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 Rejections - 35 USC § 103
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.
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) 1-2, 6-7, 10-12, 16-17, and 19-20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Todasco et al (US 20220214854 A1) and Shalev et al (US 20170199994 A1), hereinafter Todasco and Shalev respectively.
Regarding claim 11, Todasco teaches a wearable device
("client devices 604, such as a laptop, a mobile computing device, a tablet, a PC, a wearable device, and/or any other computing device having computing and/or communications capabilities" - Par 75, Lines 4-7),
comprising: a display panel
("In this manner, virtual objects may be set such that only designated users may view the virtual object through one or more displays of one or more devices." - Par 15, Lines 9-11),
configured to provide an immersive environment comprising a data object
("In some embodiments, other 3-D models of the virtual world within the field of view may be displayed along with the virtual objects. In some embodiments, the virtual world, virtual objects, and/or other 3-D models may be displayed as an overlay to images received from an image sensor of the user device" - Par 42);
NOTE: Todasco provides multiple examples of virtual objects such as a private note: "In some examples, the virtual object may be a private note with private information, such as a phone number. These virtual objects are displayed in a virtual world which can be understood as the immersive environment. The virtual world may also be an augmented reality world, see abstract A user may be able to leave the virtual note in a public area that may be viewed by an individual that is designated by the user, see Par 18. This private note can be considered a data object.
and a processor, coupled to the display panel, and configured to: lock the data object;
"In this manner, virtual objects may be set such that only designated users may view the virtual object through one or more displays of one or more devices." - Par 15, Lines 9-11
NOTE: Todasco teaches that the virtual objects have a permissions settings that a designated user may edit to hide or give access/visibility. This functionally corresponds to locking a data object.
Todasco does not teach obtaining a first feature data of a candidate object; and in response to the first feature data satisfying a predetermined standard, generate an anchor information according to the first feature data of the candidate object, wherein the anchor information is configured to be used to unlocking the data object being locked. However, Shalev teaches obtaining a first feature data of a candidate object;
"The chair 226 may include multiple feature points. For example, the chair back 226-1 includes four corners (not labeled), the seat 226-2 includes four corners (not labeled), the arms 226-3 each include four corners (not labeled), the arm rests 226-4 each include four corners (not labeled), each of the four legs 226-5 include four corners (not labeled), and each intersection (not labeled) of the wheels 226-6 with their respective legs 226-5 all of which may be feature points." - Par 20, Lines 18-26
NOTE: Shalev teaches obtaining feature points of a chair in the environment. The chair can be understood as an example of a candidate object within the environment and each part of the chair such as the back, seat, arm , leg, etc. can be considered the feature points that make up the first feature data of the candidate object.
and in response to the first feature data satisfying a predetermined standard, generate an anchor information according to the first feature data of the candidate object,
"As shown in FIG. 2, the user 210 is gesturing toward an environmental feature, the chair 226. The user 210 may gesture toward feature points in the environmental feature. For example, the user 210 may point at the top right corner (not labeled) of the chair back 226-1 of chair 226, then the user 210 may point at the front right corner (not labeled) of the right arm rest 226-4 of the chair 226, then the user 210 may point at one of the wheels 226-6, and then the user 210 may point at the bottom left corner (not labeled) of the white board 223. The wearable imaging device 230-2 may store 104 these user interactions (e.g., the gestures toward at least a portion of an environmental feature) as the stored password.," - Par 44, Lines 4-16
NOTE: Shalev discloses storing a user interaction with the feature points of a chair as a stored password. The featured points are obtained through the predetermined method of recognizing interactions or gestures with the physical object (such as pointing to parts of the object) which can be understood as a predetermined standard for obtaining the feature data. When feature data is obtained using the predetermined standard of interaction/gestures, the system then creates and stores the password for authentication. The stored password based on the feature points obtained using the predetermined standard may be understood as the anchor information. One example of this is gesturing or pointing to a chair's feature points which will be associated as the stored password. The features points of the chair that makes up the password can then be understood as an anchor information that "anchors" the chair as the object used as the entry password/key for authentication.
wherein the anchor information is configured to be used to unlocking the data object being locked.
"The user may enter 108 a password. For example, the user may touch and/or gesture toward the front of the chair back 226-1, the top of the seat 226-2, and the top of the right arm rest 226-4. The imaging device may compare 110 the stored password to the entered password. Since the user touched and/or gestured toward the same features of the chair, the entered password would be authenticated" - Par 52, Lines 33-40
NOTE: Shalev discloses storing a user interaction with a physical object and its feature points in the environment as a password which can be understood as anchor information. When the user wants to authenticate/unlock the device, the user can gesture to the same part of the chair that was initially stored as the password to then be authenticated. After the combination, the generation of anchor information based on feature points of a physical object used for authentication as taught by Shalev can modify Todasco’s device for locking and unlocking virtual data objects in an XR environment. This would allow a user to store an object password such as the feature points of a chair to be used as the object password to unlock the virtual data object. The anchor information generated based on the feature points of the chair object would be the “anchor” associated with the virtual data object to be used to unlock the private data.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the present invention to modify Todasco by incorporating the teachings of Shalev to obtain feature points of a candidate object and generate anchor information in response to the first feature data satisfying a predetermined standard according to the first feature data of the candidate object to be used to unlock the data object. One would be motivated to make this combination because the visual authentication method disclosed by Shalev will provide more security since it is based on a predetermined physical object in the environment. Substituting this authentication method will also provide the user with a more convenient and simpler way to unlock the data rather than manually unlocking the data object with a password while still allow control over the access level of the data object.
Regarding claim 1, the claim recites similar limitations to claim 11. Therefore, method claim 1 corresponds to the device disclosed in claim 11 and is rejected for the same reasons of obviousness as used above.
Regarding claim 20, the claim recites similar limitations to claim 11. Therefore, non-transitory computer readable storage medium claim 20 corresponds to the device disclosed in claim 11 and is rejected for the same reasons of obviousness as used above.
Regarding claim 12, Todasco in view of Shalev teach the device of claim 11. Todasco as modified further teaches wherein the candidate object is a physical object in a physical environment where the wearable device is operated,
“For example, the feature points in the environment 220 may include the four corners (not labeled) of the first wall 221, the second wall 222, the white board 223, and the pin board 224, the ends (e.g., at the intersection of the hands 225-1, 225-2 and at the ends furthest from the intersection of the hands 225-1, 225-2) of each hand 225-1, 225-2 of the clock, and the intersection between the hands 225-1, 225-2 of the clock 225.” – Shalev Par 20, Lines 11-18 and Fig. 2
NOTE: Shalev teaches obtaining feature points of various physical objects within the environment such as a wall, clock, whiteboard, etc. Fig. 2 best demonstrates the physical objects in a physical environment as a user is operating a wearable device
the wearable device further comprises a camera, the camera is configured to capture at least one image of the physical object,
“The user's interactions with the environment may be stored 104 and/or entered 108 as a password based on input provided to an imaging device. The user 210 may provide input to the wearable imaging device 230-2 through, for example, the image sensors 234-2. In one example, the user 210 aim the wearable imaging device 230-2 (e.g., position the image sensors 234-2) toward an object (e.g., at least a portion of an environmental feature). ” - Shalev, Par 43, Lines 1-8
NOTE: Shalev discloses using a wearable imaging device with image sensors that are used to store the physical object as a visual password. This functionally corresponds to a camera configured to capture the image of a physical object.
and the processor is configured to calculate an amount of feature points extracted from the at least one image of the physical object, to obtain the first feature data of the candidate object.
"The chair 226 may include multiple feature points. For example, the chair back 226-1 includes four corners (not labeled), the seat 226-2 includes four corners (not labeled), the arms 226-3 each include four corners (not labeled), the arm rests 226-4 each include four corners (not labeled), each of the four legs 226-5 include four corners (not labeled), and each intersection (not labeled) of the wheels 226-6 with their respective legs 226-5 all of which may be feature points." – Shalev, Par 20, Lines 18-26 and Fig. 2
NOTE: Shalev teaches obtaining feature points of a chair which can be understood as the physical candidate object. One of ordinary skill in the art would obviously know the number/amount of the determined feature points and could then use the multiple feature points determined from the physical object as feature data of the candidate object.
PNG
media_image1.png
461
421
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Regarding claim 2, the claim recites similar limitations to claim 12. Therefore, method claim 2 corresponds to the device disclosed in claim 12 and is rejected for the same reasons of obviousness as used above.
Regarding claim 16, Todasco in view of Shalev teaches the device of claim 11. Todasco as modified further teaches wherein the processor is further configured to: in response to an indication of unlocking the data object,
“Referring back to FIG. 1, after the user interactions are stored 104 as the stored password, the password entry phase may begin.” – Par 39, Lines 1-3
NOTE: Shalev discloses that after a password is stored, the system may then enter a password entry phase. The password entry phase corresponds to an indication that the user wants to be authenticated. After the combination, the indication to unlock the device as taught by Shalev can modify Todasco so that the user instead indicates to unlock the virtual data object in the XR environment.
obtain an access information from at least one of a physical environment where the wearable device is operated and the immersive environment;
The user's interactions with the environment may be stored 104 and/or entered 108 as a password based on input provided to an imaging device. The user 210 may provide input to the wearable imaging device 230-2 through, for example, the image sensors 234-2. In one example, the user 210 aim the wearable imaging device 230-2 (e.g., position the image sensors 234-2) toward an object (e.g., at least a portion of an environmental feature).” – Par 35, Lines 1-8
NOTE: Shalev discloses using the wearable device to interact with a physical object to generate a password which can be understood as anchor information. Similarly, when the user wants to be authenticated, the user performs the same interaction/or gesture on an object to enter a password as input for authentication. The user’s entered input can be understood as the access information since entering a correct input provides access to the device.
and in response to the access information matching the anchor information, unlock the data object.
“If the feature points and/or descriptors of the entered password match the feature points and/or descriptors of the stored password, then the user 210 would be authenticated.” – Shalev, Par 48 Lines 25-27
NOTE: Shalev discloses matching the entered password with the stored password to authenticate the user. This corresponds to matching the access information from the user’s entered password with the anchor information from the initially stored password. If the stored password was the feature points of a chair and the user enters the feature points of the chair as the entered input, the user is authenticated for entering the correct password. After the combination, the processing for matching the feature point information of a stored and entered password which functionally corresponds to matching the access information and anchor information as taught by Shalev can modify Todasco’s device by using the unlocking method to unlock the locked virtual data object in the XR environment.
Regarding claim 6, the claim recites similar limitations to claim 16. Therefore, method claim 6 corresponds to the device disclosed in claim 16 and is rejected for the same reasons of obviousness as used above.
Regarding claim 17, Todasco in view of Shalev teaches the device of claim 16. Todasco as modified further teaches wherein the candidate object is a physical object in the physical environment,
“For example, the feature points in the environment 220 may include the four corners (not labeled) of the first wall 221, the second wall 222, the white board 223, and the pin board 224, the ends (e.g., at the intersection of the hands 225-1, 225-2 and at the ends furthest from the intersection of the hands 225-1, 225-2) of each hand 225-1, 225-2 of the clock, and the intersection between the hands 225-1, 225-2 of the clock 225.” – Shalev Par 20, Lines 11-18 and Fig. 2
NOTE: Shalev teaches capturing feature points of various objects in a physical environment that is displayed through the wearable device as an immersive environment. Any of the physical objects in the environment may be considered the candidate object such as a chair.
the wearable device further comprises a camera, the camera is configured to capture at least one image frame of the physical environment,
“The user's interactions with the environment may be stored 104 and/or entered 108 as a password based on input provided to an imaging device. The user 210 may provide input to the wearable imaging device 230-2 through, for example, the image sensors 234-2. In one example, the user 210 aim the wearable imaging device 230-2 (e.g., position the image sensors 234-2) toward an object (e.g., at least a portion of an environmental feature). ” - Shalev, Par 43, Lines 1-8
NOTE: Shalev teaches image sensors which can be understood as cameras that capture an image frame of the physical environment.
and the processor is configured to extract a second feature data from the at least one image frame of the physical environment as the access information.
As shown in FIG. 2, the environmental features (e.g., the first wall 221, second wall 222, white board 223, pin board 224, clock 225, and chair 226) include feature points. Some objects in the environment 220 may include more or fewer feature points. For example, the feature points in the environment 220 may include the four corners (not labeled) of the first wall 221, the second wall 222, the white board 223, and the pin board 224, the ends (e.g., at the intersection of the hands 225-1, 225-2 and at the ends furthest from the intersection of the hands 225-1, 225-2) of each hand 225-1, 225-2 of the clock, and the intersection between the hands 225-1, 225-2 of the clock 225. The chair 226 may include multiple feature points. For example, the chair back 226-1 includes four corners (not labeled), the seat 226-2 includes four corners (not labeled), the arms 226-3 each include four corners (not labeled), the arm rests 226-4 each include four corners (not labeled), each of the four legs 226-5 include four corners (not labeled), and each intersection (not labeled) of the wheels 226-6 with their respective legs 226-5 all of which may be feature points.” – Par 20
NOTE: Shalev teaches obtaining multiple sets of feature points from multiple objects in an environment. As described in the rejection of claim 16, the user’s input to enter a password corresponds to the access information. Following the rejection’s example wherein the part of a chair object is the stored password obtained from the chair’s feature points, the feature points of the object representing the stored password is considered the first feature data. When the user enters the password entry phase, the user may try to gesture to a different object such as a clock on the wall in an attempt to be authenticated. The clock on the wall would then correspond to the access information. The feature points of the clock would then correspond to the second feature data.
Regarding claim 7, the claim recites similar limitations to claim 17. Therefore, method claim 7 corresponds to the device disclosed in claim 17 and is rejected for the same reasons of obviousness as used above.
Regarding claim 19, Todasco in view of Shalev teaches the device of claim 16. Todasco as modified further teaches wherein the access information comprises a second feature data obtained from one of the physical environment and the immersive environment,
“The following is an example of storing 104 user interactions with the environment and/or entering 108 a password based on gestures provided to the wearable imaging device 230-2. As shown in FIG. 2, the user 210 is gesturing toward an environmental feature, the chair 226. The user 210 may gesture toward feature points in the environmental feature.” – Par 36, Lines 1-7
NOTE: As described in the rejection of claim 17, Shalev stores an initial password using the first feature data of an object. When a user would like to be authenticated, the user enters a password by interacting with an object to be entered as a password attempt. The user’s entered password corresponds to access information which is based on the obtained feature data of that object that was interacted with. For example, the user may store a part of a chair object as the password and may later need to be authenticated again. Any input that the user enters whether it’s the correct chair object or a different incorrect object such as a clock on the wall corresponds to the access information. This access information is based on the feature points obtained from the respective objects which corresponds to the second feature data.
and the processor is further configured to determine if the access information matches the anchor information through a comparison between the second feature data and the first feature data.
“After the password entry phase, password authentication phase may begin. The entered password may be compared 110 with the stored password. Comparing 110 the entered password with the stored password may include comparing the environmental features indicated in the entered password with the environmental features indicated in the stored password.” – Par 46, Lines 1-7
“Comparing 110 the entered password with the stored password may include comparing feature points indicated in the entered password with feature points indicated in the stored password.” – Par 47, Lines 1-4
NOTE: Shalev discloses a password authentication phase in which the entered password and stored password is compared. This phase comprises of comparing feature points in the entered password with the feature points indicted in the stored password. For example if the initially stored password is based on the feature points of a chair object, and the user inputs the password based on the same feature points of the chair object, then the user has inputted the correct password and is authenticated. This functionally corresponds to determining if the anchor information (stored password) and access information (entered password) match. After the combination, the process of authenticating a user by comparing the stored and entered password which corresponds to matching the access and anchor information as taught by Shalev can be added to Todasco’s device to allow the user to set a stored password and require that the input password is the same as the stored password to unlock the virtual data object in the XR environment.
Regarding claim 10, the claim recites similar limitations to claim 19. Therefore, method claim 10 corresponds to the device disclosed in claim 19 and is rejected for the same reasons of obviousness as used above.
Claim(s) 3, 9, 13, and 18 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Todasco, Shalev, and Nickerson et al (US 12197546 B2). Hereinafter Nickerson
Regarding claim 13, Todasco in view of Shalev teaches the device of claim 11. Todasco does not teach wherein the candidate object is a virtual reality object in the immersive environment, and the processor is configured to calculate an amount of feature points of the virtual reality object, to obtain the first feature data of the candidate object. However, Nickerson teaches wherein the candidate object is a virtual reality object in the immersive environment,
“computing device 104/300 can process those images and generate a virtual display (e.g., a two-dimensional model or a three-dimensional model) of the physical object.” – Col 11, Lines 21-23
NOTE: Nickerson discloses generating to the virtual display, a model of a physical object. These virtual models of a physical object can be understood as virtual reality objects.
and the processor is configured to calculate an amount of feature points of the virtual reality object, to obtain the first feature data of the candidate object.
“obtaining, with a computer system, feature points of a virtual display of an object;” – Claim 1, Lines 24-25
NOTE: Nickerson discloses obtaining feature points of a virtual display of an object. This corresponds to obtaining first feature data of the candidate object. One of ordinary skill would be able to determine the amount of feature points during the process to obtain them.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the present invention to modify Todasco by incorporating the teachings of Nickerson to have the candidate object be a virtual object in the immersive environment and have the processor calculate an amount of feature points to obtain feature data of the candidate object. One would be motivated to make this combination because it will lead to the predicted result of more options for secure authentication to unlock the data object. A user can instead use a virtual object as a password rather than a physical object which may be more secure since a virtual object will only exist within the wearable device and not in the physical environment. The appearance of the virtual object will also not change which may provide a more consistent visual password to unlock the data.
Regarding claim 3, the claim recites similar limitations to claim 13. Therefore, method claim 3 corresponds to the device disclosed in claim 13 and is rejected for the same reasons of obviousness as used above.
Regarding claim 18, Todasco in view of Shalev teaches the device of claim 16. Todasco as modified does not teach wherein the candidate object is a virtual reality object in the immersive environment, and the processor is configured to obtain a second feature data from the immersive environment as the access information. However, Nickerson teaches wherein the candidate object is a virtual reality object in the immersive environment,
“computing device 104/300 can process those images and generate a virtual display (e.g., a two-dimensional model or a three-dimensional model) of the physical object.” – Col 11, Lines 21-23
and the processor is configured to obtain a second feature data from the immersive environment as the access information
“obtaining, with a computer system, feature points of a virtual display of an object;” – Claim 1, Lines 24-25
NOTE: After the combination, the steps of obtaining the first feature from a virtual reality candidate object as described for the rejection of claim 13 as taught by Nickerson can modify Shalev to allow the user to interact with a virtual object within the environment to store and enter the password for authentication instead of a physical object. This modification will allow Shalev’s authentication system to store an initial virtual object in the environment as a password based on the feature points of that object. A user can then interact with an object in the environment to enter a password which corresponds to the access information. The entered password is based on a set of feature points which corresponds to the second feature data. This modification is added to Todasco’s device so that a user can unlock the virtual data object in the XR environment by storing a virtual object as a password and entering the correct virtual object for authentication.
Regarding claim 9, the claim recites similar limitations to claim 18. Therefore, method claim 9 corresponds to the device disclosed in claim 18 and is rejected for the same reasons of obviousness as used above.
Claim(s) 4 and 14 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Todasco, Shalev, and Chihara et al (US 11244159 B2), hereinafter Chihara
Regarding claim 14, Todasco in view of Shalev teaches the device of claim 11. Todasco does not teach wherein the processor is further configured to determine if an amount of feature points indicated by the first feature data is greater than an amount threshold, wherein the first feature data satisfies the predetermined standard when the amount of feature points is greater than the amount threshold. However, Chihara teaches wherein the processor is further configured to determine if an amount of feature points indicated by the first feature data is greater than an amount threshold, wherein the first feature data satisfies the predetermined standard when the amount of feature points is greater than the amount threshold
“In a case in which the number of feature points is equal to or greater than the threshold S1, the recognition section 111 determines whether the number of feature points is below a threshold A1 (S205). The threshold A1 is set greater than the threshold S1, and is used to determine that the object can be appropriately recognized under present circumstances” – Col 6, Lines 56-2
NOTE: Chihara discloses an object recognition section 111 which determines if a number of feature points of an object meets or exceeds a threshold. Chihara specifically uses two different thresholds to ensure that a sufficient amount of feature points is present. When it is determined that the number of feature points is greater than the predetermined threshold, the object is recognized. This functionally corresponds to satisfying the predetermined standard when it is determined that the amount of feature points is greater than the amount threshold. After the combination, the method for determining if the amount of feature points of an object is greater than a predetermined threshold as taught by Chihara can modify Shalev so that the object password is stored only when the object is recognized after determining that the object has a sufficient amount of feature points. This modification is added to Todasco’s device so that anchor information (an object password) is created in response to determining that the object has a sufficient amount of feature points which can then be used to unlock the virtual data object.
Regarding claim 4, the claim recites similar limitations to claim 12. Therefore, method claim 4 corresponds to the device disclosed in claim 14 and is rejected for the same reasons of obviousness as used above.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 5, 8 and 15 are objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, but would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
Regarding claim 8, Todasco in view of Shalev teaches the device of claim 7. Todasco as modified still does not teach further comprising: by the processor, obtaining a spatial location of the data object relative to the physical object according to a third feature data of the data object and the second feature data. None of the prior art searched, alone or in combination, renders obvious to the limitations of claim 8.
Regarding claim 15, Todasco in view of Shalev teaches the device of claim 11. Todasco as modified does not teach wherein generating the anchor information according to the first feature data of the candidate object comprises: by the processor, linking at least one of the first feature data of the candidate object and a spatial location of the data object relative to the candidate object with an identification name, to generate the anchor information, wherein the first feature data of the candidate object indicates an amount of feature points and a spatial distribution of feature points. None of the prior art searched, alone or in combination, renders obvious to the limitations of claim 15.
Regarding claim 5, the claim recites similar limitations to claim 15. Therefore, method claim 5 corresponds to the device disclosed in claim 15 and would be allowable for the same reasons as described above.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to DAVID V. NGUYEN whose telephone number is (571)272-6111. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 9:00-5:00.
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, King Y Poon can be reached at 571-270-0728. 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.
/DAVID VAN NGUYEN/Examiner, Art Unit 2617 /KING Y POON/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2617
Prosecution Insights