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 .
DETAILED ACTIONClaims StatusClaims 1-20 are pending and have been rejected.
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted on 07/09/2025 & 04/29/2026 is in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statement is being considered by the examiner.
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 obviousness-type 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 LongL 759 F.2d 887, 225 USPQ 645 (Fed. Cir. 1985); In re Van Omum, 686 F.2d 937, 214 USPQ 761 (CCPA 1982); In re Vogel, 422 F.2d 438, 164 USPQ 619 (CCPA 1970); and In re Thorington, 418 F.2d 528, 163 USPQ644 (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 a nonstatutory double patenting ground provided the conflicting application or patent either is shown to be commonly owned with this application, or claims an invention made as a result of activities undertaken within the scope of a joint research agreement. Effective January 1, 1994, a registered attorney or agent of record may sign a terminal disclaimer. A terminal disclaimer signed by the assignee must fully comply with 37 CFR 3.73(b).
Claim 1, 2, 8, 11, 12 & 18-20 are provisionally rejected on the ground of nonstatutory obviousness-type double patenting as being unpatentable over claims 1, 2, 10, 11, 18 & 19 of U.S. Patent No. 12,284,146. Although the conflicting claims are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other because all elements of instant Application No. 19/042189 correspond to elements the U.S. Patent No. 12,284,146. The above claim of the present application would have been obvious over claims of the U.S. Patent No. 12,284,146 because each element of the claims of the present application is anticipated by the claims of the U.S. Patent No. 12,284,146. This is a provisional obviousness-type double patenting rejection because the conflicting claims have not in fact been patented.
Instant Application 19/042189
U.S. Patent No. 12,284,146
Claims 1, 11 & 19 A method comprising: providing, to a first computing device, access to calendar data stored on a second computing device; receiving an indication of a minimum number of conditions in a set of conditions to present an augmented reality content item, the set of conditions including a time period trigger and a location trigger each based on the calendar data, the time period trigger defining a time period for presenting the augmented reality content item on the second computing device, and the location trigger defining a geographical location for presenting the augmented reality content item on the second computing device; causing presentation of the augmented reality content item at the second computing device based on the minimum number of conditions of the set of conditions being satisfied; receiving a user reaction to the augmented reality content item based on multi-media data generated at the second computing device; and transmitting, to the first computing device, the user reaction.
Claims 1, 10 & 18 A method comprising: providing, to a first computing device, access to a set of images stored on a second computing device; receiving, from the first computing device, a selection of an object depicted in an image of the set of images stored on the second computing device; receiving, from the first computing device, a contextual trigger defining a set of conditions for presenting an augmented reality content item on the second computing device, the set of conditions comprising a visual marker trigger to cause presentation of the augmented reality content item in response to the object, that has been selected in the image of the set of images stored on the second computing device, being depicted in a field of view of a user of the second computing device; receiving, from the first computing device, a level of specificity of the contextual trigger, the level of specificity indicating a minimum number of conditions in the set of conditions that must be satisfied to present the augmented reality content item; determining a probability that the minimum number of conditions in the set of conditions will be satisfied based on the level of specificity; in response to determining the probability, causing display of a meter graphic on a graphical user interface of the first computing device, the meter graphic comprising a graphical representation of the probability; receiving an indication from the second computing device that the minimum number of conditions of the set of conditions has been satisfied; causing presentation of the augmented reality content item at the second computing device based on the minimum number of conditions of the set of conditions being satisfied, the augmented reality content item being presented in response to the field of view of the user of the second computing device depicting the object that has been selected in the image of the set of images stored on the second computing device; receiving, by the first second computing device, a user reaction to the augmented reality content item based on multi-media data generated at the second computing device; and transmitting to the first computing device, the user reaction and the presented augmented reality content item overlaid on the field of view of the user of the second computing device.
Claims 2, 12 & 20 wherein receiving the indication comprises: causing presentation of a display element representing a first probability that the time period trigger will be triggered by the second computing device; and causing the display element to be updated to represent a second probability that the time period trigger and the location trigger will be triggered by the second computing device.
Claims 1, 10 & 18
…determining a probability that the minimum number of conditions in the set of conditions will be satisfied based on the level of specificity; in response to determining the probability, causing display of a meter graphic on a graphical user interface of the first computing device, the meter graphic comprising a graphical representation of the probability…
Claims 8 & 18
wherein the user reaction comprises audio data captured by second computing device.
Claims 2, 11, 19 wherein the user reaction is generated during presentation of the augmented reality content item at the second computing device.
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.
Claim(s) 1-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 101 because the claimed invention is directed to abstract idea without significantly more. The claim(s) recite(s) a social/content-sharing AR platform that uses calendar-based contextual triggers.
The limitation(s) include detail that aligns with recognized abstract ideas such as collecting information, evaluating conditions, presenting content, receiving feedback, and transmitting the feedback. The claim details organizing interpersonal interactions through content sharing and event scheduling.
This judicial exception is not integrated into a practical application because the claim(s) do/does not recite an improvement function in network monitoring or a specific technical implementation of the social/content-sharing AR platform. The claimed additional elements “first computing device”, “second computing device”, “calendar data”, “augmented reality content item” and “multimedia data” are merely nominal recitation of generic computing elements used to implement the abstract idea. There is no meaningful limitation that integrates the abstract idea into a practical application.
The claim do/does not include additional elements that are sufficient to amount to significantly more than the judicial exception because absent of the abstract idea, the remaining elements only include receiving calendar data, determining whether conditions are satisfied, presenting content based on conditions, receiving a reaction and transmitting the reaction. These are all well understood, routine and conventional which merely implements the abstract idea on a computer. There is no specialized architecture, unconventional data structure or technical improvements to a social/content-sharing AR platform. The claim(s) is direct to an abstract idea, not integrated into a practical application and lacks an inventive concept.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant’s disclosure. This includes: U.S. Publication 2015/0350136, which describes providing responses to and drawings for media content.
U.S. Publication 2019/0251750, which describes using a virtual reality device to emulate user experience of an augmented reality device. Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to TANIA M PENA-SANTANA whose telephone number is (571)270-0627. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday 8am to 4pm EST.
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, Nicholas R Taylor can be reached at 5712723889. 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.
/TANIA M PENA-SANTANA/Examiner, Art Unit 2443
/NICHOLAS R TAYLOR/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2443
Prosecution Insights