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 .
Priority
Acknowledgment is made of Applicant's claim for foreign priority based on an application filed in China on 10/14/24. It is noted, however, that Applicant has not filed a certified copy of the CN202411433199.7 application as required by 37 CFR 1.55.
Drawings
The drawings are objected to as failing to comply with 37 CFR 1.84(p)(5) because they include the following reference characters not mentioned in the description: “P3” and “V1” (see Fig. 5). Corrected drawing sheets in compliance with 37 CFR 1.121(d), or amendment to the specification to add the reference character(s) in the description in compliance with 37 CFR 1.121(b) are required in reply to the Office action to avoid abandonment of the application. Any amended replacement drawing sheet should include all of the figures appearing on the immediate prior version of the sheet, even if only one figure is being amended. Each drawing sheet submitted after the filing date of an application must be labeled in the top margin as either “Replacement Sheet” or “New Sheet” pursuant to 37 CFR 1.121(d). If the changes are not accepted by the examiner, the applicant will be notified and informed of any required corrective action in the next Office action. The objection to the drawings will not be held in abeyance.
Claim Objections
Claims 7, 9-10, and 18-19 are objected to because of the following informalities:
“character, comprises” recited in claim 7, ln. 2 should likely read “character, [[ ]]comprises” to remove the double space;
“a third scene area of the second game scene on the game interface, in response to the first virtual character switching to a second game scene” recited in claim 9, ln. 2-4 and claim 18, ln. 2-3 should likely read “a third scene area of [[the]]a second game scene on the game interface, in response to the first virtual character switching to [[a]]the second game scene”;
“wherein the second game scene comprises the first virtual character and the second virtual character” recited in claim 9, ln. 4-5 and claim 18, ln. 4-5 should likely read “wherein the second game scene comprises the first virtual character and [[the]]a second virtual character”;
“a second virtual character” recited in claim 9, ln. 6 & 7 and claim 18, ln. 6 & 7 should likely read “[[a]]the second virtual character”;
“a method for controlling virtual characters according to claim 1” recited in claim 10, ln. 5-6 should likely read “[[a]]the method for controlling a virtual character[[s]] according to claim 1”; and
“perform a method for controlling a virtual character in a game according to claim 1” recited in claim 19, ln. 2-3 should likely read “perform [[a]]the method for controlling a virtual character in a game according to claim 1”.
Appropriate correction is required.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(b):
(b) CONCLUSION.—The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph:
The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the applicant regards as his invention.
Claims 11-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor (or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the applicant), regards as the invention.
Claim 10 recites in part “an interface display” and “a processor”. It is indefinite as to whether, and if so how, these limitations differ from the “game interface” and “processor” previously recited in claim 1, from which claim 10 depends.
Claims 11-18 are rejected by virtue of their dependencies on claim 10.
Claim 20 recites in part “a processor”. It is indefinite as to whether, and if so how, this limitation differs from the “processor” previously recited in claim 1, from which claim 19 depends.
Claim 20 is rejected by virtue of its dependency on claim 19.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
The following is a quotation of the appropriate paragraphs of 35 U.S.C. 102 that form the basis for the rejections under this section made in this Office action:
A person shall be entitled to a patent unless –
(a)(1) the claimed invention was patented, described in a printed publication, or in public use, on sale, or otherwise available to the public before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claims 1, 3-5, 7-10, 12-14, and 16-19 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by “Pac-Man Ghost AI Explained”, 10 pages, uploaded on July 13, 2019 by user “Retro Game Mechanics Explained” (hereinafter “Pac-Man”).
Regarding claim 1, Pac-Man discloses a method for controlling a virtual character for implementation by a device that executes a game (17:49-18:55, controlling a virtual character (Pac-Man) to execute a game), comprising:
displaying, on a game interface by a processor, a first scene area of a first game scene; wherein the first game scene comprises a user-controlled first virtual character and a second virtual character configured to attack the first virtual character, the first virtual character being located at a position within the first scene area, and the second virtual character being located at a second position within the first game scene (6:41-7:03; 17:49-18:55, where a user-controlled first virtual character (Pac-Man) and a second virtual character (e.g., red ghost (“Blinky”)) configured to attack (i.e., chase/eat) the first virtual character are displayed in the game at differing locations (a first and second position) within the first game area); and
performing, based on the second position and the first position by the processor, a first chase directive of the second virtual character towards the first virtual character on the game interface (1:57-2:57; 3:10-3:59; 6:41-7:03; 17:49-18:55, where, based on the position of the second virtual character (second position) and the position of the first virtual character (first position), a chase route is calculated and performed by the second virtual character towards the first virtual character);
wherein the first chase directive comprises: displaying, on the game interface by the processor, a part of a first movement route taken by the second virtual character towards the first virtual character within the first scene area; wherein the first movement route is determined based on the second position and the first position (1:57-2:57; 3:10-3:59; 6:41-7:03; 17:49-18:55, wherein at least a part of the chase (movement) route taken by the second virtual character towards the first virtual character is displayed).
Regarding claim 3, Pac-Man further discloses initiating, by the processor, the first chase directive based on triggering of a first preset event by the first virtual character within the first scene area (1:57-2:57; 3:10-3:59; 6:41-7:03; 17:49-18:55, where the chase route is calculated and initiated according to a first position (i.e., first movement) of the first virtual character (first preset event)).
Regarding claim 4, Pac-Man further discloses wherein the initiating, by the processor, the first chase directive based on triggering of the first preset event by the first virtual character within the first scene area comprises: setting, by the processor, the second virtual character, associated with the first game scene, to appear in the first game scene based on triggering of the first preset event by the first virtual character within the first scene area; and initiating, by the processor, the first chase directive based on appearance of the second virtual character in the first game scene (1:57-2:57; 3:10-3:59; 6:41-7:03; 17:49-18:55, where the second virtual character appears in the first scene area of the first game scene based on the first position (i.e., first movement) of the first virtual character, where the second virtual character is programmed to chase the first virtual character).
Regarding claim 5, Pac-Man further discloses wherein the first preset event is one event in a preset events set, and the preset events set comprises at least one of: the first virtual character moves to a preset position within the first scene area (1:57-2:57; 3:10-3:59; 6:41-7:03; 17:49-18:55, where the chase route is calculated and initiated according to a first position (i.e., first movement) of the first virtual character (first preset event)); a staying duration of the first virtual character within the first scene area reaches a preset duration; a quantity of steps taken by the first virtual character within the first scene area exceeds a preset step count; and the first virtual character completes a preset quest within the first scene area.
Regarding claim 7, Pac-Man further discloses wherein the performing a first chase directive of the second virtual character towards the first virtual character, comprises: performing, at a first time point by the processor, the first chase directive corresponding to the first time point based on a second position of the second virtual character at the first time point and a first position of the first virtual character at the first time point; performing, at a second time point after the first time point by the processor, the first chase directive corresponding to the second time based on a second position of the second virtual character at the second time point and a first position of the first virtual character at the second time point; wherein, if a second preset event occurs, an actual movement route of the second virtual character from the first time point to the second time point deviates from the first movement route directed by the first chase directed by the first chase directive corresponding to the first time point (1:57-2:57; 3:10-3:59; 6:41-7:03; 17:49-18:55, wherein the chase (movement) route, which may extend over first and second time points, may deviate/change if the route and corresponding positions of the first virtual character change (second preset event)).
Regarding claim 8, Pac-Man further discloses displaying, on the game interface by the processor, a third scene area of a second game scene, in response to the first virtual character switching to the second game scene; wherein the first virtual character is located in the third scene area; triggering, by the processor, the second virtual character to appear in the second game scene if the second virtual character is still alive in the first game scene; and performing, on the game interface by the processor, a second chase directive of the second virtual character towards the first virtual character (5:42-5:52; 17:49-18:55, wherein the first virtual character (Pac-Man) may move around the maze (i.e., through a tunnel (as shown by the second virtual character(s)), and where, if the second virtual character (ghost) has not been eaten (is still alive) in the first game scene, the second virtual character may appear around the maze/in the tunnel while chasing the first virtual character, where the chase route may be updated (second chase directive) based on the movement of the first virtual character).
Regarding claim 9, Pac-Man further discloses displaying, on the game interface by the processor, a third scene area of the second game scene on the game interface, in response to the first virtual character switching to a second game scene; wherein the second game scene comprises the first virtual character and the second virtual character configured to attack the first virtual character, with the first virtual character located within the third scene area, and a second virtual character in the first game scene and a second virtual character in the second game scene share the same character model, while being different virtual individuals (17:49-18:55, wherein the first virtual character (Pac-Man) may move around the maze (i.e., through a tunnel (as shown by the second virtual character(s)), and where a second virtual character (e.g., a ghost other than the red ghost) may be in the location around the maze/in the tunnel and is configured to chase/attack the first virtual character).
Regarding claim 10, claim 10 is a computerized system for performing the method of claim 1, and therefore is rejected for similar reasoning.
Regarding claim 12, claim 12 is a computerized system for performing the method of claim 3, and therefore is rejected for similar reasoning.
Regarding claim 13, claim 13 is a computerized system for performing the method of claim 4, and therefore is rejected for similar reasoning.
Regarding claim 14, claim 14 is a computerized system for performing the method of claim 5, and therefore is rejected for similar reasoning.
Regarding claim 16, claim 16 is a computerized system for performing the method of claim 7, and therefore is rejected for similar reasoning.
Regarding claim 17, claim 17 is a computerized system for performing the method of claim 8, and therefore is rejected for similar reasoning.
Regarding claim 18, claim 18 is a computerized system for performing the method of claim 9, and therefore is rejected for similar reasoning.
Regarding claim 19, claim 19 is a non-transitory computer-readable storage medium for storing instructions for performing the method of claim 1, and therefore is rejected for similar reasoning.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 103 which forms the basis for all obviousness rejections set forth in this Office action:
A patent for a claimed invention may not be obtained, notwithstanding that the claimed invention is not identically disclosed as set forth in section 102, if the differences between the claimed invention and the prior art are such that the claimed invention as a whole would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which the claimed invention pertains. Patentability shall not be negated by the manner in which the invention was made.
Claims 2, 11, and 20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Pac-Man in view of “Mario Kart 8 Deluxe – Full Game Walkthrough”, 6 pages, uploaded on June 16, 2021 by user “Typhlosion4President” (hereinafter “Mario Kart”).
Regarding claim 2, Pac-Man further discloses where the second position of the second virtual character may be located within a second scene area of the first game scene that is currently not displayed on the game interface (17:49-18:55, wherein the second virtual character(s) may be in the tunnel (off-screen)). However, Pac-Man may not further disclose displaying a character symbol representing the second virtual character at a third position within the first scene area, the third position determined based on the first position and the second position. However, Mario Kart, which teaches wherein threats (e.g., other drivers or hazards) attack a first virtual character traversing a track having multiple possible routes between a starting and ending point (i.e., a maze) (see, e.g., 13:48 & 13:57, where a player can go left or right), further teaches wherein threats located behind the player (first virtual character) in a second scene area not displayed on the game interface are presented by a symbol at a position dependent on the player position (first position) and threat position (second position) (14:11-14:12; 17:08; 17:21). It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to display a symbol indicative of a position of an imminent threat, as taught by Mario Kart, in the invention of Pac-Man (e.g., where a ghost is going to appear after passing through a tunnel), to warn the player of the imminent threat and potentially aid the player’s next movement.
Regarding claim 11, claim 11 is a computerized system for performing the method of claim 2, and therefore is rejected for similar reasoning.
Regarding claim 20, claim 20 is a non-transitory computer-readable storage medium for storing instructions for performing the method of claim 2, and therefore is rejected for similar reasoning.
Claims 6 and 15 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Pac-Man in view of Mario Kart, as applied to claims 2 and 11, and in further view of Liu (CN 111185004 A).
Regarding claim 6, Pac-Man may not further disclose wherein the first chase directive further comprises: marking, by the processor, an actual distance of the first movement route in the first game scene on at least one of the character symbol and the first movement route. However, Liu, directed to a chase/attack game, teaches where the distance from the user to a particular location may be marked on the movement track for example in the form of text ([0107]; [0112]). It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to indicate a distance to a relevant location (e.g., a location of a second virtual character from the first virtual character in Pac-Man), as taught by Liu, to aid the player with strategizing a next action/movement (Liu, [0107]; [0112], wherein the presented information allows the player to judge distance between themselves and the object of interest to better plan next actions).
Regarding claim 15, claim 15 is a computerized system for performing the method of claim 6, and therefore is rejected for similar reasoning.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
U.S. Pub. 2021/0052983 A1 – This reference teaches where a distance that a first object (e.g., soldier) has moved is indicated in the game area (e.g., “L”, “L/2”, etc.).
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ALYSSA N BIANCAMANO whose telephone number is (571)272-4280. The examiner can normally be reached M-F: 8:30am-5:00pm.
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, Dmitry Suhol, can be reached at (571)272-4430. 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.
/ALYSSA N BIANCAMANO/Examiner, Art Unit 3715
Prosecution Insights