Currently Amended), Stein discloses:
A system, comprising:
a virtual reality headset comprising one or more headset sensors (Stein, Fig 3 displays the virtual reality headset with various sensors (e.g., user receiving device 55). Also referred to as a “mobile device” and “mobile endpoint”.); and
a laser array (Stein, Fig 1, Base Station 30 and Stein, Fig 2B and 2C, Light Source 70) comprising:
one or more lasers (Stein, Fig 4A, Optical Beam or Ray 40),
wherein the laser array is configured to receive console data transmitted from a video game console (Stein, cols 11-12, lines 63-67 and line 1, respectively, “Computing device 800 is intended to represent various forms of digital computers, … , which may be in communication with the base station described herein...” The computing device acts as the video game console. Further: Stein, col 2, lines 65-67, “particularly when the users move in the space while interacting with their particular application or game.”),
wherein the laser array is configured to wirelessly transmit the console data to the one or more headset sensors via the one or more lasers of the laser array (Stein, col 10, lines 1-16, “The headset 500 shown in FIG. 5 may include a user tracking device 520 to facilitate initial location and tracking of the electronic device in the prescribed space based on an optical tracking signal from the base station 300 or other light source, a receiving device 550 that receives optical data signals from the base station 300, and a transmitting device 580 that transmits optical data signals to the base station 300. The headset 500 may also include a control system 510 including an operating system 511, various applications 512 to be run by the headset 500 together with data received from the base station 300, audio and video control algorithms 513, and an input interface 514 capable of receiving external input, and a memory 515 accessible to the control system 510, with a processor 530 operably coupling the components of the control system 510 to the tracking device 520, transmitting device 580 and receiving device 550.”), and
wherein the laser array is configured to be positioned above a user in use, such that the one or more lasers are configured to transmit laser signals downwards (Stein, Fig 1 displays the base station 30 mounted to the ceiling with optical beams 40 extending downward.).
Regarding claim 2 (Original), Stein discloses:
A system according to claim 1,
wherein the one or more lasers are configured to emit a direct laser beam towards the one or more headset sensors (Stein, col 6, lines 53-58, “the base station 30 may include a steering mechanism, which may orient the transmission of information from the base station 30 to the mobile receiving endpoint(s) 10 using, for example, an optical beam 40 directed to a specifically intended user receiving endpoint 10 based on the identified/tracked location.”).
Regarding claim 3, the claim was canceled prior to the first action on the merits.
Regarding claim 4 (Original), Stein discloses:
The system according to claim 1, further comprising:
one or more auxiliary laser arrays each comprising one or more auxiliary lasers (Stein, col 29-31, “one or more of the multiple base stations may include a second emitter having a static transmission angle, forming a chain of base stations.”),
wherein the one or more auxiliary laser arrays are configured to receive the console data transmitted from the video game console (Stein, col 8, lines 31-34, “In this chain of base stations, the second optical signal may provide a network backbone, transmitting high bandwidth data from one base station to the next.”), and
wherein the one or more auxiliary laser arrays are configured to transmit the console data to the one or more headset sensors via the one or more auxiliary lasers of the one or more auxiliary laser arrays (Stein, col 8, 39-41, “with each base station using its primary optical path to aim optical data signal(s) to respective mobile user endpoints.”).
Regarding claim 5 (Original), Stein discloses:
The system according to claim 1,
wherein the laser array comprises one or more array sensors configured to detect optical signals transmitted by the video game console and/or the virtual reality headset (See citations within claim 1.).
Regarding claim 7 (Currently Amended), Stein discloses:
The system according to claim 1,
wherein the laser array is configured to track motion of the virtual reality headset to determine a position of the virtual reality headset (See citations within claim 1.), and
wherein the one or more lasers of the laser array are configured to be orientated in a direction facing the virtual reality headset based on the determined position of the virtual reality headset (See citations within claims 1 and 2.).
Regarding claim 8 (Currently Amended), Stein discloses:
The system according to claim 7,
wherein the laser array comprises a motor configured to change the orientation of the one or more lasers of the laser array based on the determined position of the virtual reality headset (Stein, col 7, lines 13-21, “In some implementations, this may include, for example, rotating a first single axis mirror about a first axis and a second single axis mirror about a second axis to specific position(s) to beam a ray 40 generated by the light source towards a specific, intended 3D endpoint 10. Alternatively, in some implementations, this may include, for example, rotating a single mirror about a first axis and a second axis to beam a ray 40 generated by the light source towards a specific, intended 3D endpoint.”).
Regarding claim 9 (Original), Stein discloses:
The system according to claim 7,
wherein the laser array tracks the motion of the virtual reality headset at least in part by tracking motion capture markers located on the virtual reality headset via a camera (Stein, cols 3-4, lines 66-67 and lines 1-7, respectively, “This may include, for example, a camera, associated with each of the user receiving endpoints 10, oriented into the space 20 to triangulate a position of each mobile endpoint 10 based on detection of markers affixed at known positions in the space 20, and/or a camera oriented into the space 20 to detect markers physically affixed to each of the user receiving endpoints 10 to determine a position of each of the user receiving endpoints 10.”).
Regarding claim 10 (Original), Stein discloses:
The system according to claim 1,
wherein the virtual reality headset comprises a motion sensor configured to detect motion of the virtual reality headset (See citations within claim 1.), and
wherein the motion sensor is configured to generate headset motion data based on the detected motion of the virtual reality headset (See citations within claim 1.).
Regarding claim 11 (Original), Stein discloses:
The system according to claim 10,
wherein the virtual reality headset is configured to transmit the headset motion data to the one or more array sensors (See citations within claims 1 and 2.), and
wherein the laser array tracks the motion of the virtual reality headset based at least in part on the headset motion data (See citations within claims 1 and 2.).
Regarding claim 12 (Original), Stein discloses:
The system according to claim 1,
wherein the one or more headset sensors comprise one or more top-mounted sensors and/or one or more bottom-mounted sensors (Stein, col 6, lines 40-44, “In some implementations, the user tracking device 52 may be located at other positions on the headset 50. For example, the user tracking device 52 may be located at a top portion of the frame 53, or at a rear portion of the frame 53, or on a portion of the housing 51.”),
wherein the top-mounted sensors are mounted on an upper section of the virtual reality headset and
the bottom-mounted sensors are mounted on a lower section of the virtual reality headset.
Regarding claim 13 (Original), Stein discloses:
The system according to claim 1,
wherein the console data comprises video data (Stein, col 11, lines 24-40, “The system and method for automatic steering of optical wireless communication systems has been described herein with respect to a VR/AR interactive entertainment system, simply for ease and clarity of discussion and illustration. However, the system and method for automatic steering of optical wireless communication, as embodied and broadly described herein, may also be applied to other systems, such as, for example, a workplace environment, a training environment, a classroom environment, and other such applications and/or implementations involving data transceiving between one or more base stations and multiple mobile user endpoints. Additionally, the system and method for automatic steering of optical wireless communication has been described herein with respect to a space in which the system operates. This space may be an indoor space or an outdoor space, or any space equipped so that the system may operate as described.”).
Regarding claim 14 (Currently Amended), Stein discloses:
The system according to claim 1, the laser array comprising:
one or more laser sensors,
wherein the one or more laser sensors are configured to detect a laser signal comprising video data (See citations within claims 1 and 13.);
one or more radio sensors,
wherein the one or more radio sensors are configured to detect a radio signal comprising location data (Stein, col 14, lines 17-23, “Communication interface 866 may provide for communications under various modes or protocols, such as GSM voice calls, SMS, EMS, or MMS messaging, CDMA, TDMA, PDC, WCDMA, CDMA2000, or GPRS, among others. Such communication may occur, for example, through radio-frequency transceiver 868.”); and
a motor,
wherein the motor is configured to orientate the one or more lasers based on the received location data (See citations within claim 8.).
Regarding claim 15, the claim was canceled prior to the first action on the merits.
Regarding claim 16 (Currently Amended), Stein discloses:
The system according to claim 14, further comprising:
a mounting for attaching the laser array to a ceiling (Stein, col 6, lines 58-60, “As shown in the example implementation of FIG. 1, the base station 30 may positioned on a ceiling surface of the space 20”),
wherein the one or more lasers are configured to transmit the laser signal downwards away from the ceiling (Stein, See Fig 1 and citations within claim 1.).
Regarding claim 17 (Currently Amended), Stein discloses:
The system according to claim 14, further comprising:
a camera,
wherein the laser array is configured to track the motion of motion capture markers via the camera (See citations within claim 9.), and
wherein the motor is configured to orientate the one or more lasers based on the detected motion of the motion capture markers (See citations within claims 8 and 9.).
Regarding claim 18-20, the claims were canceled prior to the first action on the merits.
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 for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized as follows:
1. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art.
2. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue.
3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art.
4. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness.
This application currently names joint inventors. In considering patentability of the claims the examiner presumes that the subject matter of the various claims was commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the claimed invention(s) absent any evidence to the contrary. Applicant is advised of the obligation under 37 CFR 1.56 to point out the inventor and effective filing dates of each claim that was not commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the later invention in order for the examiner to consider the applicability of 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(C) for any potential 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) prior art against the later invention.
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 6 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Stein.
Regarding claim 6 (Currently Amended), Stein discloses:
The system according to claim 5, further comprising the video game console,
wherein the video game console comprises a console laser (Stein, cols 11-12, lines 63-67 and line 1-2, respectively, “Computing device 800 is intended to represent various forms of digital computers, such as laptops, desktops, workstations, personal digital assistants, servers, blade servers, mainframes, and other appropriate computers, which may be in communication with the base station described herein and/or which may function as the base station described herein.”), and
wherein the video game console is configured to transmit the console data to the one or more array sensors via the console laser (Stein, col 12, lines 1-2, “which may function as the base station described herein.”).
Stein does not explicitly recite a video game console comprising a console laser that transmits console data to one or more array sensors via the console laser; however, Stein does disclose the video game console (i.e., computing device 800) is capable of operating as the base station 30, which contains the lasers capable of transmitting the data. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention that the lasers applied to the base station of Stein would be capable of being applied to the computing device of Stein as the lasers are simply one aspect of the full requirements necessary for the computing device to operate as a base station.
Regarding claims 21-25 (New), the claims share similar limitations to claims 1-2, 4-14, and 16-17. For citations on rejection, see the rejection of claims 1-2, 4-14, and 16-17 above.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ZACHARY JOSEPH POLLOCK whose telephone number is (703)756-5952. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 10:00am-8:00pm ET.
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, XUAN THAI can be reached at (571) 272-7147. 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.
/Z.J.P./Examiner, Art Unit 3715
/XUAN M THAI/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3715
Prosecution Insights