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 .
Allowable Subject Matter
Claim 6 is 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.
Claim 7 is held allowable since it depends from allowable claim 6.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
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 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, 8 and 10 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Betzel et al. (Pub No US 2019/0351331). Hereinafter, referenced as Betzel.
Regarding claim 1, Betzel discloses a game assistance method, adapted to an electronic apparatus comprising a display device, the method comprising:
executing a game application and displaying a game screen of the game application (Paragraph [0050] figures 2 and 5A-D; displaying gaming console video 302);
recognizing text in the game screen (Paragraphs [0035] [0050] figures 2 and 5A-D; processing the images by performing optical character recognition OCR to deter keywords and phrases 304);
generating a target string based on the recognized text (Paragraphs [0029] [0031] [0035]; generating a search query based on the detected keywords and phrases 304 recognized on the video game);
and inputting the target string into an application and overlapping and displaying a floating window (e.g. GUI 400) of the application on the game screen (e.g. video game 500) through the display device (Paragraphs [0055] [0056] figures 2 and 5A-D; displaying GUI 400 with contextual information over video game screen 500).
Regarding claim 8, Betzel discloses the game assistance method according to claim 1; moreover, Betzel discloses that the application comprises a browser (e.g. GUI 400), and the step of inputting the target string into the application and overlapping and displaying the floating window of the application on the game screen through the display device (Paragraphs [0055] [0056] figures 2 and 5A-D; displaying GUI 400 with contextual information over video game screen 500) further comprises:
inputting the target string into a search engine of the browser to obtain a walkthrough search result of the target string (Paragraphs [0056] [007] figures 5B-D; results 502);
and overlapping and displaying the floating window comprising the walkthrough search result on the game screen through the display device (Paragraphs [0056] [007] figures 5B-D; GUI 400 is overlaid over video game screen 500).
Regarding claim 10, Betzel discloses all the limitations of claim 10; therefore, claim 10 is rejected for the same reasons stated in claim 1.
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.
Claims 2-3 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Betzel in view of Candelore et al. (Pub No US 2008/0226119). Hereinafter, referenced as Candelore.
Regarding claim 2, Betzel discloses the game assistance method according to claim 1; moreover, Betzel discloses the step of recognizing the text in the game screen (Paragraphs [0035] [0050] figures 2 and 5A-D; processing the images by performing optical character recognition OCR to deter keywords and phrases 304).
However, it is noted that Betzel is silent to explicitly disclose providing a text mark box on the screen; capturing a partial game screen from the screen according to the text mark box; and performing text recognition on the partial screen to obtain the text in the screen.
Nevertheless, in a similar field of endeavor Candelore discloses providing a text mark box on the screen (Figure 2; e.g. region of interest 220); capturing a partial game screen from the screen according to the text mark box (Paragraphs [0016] [0019] figure 2; capturing the region of interest ROI 220); and performing text recognition on the partial screen to obtain the text in the screen (Paragraphs [0019] [0042] figure 2; image in the ROI may be analyzed using optical character recognition (OCR) techniques if it contains textual information used to help identifying the image).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Betzel by specifically providing the elements mentioned above, as taught by Candelore, for the predictable result of allowing the user more control over what region of interest in the video frame the system should search and find supplemental information for the user enjoy along with the video content.
Regarding claim 3, Betzel and Candelore disclose the game assistance method according to claim 2; moreover, Betzel discloses the step of recognizing the text in the game screen (Paragraphs [0035] [0050] figures 2 and 5A-D; processing the images by performing optical character recognition OCR to deter keywords and phrases 304 and generate a search string).
However, it is noted that Betzel is silent to explicitly disclose after the step of providing the text mark box on the game screen, the method further comprising: adjusting a position or a coverage size of the text mark box according to a user adjustment command.
Nevertheless, in a similar field of endeavor Candelore discloses after the step of providing the text mark box on the game screen (Figure 2; region of interest ROI 220), the method further comprising: adjusting a position or a coverage size of the text mark box according to a user adjustment command (Paragraph [0040] figure 2; remote control unit 30 may interact with the image content search processor 60 to adjust the size of the ROI 220 to cover the image of interest).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Betzel by specifically providing the elements mentioned above, as taught by Candelore, for the predictable result of allowing the user more control over what region of interest in the video frame the system should search and find supplemental information for the user enjoy along with the video content.
Claims 4-5 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Betzel in view of Hsiao et al. (Patent No US 10,540,378). Hereinafter, referenced as Hsiao.
Regarding claim 4, Betzel discloses the game assistance method according to claim 1; moreover, Betzel discloses that the step of generating the target string based on the recognized text comprises: generating a plurality of first words according to the recognized text (Paragraphs [0029] [0035]; OCRed keywords and phrases).
However, it is noted that Betzel is silent to explicitly disclose providing a candidate word list through the display device, wherein the candidate word list comprises the plurality of first words; and selecting at least one selected word from the candidate word list according to a user selection command to determine the target string.
Nevertheless, in a similar field of endeavor Hsiao discloses providing a candidate word list (e.g. keywords 324) through the display device, wherein the candidate word list comprises the plurality of first words (e.g. brand A, 20 MP, etc.); and selecting at least one selected word from the candidate word list according to a user selection command to determine the target string (Col. 9 lines 15-60 figures 3A-B; implementing an OCR technique, and recognize keywords present in the analyzed image 322, and presenting search keyword options 324).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Betzel by specifically providing the elements mentioned above, as taught by Hsiao, for the predictable result of providing a way for a user to quickly search for keywords extracted from an image, preventing a process that can be time consuming and potentially frustrating for a user (Col. 1 lines 23-27)
Regarding claim 5, Betzel and Hsiao disclose the game assistance method according to claim 4; moreover, Betzel discloses that the step of generating the target string based on the recognized text further comprises: generating a plurality of second words according to game information (Paragraphs [0029] [0030]; perform optical character recognition on frames of the media in order to identify keywords or phrases found in the frames, in addition to landmarks of the game).
However, it is noted that Betzel is silent to explicitly disclose that the candidate word list further comprises the plurality of second words.
Nevertheless, in a similar field of endeavor Hsiao discloses that the candidate word list further comprises the plurality of second words (Col. 9 lines 15-60 figures 3A-B; implementing an OCR technique, and recognize keywords present in the analyzed image 322 in addition to descriptive keywords of the image, e.g. metal, digital, camera, etc.).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Betzel by specifically providing the elements mentioned above, as taught by Hsiao, for the predictable result of providing a way for a user to quickly search for keywords extracted from an image, preventing a process that can be time consuming and potentially frustrating for a user (Col. 1 lines 23-27)
Claim 9 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Betzel in view of Weedemann et al. (Pub No US 2023/0418693). Hereinafter, referenced as Weedemann.
Regarding claim 9, Betzel discloses the game assistance method according to claim 1; moreover, Betzel discloses the target string (Paragraphs [0035] [0050] figures 2 and 5A-D; processing the images by performing optical character recognition OCR to deter keywords and phrases 304 and generate a search string).
However, it is noted that Betzel is silent to explicitly disclose copying the target string to a clipboard.
Nevertheless, in a similar field of endeavor Weedemann discloses copying the target string to a clipboard (Paragraphs [0012] [0017] figure 2; OCR text in a displayed video 108, and the text is copied by the user to a clipboard for further use 110).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Betzel by specifically providing the elements mentioned above, as taught by Weedemann, for the predictable result of providing a copy of the OCR text to avoid manual transcription errors when copying such information by hand (Weedemann – paragraph [0023]).
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to JUNIOR O MENDOZA whose telephone number is (571)270-3573. The examiner can normally be reached Mon-Fri 10am-6pm 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, Benjamin Bruckart can be reached at 571-272-3982. 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.
JUNIOR O. MENDOZA
Primary Examiner
Art Unit 2424
/JUNIOR O MENDOZA/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2424
Prosecution Insights