DETAILED ACTION
This non-final rejection is responsive to the claims filed 15 January 2025. Claims 1-20 are pending. Claims 1, 19, and 20 are independent claims.
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 .
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 USPTO Internet website contains terminal disclaimer forms which may be used. Please visit www.uspto.gov/patent/patents-forms. The 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/process/file/efs/guidance/eTD-info-I.jsp.
Claims 1-20 rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claim 1-20 of U.S. Patent No. 12,236,063 B2. Although the claims at issue are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other.
Instant Application No. 19021604
Reference Patent: US 12,263,063 B2
1. A method comprising: determining how many non-access restricted augmented reality experiences a creator of a given augmented reality experience has previously submitted; and allowing the creator to submit the given augmented reality experience in response to determining that a quantity of the non-access restricted augmented reality experiences the creator has previously submitted transgresses a threshold.
17. The method of claim 1, further comprising: determining how many non-access restricted augmented reality experiences a creator of the given augmented reality experience has previously submitted; and allowing the creator to submit the given augmented reality experience in response to determining that a quantity of the non-access restricted augmented reality experiences the creator has previously submitted transgresses a threshold.
2. The method of claim 1, further comprising: receiving, by a device, a request to access a display of a plurality of augmented reality experiences;
receiving input associated with a preview of a given augmented reality experience of the plurality of augmented reality experiences that is associated with an access restriction, the given augmented reality experience being associated with a plurality of augmented reality features; and
in response to receiving the input comprising a selection of an icon associated with the given augmented reality experience that includes the plurality of augmented reality features, generating for display the preview of the given augmented reality experience in which a subset of the plurality of augmented reality features are used to modify an image by automatically overlaying a first set of the plurality of augmented reality features of the given augmented reality experience while excluding a second set of the plurality of augmented reality features of the given augmented reality experience.
Claim 1, first three steps, in identical language.
3. The method of claim 2, further comprising: overlaying one or more augmented reality items of the given augmented reality experience as static images over a video without dynamically adjusting a positioning of the one or more augmented reality items based on tracking information representing movement of the device.
Claim 1, final step, in identical language.
4. The method of claim 1, further comprising: retrieving a plurality of identifiers of each of a plurality of augmented reality experiences; modifying a given identifier of the plurality of identifiers associated with the given augmented reality experience in response to determining that the given augmented reality experience is associated with an access restriction; and generating, for display, a graphical user interface that includes the plurality of identifiers comprising the modified given identifier.
Claim 17 and claim 2.
5. The method of claim 1, further comprising: determining that the given augmented reality experience is associated with a collection of augmented reality experiences; determining that a subset of the collection of augmented reality experiences is not associated with access restrictions; and in response to determining that the subset includes more than a threshold number of augmented reality experiences, allowing a given identifier of the given augmented reality experience to be included in a graphical user interface among a plurality of identifiers.
Claim 17 and claim 4.
6. The method of claim 5, further comprising: in response to determining that the subset includes less than the threshold number of augmented reality experiences, preventing the given identifier of the given augmented reality experience from being included in the graphical user interface among the plurality of identifiers.
Claim 17 and claim 5
7. The method of claim 5, wherein the plurality of identifiers corresponds to the collection of the augmented reality experiences, further comprising receiving input that selects the collection of the augmented reality experiences from a plurality of collections of augmented reality experiences.
Claim 17 and claim 6.
8. The method of claim 1, further comprising: determining that the given augmented reality experience is associated with a popularity criterion that exceeds a popularity threshold; and in response to determining that the given augmented reality experience is associated with the popularity criterion that exceeds the popularity threshold, presenting a given identifier independently of a plurality of identifiers of a collection of the augmented reality experiences.
Claim 17 and claim 7.
9. The method of claim 1, further comprising: after removing an access restriction, modifying an image based on all augmented reality features associated with the given augmented reality experience.
Claim 17 and claim 8.
10. The method of claim 1, further comprising: receiving input that selects a given identifier to access the given augmented reality experience; and in response to receiving the input and in response to determining that the given augmented reality experience is associated with an access restriction, generating a preview of the given augmented reality experience, wherein generating the preview comprises: displaying a video; and obtaining one or more augmented reality items associated with the given augmented reality experience.
Claim 17 and claim 9.
11. The method of claim 1, further comprising: presenting an interface for performing an electronic transaction associated with an access restriction; removing the access restriction associated with the given augmented reality experience in response to performing the electronic transaction; and after removing the access restriction, overlaying one or more augmented reality items over an image based on accelerometer and gyroscopic based measurements representing movement of a device.
Claim 17 and claim 10.
12. The method of claim 11, further comprising: accessing a collection of virtual tokens associated with a user in response to receiving a request to perform the electronic transaction ;in response to determining that the collection of virtual tokens includes a number of virtual tokens greater than a value of access restriction, completing the electronic transaction; and in response to determining that the collection of virtual tokens includes the number of virtual tokens less than the value of access restriction, presenting an interface that allows the user to purchase additional virtual tokens.
Claim 17 and claim 10 and claim 11.
13. The method of claim 1, wherein a plurality of identifiers is presented as icons over a given video captured by a device.
Claim 17 and claim 12.
14. The method of claim 13, further comprising replacing a representation of an access restriction with a representation of the given augmented reality experience in response to determining that the access restriction has been removed.
Claim 17 and claim 12 and claim 13.
15. The method of claim 1, further comprising: displaying a graphical user interface in a personalized graphical user interface that includes content selected based on a user profile; and modifying a size of a given identifier relative to a remaining portion of a plurality of identifiers.
Claim 17 and claim 14.
16. The method of claim 1, further comprising presenting a plurality of identifiers of a plurality of non-restricted access augmented reality experiences in a first region of a graphical user interface and presenting a given identifier of the given augmented reality experience among a plurality of restricted access identifiers of a plurality of restricted access augmented reality experiences in a second region of the graphical user interface, and wherein the plurality of restricted access augmented reality experiences are ranked relative to each other in the second region, wherein the plurality of identifiers is presented with an introductory tile in response to determining that a quantity of times that the graphical user interface was presented fails to transgress a threshold value.
Claim 17 and claim 15.
17. The method of claim 1, further comprising: receiving input from the creator of the given augmented reality experience that specifies which portions of the given augmented reality experience are disabled during a free preview of the given augmented reality experience.
Claim 17 and claim 16.
18. The method of claim 17, further comprising: selectively allowing the creator to submit the given augmented reality experience on a popularity metric associated with the non-access restricted augmented reality experiences.
Claim 18 and claim 16.
19. A system comprising: at least one processor configured to perform operations comprising: determining how many non-access restricted augmented reality experiences a creator of a given augmented reality experience has previously submitted; and allowing the creator to submit the given augmented reality experience in response to determining that a quantity of the non-access restricted augmented reality experiences the creator has previously submitted transgresses a threshold.
Claim 17.
20. A non-transitory machine-readable storage medium that includes instructions that, when executed by one or more processors of a machine, cause the machine to perform operations comprising: determining how many non-access restricted augmented reality experiences a creator of a given augmented reality experience has previously submitted; and allowing the creator to submit the given augmented reality experience in response to determining that a quantity of the non-access restricted augmented reality experiences the creator has previously submitted transgresses a threshold.
Claim 17.
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, 4-8, and 13-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 101 because the claimed invention is directed to an abstract idea without significantly more.
Regarding Claim 1
Step 1
According to the first part of the analysis, in the instant case, claims 1-18 are directed to a method, claim 19 is directed to a system, and claim 20 is directed to a non-transitory machine-readable storage medium. Thus, each of the claims falls within one of the four statutory categories (i.e., process, machine, manufacture, or composition of matter).
Step 2A, Prong One
determining how many non-access restricted … experiences a creator of a given … experience has previously submitted; and (This step is for determining the number of experiences and it is practically implementable in the human mind or with the aid of pen and paper; and thus, it is understood as a mental process)
allowing the creator to submit the given … experience in response to determining that a quantity of the non-access restricted … experiences the creator has previously submitted transgresses a threshold. (This step is for determining whether a person may participate in an activity based on their contributions and it is practically implementable in the human mind or with the aid of pen and paper; and thus, it is understood as a mental process. The foregoing may also be understood as a method of organizing human activity.)
Step 2A Prong 2: This judicial exception is not integrated into a practical application.
augmented reality (This element identifies the type of content, which is understood to be a field of use limitation. MPEP 2106.05(h))
Step 2B
The claim does not include additional elements that are sufficient to amount to significantly more than the judicial exception because when considered separately and in combination, they do not add significantly more (also known as an “inventive concept”) to the exception. The claim recites a field of use limitation.
Regarding claims 19 and 20, these claims provide the additional elements of a processor and a non-transitory machine-readable storage medium, which amount to generic computer components under MPEP 2106.05(f). The claims do not include additional elements that are sufficient to amount to significantly more than the judicial exception because when considered separately and in combination, they do not add significantly more (also known as an “inventive concept”) to the exception. The claims recite generic computer components.
Regarding Claim 4
Step 2A Prong One:
retrieving a plurality of identifiers of each of a plurality of … experiences; (This step is for determining the identification of experiences and it is practically implementable in the human mind or with the aid of pen and paper; and thus, it is understood as a mental process)
modifying a given identifier of the plurality of identifiers associated with the given … experience in response to determining that the given … experience is associated with an access restriction; and (This step is for editing the identification of experiences and it is practically implementable in the human mind or with the aid of pen and paper; and thus, it is understood as a mental process)
Step 2A Prong Two:
augmented reality (This element identifies the type of content, which is understood to be a field of use limitation. MPEP 2106.05(h))
generating, for display, a graphical user interface that includes the plurality of identifiers comprising the modified given identifier. (This limitation merely displays the edited data, which is understood to be a field of use limitation. MPEP 2106.05(h))
Step 2B:
The claim does not include additional elements that are sufficient to amount to significantly more than the judicial exception because when considered separately and in combination, they do not add significantly more (also known as an “inventive concept”) to the exception. The claim recites field of use limitations.
Regarding Claim 5
Step 2A Prong One:
determining that the given … experience is associated with a collection of … experiences; determining that a subset of the collection of … experiences is not associated with access restrictions; and (This step is for organizing the experiences and it is practically implementable in the human mind or with the aid of pen and paper; and thus, it is understood as a mental process)
in response to determining that the subset includes more than a threshold number of … experiences, allowing a given identifier of the given … experience to be included in a graphical user interface among a plurality of identifiers. (This step is for determining whether the number exceeds an amount and it is practically implementable in the human mind or with the aid of pen and paper; and thus, it is understood as a mental process)
Step 2A Prong Two:
augmented reality (This element identifies the type of content, which is understood to be a field of use limitation. MPEP 2106.05(h))
Step 2B:
The claim does not include additional elements that are sufficient to amount to significantly more than the judicial exception because when considered separately and in combination, they do not add significantly more (also known as an “inventive concept”) to the exception. The claim recites field of use limitations.
Regarding Claim 6
Step 2A Prong One:
response to determining that the subset includes less than the threshold number of … experiences, preventing the given identifier of the given augmented reality experience from being included (This step is for determining whether the number exceeds an amount and it is practically implementable in the human mind or with the aid of pen and paper; and thus, it is understood as a mental process)
Step 2A Prong Two:
augmented reality (This element identifies the type of content, which is understood to be a field of use limitation. MPEP 2106.05(h))
… in the graphical user interface among the plurality of identifiers. (This limitation merely decides what data to display, which is understood to be a field of use limitation. MPEP 2106.05(h))
Step 2B:
The claim does not include additional elements that are sufficient to amount to significantly more than the judicial exception because when considered separately and in combination, they do not add significantly more (also known as an “inventive concept”) to the exception. The claim recites field of use limitations.
Regarding Claim 7
Step 2A Prong One:
wherein the plurality of identifiers corresponds to the collection of the … experiences, further comprising receiving input that selects the collection of the … experiences from a plurality of collections of … experiences (This step is for selecting the experience and it is practically implementable in the human mind or with the aid of pen and paper; and thus, it is understood as a mental process)
Step 2A Prong Two:
augmented reality (This element identifies the type of content, which is understood to be a field of use limitation. MPEP 2106.05(h))
Step 2B:
The claim does not include additional elements that are sufficient to amount to significantly more than the judicial exception because when considered separately and in combination, they do not add significantly more (also known as an “inventive concept”) to the exception. The claim recites field of use limitations.
Regarding Claim 8
Step 2A Prong One:
further comprising: determining that the given … experience is associated with a popularity criterion that exceeds a popularity threshold; and in response to determining that the given …experience is associated with the popularity criterion that exceeds the popularity threshold, presenting a given identifier independently of a plurality of identifiers of a collection of the … experiences. (This step is for selecting the experience based upon a criteria and it is practically implementable in the human mind or with the aid of pen and paper; and thus, it is understood as a mental process)
Step 2A Prong Two:
augmented reality (This element identifies the type of content, which is understood to be a field of use limitation. MPEP 2106.05(h))
Step 2B:
The claim does not include additional elements that are sufficient to amount to significantly more than the judicial exception because when considered separately and in combination, they do not add significantly more (also known as an “inventive concept”) to the exception. The claim recites field of use limitations.
Regarding Claim 13
Step 2A Prong One:
Step 2A Prong Two:
wherein a plurality of identifiers is presented as icons over a given video captured by a device.
(This element focuses on how to display the content, which is understood to be a field of use limitation. MPEP 2106.05(h))
Step 2B:
The claim does not include additional elements that are sufficient to amount to significantly more than the judicial exception because when considered separately and in combination, they do not add significantly more (also known as an “inventive concept”) to the exception. The claim recites field of use limitations.
Regarding Claim 14
Step 2A Prong One:
replacing a representation of an access restriction with a representation of the given … experience in response to determining that the access restriction has been removed. (This step is for replacing an element and it is practically implementable in the human mind or with the aid of pen and paper; and thus, it is understood as a mental process)
Step 2A Prong Two:
augmented reality (This element identifies the type of content, which is understood to be a field of use limitation. MPEP 2106.05(h))
Step 2B:
The claim does not include additional elements that are sufficient to amount to significantly more than the judicial exception because when considered separately and in combination, they do not add significantly more (also known as an “inventive concept”) to the exception. The claim recites field of use limitations.
Regarding Claim 15
Step 2A Prong One:
Step 2A Prong Two:
further comprising: displaying a graphical user interface in a personalized graphical user interface that includes content selected based on a user profile; and modifying a size of a given identifier relative to a remaining portion of a plurality of identifiers. (This element determines how something is displayed, which is understood to be a field of use limitation. MPEP 2106.05(h))
Step 2B:
The claim does not include additional elements that are sufficient to amount to significantly more than the judicial exception because when considered separately and in combination, they do not add significantly more (also known as an “inventive concept”) to the exception. The claim recites field of use limitations.
Regarding Claim 16
Step 2A Prong One:
further comprising presenting a plurality of identifiers of a plurality of non-restricted access augmented reality experiences in a first region of a graphical user interface and presenting a given identifier of the given augmented reality experience among a plurality of restricted access identifiers of a plurality of restricted access augmented reality experiences in a second region of the graphical user interface, and wherein the plurality of restricted access augmented reality experiences are ranked relative to each other in the second region, wherein the plurality of identifiers is presented with an introductory tile in response to determining that a quantity of times that the graphical user interface was presented fails to transgress a threshold value. (This step is for organizing elements and it is practically implementable in the human mind or with the aid of pen and paper; and thus, it is understood as a mental process)
Step 2A Prong Two:
further comprising presenting a plurality of identifiers of a plurality of non-restricted access augmented reality experiences in a first region of a graphical user interface and presenting a given identifier of the given augmented reality experience among a plurality of restricted access identifiers of a plurality of restricted access augmented reality experiences in a second region of the graphical user interface, and wherein the plurality of restricted access augmented reality experiences are ranked relative to each other in the second region, wherein the plurality of identifiers is presented with an introductory tile in response to determining that a quantity of times that the graphical user interface was presented fails to transgress a threshold value. (This element determines how something is displayed, which is understood to be a field of use limitation. MPEP 2106.05(h))
Step 2B:
The claim does not include additional elements that are sufficient to amount to significantly more than the judicial exception because when considered separately and in combination, they do not add significantly more (also known as an “inventive concept”) to the exception. The claim recites field of use limitations.
Regarding Claim 17
Step 2A Prong One:
receiving input from the creator of the given augmented reality experience that specifies which portions of the given augmented reality experience are disabled during a free preview of the given augmented reality experience. (This step is for selecting elements and it is practically implementable in the human mind or with the aid of pen and paper; and thus, it is understood as a mental process)
Step 2A Prong Two:
receiving input from the creator of the given augmented reality experience that specifies which portions of the given augmented reality experience are disabled during a free preview of the given augmented reality experience. (This element determines receiving input from a user and displaying content, which is understood to be a field of use limitation. MPEP 2106.05(h))
Step 2B:
The claim does not include additional elements that are sufficient to amount to significantly more than the judicial exception because when considered separately and in combination, they do not add significantly more (also known as an “inventive concept”) to the exception. The claim recites field of use limitations.
Regarding Claim 18
Step 2A Prong One:
selectively allowing the creator to submit the given augmented reality experience on a popularity metric associated with the non-access restricted augmented reality experiences. (This step is for selecting elements and it is practically implementable in the human mind or with the aid of pen and paper; and thus, it is understood as a mental process)
Step 2A Prong Two:
selectively allowing the creator to submit the given augmented reality experience on a popularity metric associated with the non-access restricted augmented reality experiences. (This element identifies the type of content, which is understood to be a field of use limitation. MPEP 2106.05(h))
Step 2B:
The claim does not include additional elements that are sufficient to amount to significantly more than the judicial exception because when considered separately and in combination, they do not add significantly more (also known as an “inventive concept”) to the exception. The claim recites field of use limitations.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ALEX OLSHANNIKOV whose telephone number is (571)270-0667. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 9:30-6.
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, Scott Baderman can be reached at 571-272-3644. 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.
/ALEKSEY OLSHANNIKOV/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2118
Prosecution Insights