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 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:
Surface identification logic and processing logic in claim 16.
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.
Information Disclosure Statement
NPL entry #2 of ids filed 1/13/25 is missing a date and has not been considered; at least the year published is necessary.
Specification
Title of the Invention
The title of the invention is not descriptive. A new title is required that is clearly indicative of the invention to which the claims are directed.
The following title is suggested:
SYSTEMS AND METHODS FOR DETERMINING RENDERED PIXEL VALUES IN ACCORDANCE WITH DETERMINED EXTENTS OF OCCLUSION FROM A LIGHT FOR PIXELS
Abstract
The abstract of the disclosure is objected to because it isn’t relevant to the current set of claims. A corrected abstract of the disclosure is required and must be presented on a separate sheet, apart from any other text. See MPEP § 608.01(b).
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 1-11 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 101 because the claimed invention is directed to non-statutory subject matter.
The claim(s) does/do not fall within at least one of the four categories of patent eligible subject matter because claim 1 is directed to: A machine-implemented method of processing a plurality of rays cast from surfaces in a scene, wherein positions of primitives in the scene are represented by nodes of a hierarchical acceleration structure and each ray of the plurality of rays is associated with one or more pixels of a frame of pixels, the method comprising the steps of identifying, determining and determining which are nothing more than software instructions. Software instructions are non-statutory under 35 U.S.C. 101.
Claims 2-11 depend from claim 1 and comprise additional steps, for example claim 3 comprises the steps of determining and using, therefore claims 2-11 have the same problem as claim 1 and are rejected under the same rationale.
Double Patenting
The nonstatutory double patenting rejection is based on a judicially created doctrine grounded in public policy (a policy reflected in the statute) so as to prevent the unjustified or improper timewise extension of the “right to exclude” granted by a patent and to prevent possible harassment by multiple assignees. A nonstatutory double patenting rejection is appropriate where the conflicting claims are not identical, but at least one examined application claim is not patentably distinct from the reference claim(s) because the examined application claim is either anticipated by, or would have been obvious over, the reference claim(s). See, e.g., In re Berg, 140 F.3d 1428, 46 USPQ2d 1226 (Fed. Cir. 1998); In re Goodman, 11 F.3d 1046, 29 USPQ2d 2010 (Fed. Cir. 1993); In re Longi, 759 F.2d 887, 225 USPQ 645 (Fed. Cir. 1985); In re Van Ornum, 686 F.2d 937, 214 USPQ 761 (CCPA 1982); In re Vogel, 422 F.2d 438, 164 USPQ 619 (CCPA 1970); In re Thorington, 418 F.2d 528, 163 USPQ 644 (CCPA 1969).
A timely filed terminal disclaimer in compliance with 37 CFR 1.321(c) or 1.321(d) may be used to overcome an actual or provisional rejection based on nonstatutory double patenting provided the reference application or patent either is shown to be commonly owned with the examined application, or claims an invention made as a result of activities undertaken within the scope of a joint research agreement. See MPEP § 717.02 for applications subject to examination under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA as explained in MPEP § 2159. See MPEP § 2146 et seq. for applications not subject to examination under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA . A terminal disclaimer must be signed in compliance with 37 CFR 1.321(b).
The filing of a terminal disclaimer by itself is not a complete reply to a nonstatutory double patenting (NSDP) rejection. A complete reply requires that the terminal disclaimer be accompanied by a reply requesting reconsideration of the prior Office action. Even where the NSDP rejection is provisional the reply must be complete. See MPEP § 804, subsection I.B.1. For a reply to a non-final Office action, see 37 CFR 1.111(a). For a reply to final Office action, see 37 CFR 1.113(c). A request for reconsideration while not provided for in 37 CFR 1.113(c) may be filed after final for consideration. See MPEP §§ 706.07(e) and 714.13.
The USPTO Internet website contains terminal disclaimer forms which may be used. Please visit www.uspto.gov/patent/patents-forms. The actual filing date of the application in which the form is filed determines what form (e.g., PTO/SB/25, PTO/SB/26, PTO/AIA /25, or PTO/AIA /26) should be used. A web-based eTerminal Disclaimer may be filled out completely online using web-screens. An eTerminal Disclaimer that meets all requirements is auto-processed and approved immediately upon submission. For more information about eTerminal Disclaimers, refer to www.uspto.gov/patents/apply/applying-online/eterminal-disclaimer.
Claims 1-15 and 17-19 are rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claims 1-15 and 17-19 of U.S. Patent No. 10,529,120 B2. Although the claims at issue are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other because the instant claims are a broader version of the patent claims.
Claim 16 is rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claim 12 of U.S. Patent No. 10,529,120 in view of ASHTON (US 5,596,685).
Regarding claim 16, the patent doesn’t teach, however the analogous prior art ASHTON teaches: 16. The graphics processing unit of claim 12, further comprising:
surface identification logic configured to identify surfaces within the scene (ASHTON: col. 6 lines 18-23); and
processing logic configured to process graphics data for identified surfaces (ASHTON: col. 1 lines 36-43; col. 6 lines 18-23).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine surface identification logic configured to identify surfaces within the scene; and processing logic configured to process graphics data for identified surfaces as shown in ASHTON with the patent for the benefit of addressing a shortcoming in the prior art in that the best known prior art systems for generating fully occulted real time 3D images is the Z-buffer or depth buffer image precision algorithm. However Z-buffer type systems require a high level of integration and performance and are very expensive. It is necessary to use a high performance frame buffer and Z-buffer if real time performance is to be achieved [col. 1 lines 13-15 and lines 31-34].
Claims of 19/019,232 Claims of US 10,529,120 B2
1. A machine-implemented method of processing a plurality of rays cast from surfaces in a scene, wherein positions of primitives in the scene are represented by nodes of a hierarchical acceleration structure and each ray of the plurality of rays is associated with one or more pixels of a frame of pixels, the method comprising:
for one or more rays that are not occluded from a light in the scene:
identifying a nearest-hit primitive by determining which of the nodes of the hierarchical acceleration structure to be hit by the ray has the smallest distance-ratio, wherein a distance-ratio for a node is the ratio of a dimension of the node and the distance along the ray at which the ray hits the node; and
determining an extent of occlusion from the light for one or more pixels corresponding to an origin of the ray in accordance with data relating to the determined node having the smallest distance-ratio; and
determining rendered pixel values of the frame in accordance with the determined extents of occlusion from the light for the pixels.
2. The machine-implemented method of claim 1, wherein said data relating to the determined node having the smallest distance-ratio includes one or both of:(i) an indication of said dimension of the node and an indication of the distance along the ray at which the ray hits the node, and (ii) the distance-ratio of the determined node.
3. The machine-implemented method of claim 1, wherein said determining an extent of occlusion from the light for the one or more pixels corresponding to the ray origin comprises determining an angle corresponding to the distance-ratio of the determined node, and using the determined angle to determine the extent of occlusion from the light.
4. The machine-implemented method of claim 1, wherein the nodes are voxels which are determined in accordance with an octree structure.
5. The machine-implemented method of claim 1, wherein said identifying a nearest-hit primitive for a ray comprises:
storing a closest hit distance-ratio for the ray;
descending within the hierarchical acceleration structure from a current level for a test primitive being tested if the current node corresponding to the test primitive at the current level is a hit for the ray and if the distance-ratio for the current node is smaller than the stored closest hit distance-ratio for the ray; and
updating the stored closest hit distance-ratio for the ray in response to descending within the hierarchical acceleration structure.
6. The machine-implemented method of claim 5, wherein a node of the hierarchical acceleration structure with a relatively low distance-ratio is selectively descended before a node of the hierarchical acceleration structure with a relatively high distance-ratio.
7. The machine-implemented method of claim 5, wherein the hierarchical acceleration structure is traversed in a depth-first manner.
8. The machine-implemented method of claim 1, wherein said determining an extent of occlusion from the light for the one or more pixels corresponding to the ray origin further uses information relating to the light.
9. The machine-implemented method of claim 8, wherein the information relating to the light comprises one or more of:
a position of the light in the scene;
a distance of the light from the origin of the ray;
a spatial extent of the light in the scene; and
a spatial extent of the light as viewed along the direction of the ray.
10. The machine-implemented method of claim 1, wherein said determining an extent of occlusion from the light for the one or more pixels corresponding to the ray origin comprises determining an attenuation value for the nearest-hit primitive for the ray and using the determined attenuation value to determine the extent of occlusion.
11. The machine-implemented method of claim 1, further comprising:
for each of the rays that are determined to be occluded from the light:
recording a distance along the ray from the surface to its respective occlusion;
determining a blending region for a blending filter based on the recorded distance for the ray;
transforming that blending region into the frame of pixels;
blending shadow information for pixels in the frame of pixels that are within the transformed blending region; and
using the blended shadow information to determine shadowing for the one or more pixels corresponding to the ray origin.
12. A graphics processing unit for processing a plurality of rays cast from surfaces in a scene, wherein positions of primitives in the scene are represented by nodes of a hierarchical acceleration structure and each ray of the plurality of rays is associated with one or more pixels of a frame of pixels, wherein the graphics processing unit is configured to:
for one or more rays that are not occluded from a light in the scene:
identify a nearest-hit primitive by determining which of the nodes of the hierarchical acceleration structure to be hit by the ray has the smallest distance-ratio, wherein a distance-ratio for a node is the ratio of a dimension of the node and the distance along the ray at which the ray hits the node; and
determine an extent of occlusion from the light for one or more pixels corresponding to an origin of the ray in accordance with data relating to the determined node having the smallest distance-ratio.
13. The graphics processing unit of claim 12, wherein the graphics processing unit is configured to determine the extent of occlusion from the light for the one or more pixels corresponding to a ray origin by determining an angle corresponding to the distance-ratio of the determined node, and using the determined angle to determine the extent of occlusion from the light.
14. The graphics processing unit of claim 12, configured to identify a nearest-hit primitive for a ray by:
storing a closest hit distance-ratio for the ray;
descending within the hierarchical acceleration structure from a current level for a test primitive being tested if the current node corresponding to the test primitive at the current level is a hit for the ray and if the distance-ratio for the current node is smaller than the stored closest hit distance-ratio for the ray; and
updating the stored closest hit distance-ratio for the ray in response to descending within the hierarchical acceleration structure.
15. The graphics processing unit of claim 12, wherein the graphics processing unit is configured to determine an extent of occlusion from the light for a pixel further using information relating to the light.
17. The graphics processing unit of claim 12, wherein the graphics processing unit is configured to, for each of the rays that are occluded from the light:
record a distance along the ray from the surface to its respective occlusion;
determine a blending region for a blending filter based on the recorded distance for the ray;
transform that blending region into the frame of pixels;
blend shadow information for pixels in the frame of pixels that are within the transformed blending region; and
use the blended shadow information to determine shadowing for the one or more pixels corresponding to the ray origin.
18. The graphics processing unit of claim 12, wherein the graphics processing unit is further configured to determine rendered pixel values of the frame in accordance with the determined extents of occlusion from the light for the pixels.
19. A non-transitory computer readable storage medium having stored thereon computer readable instructions that, when executed at a computer system, cause the computer system to perform the method as set forth in claim 1.
1. A machine-implemented method of graphics processing, wherein positions of primitives in a scene are represented by nodes of a hierarchical acceleration structure, the method comprising:
using the hierarchical acceleration structure to identify visible surfaces of a scene for pixels of a frame of pixels;
for one or more of the rays that are determined to be not occluded from the light:
identifying a nearest-hit primitive by determining which of the nodes of the hierarchical acceleration structure to be hit by the ray has the smallest distance-ratio, wherein a distance-ratio for a node is the ratio of a dimension of the node and the distance along the ray at which the ray hits the node;
determining an extent of occlusion from the light for one or more pixels corresponding to the ray origin in accordance with data relating to the determined node having the smallest distance-ratio; and
determining rendered pixel values of the frame in accordance with the determined extents of occlusion from the light for the pixels
determining origins for casting rays from the visible surfaces towards a light;
determining whether each of the rays is occluded from reaching the light.
2. The machine-implemented method of claim 1, wherein said data relating to the determined node having the smallest distance-ratio includes one or both of: (i) an indication of said dimension of the node and an indication of the distance along the ray at which the ray hits the node, and (ii) the distance-ratio of the determined node.
3. The machine-implemented method of claim 1, wherein said determining an extent of occlusion from the light for the one or more pixels corresponding to the ray origin comprises determining an angle corresponding to the distance-ratio of the determined node, and using the determined angle to determine the extent of occlusion from the light.
4. The machine-implemented method of claim 1, wherein the nodes are voxels which are determined in accordance with an octree structure.
5. The machine-implemented method of claim 1, wherein said identifying a nearest-hit primitive for a ray comprises:
storing a closest hit distance-ratio for the ray;
descending within the hierarchical acceleration structure from a current level for a test primitive being tested if the current node corresponding to the test primitive at the current level is a hit for the ray and if the distance-ratio for the current node is smaller than the stored closest hit distance-ratio for the ray; and
updating the stored closest hit distance-ratio for the ray in response to descending within the hierarchical acceleration structure.
6. The machine-implemented method of claim 5, wherein a node of the hierarchical acceleration structure with a relatively low distance-ratio is selectively descended before a node of the hierarchical acceleration structure with a relatively high distance-ratio.
7. The machine-implemented method of claim 5, wherein the hierarchical acceleration structure is traversed in a depth-first manner.
8. The machine-implemented method of claim 1, wherein said determining an extent of occlusion from the light for the one or more pixels corresponding to the ray origin further uses information relating to the light.
9. The machine-implemented method of claim 8, wherein the information relating to the light comprises one or more of:
a position of the light in the scene;
a distance of the light from the origin of the ray;
a spatial extent of the light in the scene; and
a spatial extent of the light as viewed along the direction of the ray.
10. The machine-implemented method of claim 1, wherein said determining an extent of occlusion from the light for the one or more pixels corresponding to the ray origin comprises determining an attenuation value for the nearest-hit primitive for the ray and using the determined attenuation value to determine the extent of occlusion.
11. The machine-implemented method of claim 1, further comprising:
for each of the rays that are determined to be occluded from the light:
recording a distance along the ray from the surface to its respective occlusion;
determining a blending region for a blending filter based on the recorded distance for the ray;
transforming that blending region into the frame of pixels;
blending shadow information for pixels in the frame of pixels that are within the transformed blending region; and
using the blended shadow information to determine shadowing for the one or more pixels corresponding to the ray origin.
12. A graphics processing unit configured to render a frame representing a scene, wherein positions of primitives in the scene are represented by nodes of a hierarchical acceleration structure, the graphics processing unit comprising:
wherein the graphics processing unit is configured to:
for one or more of the rays that are determined to be not occluded from the light:
identify a nearest-hit primitive by determining which of the nodes of the hierarchical acceleration structure to be hit by the ray has the smallest distance-ratio, wherein a distance-ratio for a node is the ratio of a dimension of the node and the distance along the ray at which the ray hits the node;
determine an extent of occlusion from the light for one or more pixels corresponding to the ray origin in accordance with data relating to the determined node having the smallest distance-ratio;
surface identification logic configured to identify surfaces within the scene; and
processing logic configured to process graphics data for identified surfaces;
use the hierarchical acceleration structure to identify visible surfaces of a scene for pixels of a frame of pixels;
determine origins for casting rays from the visible surfaces towards a light;
determine whether each of the rays is occluded from reaching the light.
13. The graphics processing unit of claim 12, wherein the graphics processing unit is configured to determine the extent of occlusion from the light for the one or more pixels corresponding to a ray origin by determining an angle corresponding to the distance-ratio of the determined node, and using the determined angle to determine the extent of occlusion from the light.
14. The graphics processing unit of claim 12, configured to identify a nearest-hit primitive for a ray by:
storing a closest hit distance-ratio for the ray;
descending within the hierarchical acceleration structure from a current level for a test primitive being tested if the current node corresponding to the test primitive at the current level is a hit for the ray and if the distance-ratio for the current node is smaller than the stored closest hit distance-ratio for the ray; and
updating the stored closest hit distance-ratio for the ray in response to descending within the hierarchical acceleration structure.
15. The graphics processing unit of claim 12, wherein the graphics processing unit is configured to determine an extent of occlusion from the light for a pixel further using information relating to the light.
17. The graphics processing unit of claim 12, wherein the graphics processing unit is configured to, for each of the rays that are determined to be occluded from the light:
record a distance along the ray from the surface to its respective occlusion;
determine a blending region for a blending filter based on the recorded distance for the ray;
transform that blending region into the frame of pixels;
blend shadow information for pixels in the frame of pixels that are within the transformed blending region; and
use the blended shadow information to determine shadowing for the one or more pixels corresponding to the ray origin.
18. The graphics processing unit of claim 12, wherein the graphics processing unit is further configured to determine rendered pixel values of the frame in accordance with the determined extents of occlusion from the light for the pixels.
19. A non-transitory computer readable storage medium having stored thereon processor executable instructions that when executed cause at least one processor to:
use a hierarchical acceleration structure to identify visible surfaces of a scene for pixels of a frame of pixels, wherein positions of primitives in the scene are represented by nodes of the hierarchical acceleration structure;
determine origins for casting rays from the visible surfaces towards a light;
determine whether each of the rays is occluded from reaching the light;
for one or more of the rays that are determined to be not occluded from the light:
identify a nearest-hit primitive by determining which of the nodes of the hierarchical acceleration structure to be hit by the ray has the smallest distance-ratio, wherein a distance-ratio for a node is the ratio of a dimension of the node and the distance along the ray at which the ray hits the node; and
determine an extent of occlusion from the light for one or more pixels corresponding to the ray origin in accordance with data relating to the determined node having the smallest distance-ratio; and
determine rendered pixel values of the frame in accordance with the determined extents of occlusion from the light for the pixels.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to MAURICE L MCDOWELL, JR whose telephone number is (571)270-3707. The examiner can normally be reached Mon-Fri: 2pm-10pm.
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 A. 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.
/MAURICE L. MCDOWELL, JR/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2612
Prosecution Insights