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 § 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.
(a)(2) the claimed invention was described in a patent issued under section 151, or in an application for patent published or deemed published under section 122(b), in which the patent or application, as the case may be, names another inventor and was effectively filed before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claims 1-8, 11-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) and 102(a)(2) as being anticipated by Starke (Pub No. US 20230186541 A1).
As per claim 1, Starke teaches the claimed:
A computer-implemented method for applying character modifications to characters in a virtual environment, the method comprising (Starke [0006] “The modified animation rule set can define the modified series of character poses generated by the character within a virtual environment of the game application when performing the first action”):
selecting a character modifier to apply to characterization data for a particular character associated with the virtual environment (Starke [0028] “In some embodiments, the animation generation system addresses such issues using a deep learning framework implementing a motion generation machine learning model to create a realistic extrapolation of an in-game character's full-body pose, according to changes in the pose introduced by the player of the video game. The system can be preconfigured with animation rule sets corresponding to various animations, such as animations for a standard walking motion, a standard running motion, a standard kicking motion, or the like.
In this passage, the animation generation system corresponds to the claimed ‘character modifier’ and the animation rule sets correspond to the claimed ‘characterization data’ );
determining that a particular parameter, that is subject to modification upon an execution of the character modifier, is unavailable for the particular character (Starke [0101] “FIGS. 4B and 4C illustrate other example animation editor interfaces 420, 430. In these examples, the animation editor interfaces 420, 430 include representations 422, 432 of a motion that is to be modified or created by the user of the video game 110.”
In this passage as well as the mentioned figures 4A and 4C, the user is only able to modify the avatar based on the limited predetermined options. In fig 4A, the user is only able to adjust the avatars posture, lean direction and speed. Therefore, it is limited to these 3 movement parameters);
determining that other characterization data for a separate character includes an available parameter that is modifiable according to the character modifier (Starke [0037] “Based at least in part on the current runtime state of the game application, the game engine 112 applies an animation rule set 114 to control the characters or the environment. For example, as described herein, an animation rule set 114 can define actions or motions to be performed by one or more in-game characters”
In this passage, Starke teaches that the rule sets can be available to modify one or more characters in the game. The rule set corresponds to the claimed ‘characterization data’ and the animation generation system corresponds to the claimed ‘character modifier’.);
generating, for the particular character, updated characterization data that references the available parameter (Starke [0073] “The animation generation system 150 can generate (or update) poses of a particular type of animation (e.g., walking) based on the character pose 202B and/or the user input 206, which indicates a modification to the character pose 202B. In particular, in this example, the user input 206 indicates an instruction to modify a posture associated with the character pose 202B such that the in-game character is hunched forward. As such, the animation generation system 150 can generate the modified walking rule set 214A, such that some or all of the walking poses 202 (202A, 202B, 202C, 202D, 202E) are updated by the animation generation system 150 to form the modified walking rule set 214A. Accordingly, in some cases, in response to receiving input to modify the character pose 202B, the animation generation system 150 can modify the some or all of the other character poses associated with the walking rule set 202”.
In this passage, the walking rule set, which is the characterization data that refers to the available parameters of a character’s walking movements, is updated and the animation generation system applies the updated walking rule set to the particular character.);
modifying the updated characterization data according to the character modifier (Starke [0012] “The one or more processors can be configured to update the animation rule set to generate a modified animation rule set for the first action. The one or more modified character poses for the first action replace the corresponding one or more unmodified character poses for the first action. The modified animation rule set can define the modified series of character poses generated by the character within a virtual environment of the game application when performing the first action”
Please also see Starke [0073] “As such, the animation generation system 150 can generate the modified walking rule set 214A, such that some or all of the walking poses 202 (202A, 202B, 202C, 202D, 202E) are updated by the animation generation system 150 to form the modified walking rule set 214A. Accordingly, in some cases, in response to receiving input to modify the character pose 202B, the animation generation system 150 can modify the some or all of the other character poses associated with the walking rule set 202”
To reiterate the statements above, the animation rule set corresponds to the ‘characterization data’ in the claimed invention. In these passages, Starke teaches that the animation rule set gets modified according to the animation generation system, which corresponds to the ‘character modifier’ ); and
causing the particular character to exhibit a transition according to the character modifier while the particular character is being rendered via at least one user interface (Starke [0083] “As described herein, an action (sometimes referred to as an animation) is comprised of a series of character poses (and associated frames) that collectively form the action. For example, the game application 100 may interpolate between these poses/frames such that an in-game character appears to transition between them, thereby causing the appearance of the in-game character performing the action. For purposes of this example, the one or more character poses are a subset of a first series of character poses associated with the first action.”
Please also see Stark [0098] “FIG. 4A illustrates an example animation editor interface 410. In this example, the animation editor interface 410 includes a representation 412 of a motion that is to be modified or created. The representation 412 may be a particular pose or frame associated with a type of animation. In addition or alternatively, the representation 412 may include a video clip (e.g., a recurring video clip) that transitions through a series of poses. In the example of FIG. 4A, the animation editor interface 410 allows modification of three different pose parameters: Posture 414A, Lean 414B, and Speed 414C (individually or collectively referred to as pose parameter 414 or pose parameters 414)”
In these passages Starke discloses that via a user interface, the user is able to see the transition of the character as the character is being rendered. It may be displayed in the form of a video clip.).
As per claim 2, Starke teaches the claimed:
The computer-implemented method of claim 1, wherein:
the character modifier corresponds to an application operation for modifying an initial pose of the particular character in the virtual environment (Starke [0067] “For example, as described herein, the user of the game application can select a character pose to modify. The character pose may be associated with a particular frame of a plurality of frame of an animation. The user can also select a modification to the character pose, such as a change to at least one position, angle, or velocity associated with an arrangement of the rigid bodies and joints of the in-game character. The animation generation system 150 generates a modified version of the selected pose that realistically implements the proposed modification by the user.”), and
the transition corresponds to the particular character transitioning from the initial pose to a final pose (Starke [0098] “FIG. 4A illustrates an example animation editor interface 410. In this example, the animation editor interface 410 includes a representation 412 of a motion that is to be modified or created. The representation 412 may be a particular pose or frame associated with a type of animation. In addition or alternatively, the representation 412 may include a video clip (e.g., a recurring video clip) that transitions through a series of poses. In the example of FIG. 4A, the animation editor interface 410 allows modification of three different pose parameters: Posture 414A, Lean 414B, and Speed 414C (individually or collectively referred to as pose parameter 414 or pose parameters 414)”
In this example, the user has selected Posture 414A, Lean 414B, and Speed 414C. This is the desired final pose and the interface shows a video clip of the transition from the initial pose (before the selections) to the final pose (the mentioned Posture, Lean and Speed selections).
As per claim 3, Starke teaches the claimed:
The computer-implemented method of claim 1, further comprising, prior to determining that the other characterization data for the separate character includes the available parameter that is modifiable according to the character modifier, processing the other characterization data using one or more trained machine learning models (Starke [0006] “The game data can include an animation rule set including a series of character poses defining animation of a first action of an in-game character within the game application. An in-game character can include a plurality of rigid bodies connected by a plurality of joints. Each character pose of the series of character poses is a particular arrangement of the rigid bodies and joints of the in-game character. The method can further include, during runtime of the game application, identifying one or more character poses associated with animation of the first action; and receiving, from a user of the game application, a modification to a first character pose of the one or more character poses. The modification can include a change to at least one position, angle, or velocity associated with the arrangement of the rigid bodies and joints of the in-game character. The method can further include generating one or more modified character poses for the first action based at least in part on the modification to the first character pose. The one or more modified character poses for the first action can be generated using a motion generation machine learning model. The method can further include updating the animation rule set to generate a modified animation rule set for the first action. The one or more modified character poses for the first action can replace the corresponding one or more unmodified character poses for the first action. The modified animation rule set can define the modified series of character poses generated by the character within a virtual environment of the game application when performing the first action.”
In this passage, Starke discloses that all characters in this game system are determined to have bones and joints, which allow them all to have similar sets of actions. Starke also teaches the motion generation machine learning model that is used to modify the first action, which is defined as the first rule set (this corresponds to the characterization data in the claimed invention).
Please also see Starke [0007] “The animation rule set can be a first animation rule set. The series of character poses can be a first series of character poses. The game data further can include a second animation rule set including a second series of character poses defining animation of a second action. The method can further include generating one or more modified character poses for the second action based at least in part on the modification to the first character pose.”
Starke teaches in this passage that a second set of rule sets defining a second action may be applied to a character after the first set of actions are applied. In this case, the second rule sets correspond to the ‘other characterization data’).
As per claim 4, Starke teaches the claimed:
The computer-implemented method of claim 1, wherein selecting the character modifier to apply to characterization data for the particular character is performed in response to a user input, or in response to an automated operation of an application that is providing access to the characterization data (Starke [0067] “The animation generation system 150 generates realistic poses based on user-selected modifications to the poses. For example, as described herein, the user of the game application can select a character pose to modify. The character pose may be associated with a particular frame of a plurality of frame of an animation. The user can also select a modification to the character pose, such as a change to at least one position, angle, or velocity associated with an arrangement of the rigid bodies and joints of the in-game character. The animation generation system 150 generates a modified version of the selected pose that realistically implements the proposed modification by the user.”).
As per claim 5, Starke teaches the claimed:
The computer-implemented method of claim 1, further comprising, prior to generating the updated characterization data, modifying an existing parameter of the characterization data to include content of the available parameter, or to include a reference to the available parameter. (Please see Starke figure 3 and [0092-0093] “At block 314, the user computing system 102 generates one or more modified character poses for a second action based at least in part on the modification to the first character pose. For purposes of this example, the second action is associated with a second animation rule set. As described herein, the series of first character poses can correspond to a first action (e.g., running). Furthermore, tor this example, the series of second character poses can correspond to a second action (e.g., walking). Accordingly, using similar techniques to that described with respect to block 310, the system can determine a modified series of second character poses based on the series of second character poses and the identified modification to the first character pose
At block 316, similar to block 312, the user computing system 102 updates the second animation rule set to generate a modified second animation rule set for the second action.”
In this passage and in figure 3, step 314 is where the system modifies the poses of a character in reference to the available parameter. The modification for the second action is for example, walking. Afterwards in step 316, the second animation rule set is updated based on the second action.).
As per claim 6, Starke teaches the claimed:
The computer-implemented method of claim 5, wherein the particular character corresponds to a virtual person in the virtual environment (Starke [0059] “The user-controlled avatars may represent the users in the virtual environment” ) and the existing parameter characterizes a feature of an appendage of the virtual person (Starke [0087] “In some cases, the modification can include a movement rigid bodies (e.g., bones) or joints of the in-game character. For example, the user may interact with the animation editor interface to reposition or rotate one or more of the bones or joints of the in-game character. In some cases, the user may reposition or rotate of limb (e.g., arm, leg) or other body portion (e.g., head, trunk) and the corresponding bones or joints will move as well, for example based on realistic movements of the in-game character”
Please also see Starke [0103] “in some cases, the user may be able to interactively move (e.g., reposition, rotate, etc.) one or more body parts to denote the modification. For example, as described herein, an in-game character can include a plurality of rigid bodies 464 (e.g., bones) connected by a plurality of joints 462. In some such cases, the animation editor interface 430 may allow the user to select the modification by repositioning or rotating one or more of the bones 464 or joints 462 of the in-game character. In addition or alternately, in some cases, rather than select a particular bone or joint, the user may be able to reposition or rotate of limb (e.g., arm, leg) or other body portion (e.g., head, trunk), and the corresponding bones or joints will automatically move as well, for example based on realistic movements of the in-game character”).
As per claim 7, Starke teaches the claimed:
The computer-implemented method of claim 6, further comprising, prior to causing the particular character to exhibit the transition according to the character modifier, generating frame data that characterizes frames depicting the transition of the particular character between an initial pose and a final pose (Starke [0024] “Motion may be defined, at least in part, based on a series of distinct poses of an in-game character. As an example, each pose may represent a discrete sample of the motion to be performed by the in-game character. For this example, the pose may identify positions, including rotations, of rigid bodies (e.g., bones) or joints of the in-game character. Thus, if motion is to depict running, each pose may represent a snapshot of the running. For example, a first frame generated by an electronic game may include the in-game character with both feet on a surface within the game world. As another example, a second frame may include the in-game character beginning to move one of the feet upwards. It may be appreciated that subsequent frames may include the in-game character moving forward in a running motion”
In this passage, Starke teaches that the system will provide a sample frame data for each transition from the initial pose to the final pose so that the user can see a sample clip of the movement prior to committing to the modification).
As per claim 8, Starke teaches the claimed:
The computer-implemented method of claim 1, wherein generating the updated characterization data that references the available parameter for the particular character includes storing the available parameter within the characterization data or storing a reference to the available parameter within the characterization data (Starke [0048] “Consider a scenario in which a first animation rule set 114 corresponds to a first type of animation (e.g., walking) and a second animation rule set 114 corresponds to a second type of animation (e.g., running). Further, consider that the first animation rule set 114 defines a series of first poses relating to walking, and the second animation rule set 114 defines a series of second poses relating to running. In such a scenario, in some cases, a user of the video game 110 can provide input to modify one or more pose of the series of first poses relating to walking. For example, the modification may introduce a sideways lean into the pose. In some cases, based on the modification to a signal pose, the animation editing system can make corresponding modifications to the other poses of the series of first poses relating to walking. In this way, an updated or modified first animation rule set 114 can correspond to walking with a sideways lean”
In this passage, Starke discloses that the animation rule set related to walking, may be modified by adding a sideways lean. In this scenario, the available parameter for this character is the leaning and the characterization data is the animation rule set relating to walking. The updated characterization data corresponds to the animation rule set that stores the available parameter that combines walking with a sideways lean).
As per claims 11 and 20, these claims are similar in scope to limitations recited in claim 1, and thus is rejected under the same rationale. The system of Starke would have to have some type of non-transitory machine readable media and one or more memories present in order to function and run on a computer as described by the reference.
As per claim 12, Starke teaches the claimed:
The one or more non-transitory computer readable media of claim 11, wherein the character modifier corresponds to a movement of the particular character (Starke [0075] “An animation generation system enables a user of the video game to create custom animations (e.g., a repeating 3-second animation for an avatar), modify existing animations (e.g., running motions, walking motions), or assign particular pose parameters (e.g., posture characteristics, gait parameters) to a virtual avatar to modify some or all of the animations for that avatar.” ) relative to a scene object that is rendered (Starke [0054] The game instance of the game application 110 may include a simulated virtual environment, for example, a virtual environment that is accessible by users via clients (e.g., user computing systems 102) that present the views of the virtual environment to a user. The virtual environment may have a topography, express ongoing real-time interaction by one or more users or include one or more objects positioned within the topography that are capable of locomotion within the topography. In some instances, the topography may include a two-dimensional topography. In other instances, the topography may include a three-dimensional topography.
In this passage, the virtual environment is shared with multiple users to play a game application together, even from various physical locations. This virtual environment is created using a topography, which corresponds to the claimed ‘scene object’. ), with the particular character and the separate character, via at least one user interface (Starke [0074] “The game application 110 may provide an animation editing system (e.g., an animation-editing interface) that allows the user to make one or more modifications to animation rule sets 114”
Please also refer to Starke [0006] “”For example, as described herein, an animation rule set 114 can define actions or motions to be performed by one or more in-game characters”).
As per claim 13, Starke teaches the claimed:
The one or more non-transitory computer readable media of claim 11, wherein the operations further include, prior to selecting the character modifier to apply to the characterization data for the particular character, receiving a user input that identifies the character modifier (Starke [0067] “The animation generation system 150 generates realistic poses based on user-selected modifications to the poses. For example, as described herein, the user of the game application can select a character pose to modify. The character pose may be associated with a particular frame of a plurality of frame of an animation. The user can also select a modification to the character pose, such as a change to at least one position, angle, or velocity associated with an arrangement of the rigid bodies and joints of the in-game character. The animation generation system 150 generates a modified version of the selected pose that realistically implements the proposed modification by the user). for causing the particular character to move relative to a scene object in the virtual environment (Starke [0054] The game instance of the game application 110 may include a simulated virtual environment, for example, a virtual environment that is accessible by users via clients (e.g., user computing systems 102) that present the views of the virtual environment to a user. The virtual environment may have a topography, express ongoing real-time interaction by one or more users or include one or more objects positioned within the topography that are capable of locomotion within the topography. In some instances, the topography may include a two-dimensional topography. In other instances, the topography may include a three-dimensional topography.
In this passage, the virtual environment is shared with multiple users to play a game application together, even from various physical locations. This virtual environment is created using a topography, which corresponds to the claimed ‘scene object’.
Please also see Starke [0063] “A given user may input commands with specific parameters to undertake specific deeds, actions, functions, spheres of actions or any other types of interactions within the virtual environment. For example, the given user may input commands to construct, upgrade or demolish virtual buildings; harvest or gather virtual resources; heal virtual user-controlled elements, non-player entities or elements controlled by other users; train, march, transport, reinforce, reassign, recruit, or arrange troops; attack, manage, create, demolish or defend cities, realms, kingdoms, or any other virtual environment locations controlled by or associated with the users; craft or transport virtual items; interact with, compete against or along with non-player entities or virtual environment elements controlled by other users in combats; research technologies or skills; mine or prospect for virtual resources; complete missions, quests, or campaigns; exercise magic power or cast spells; or perform any other specific deeds, actions, functions, or sphere of actions within the virtual environment”).
As per claim 14, Starke teaches the claimed:
The one or more non-transitory computer readable media of claim 11, wherein the characterization data is imported from a separate application that is different from an application that renders the at least one user interface (Starke [0052] “In some implementations, the rule set manager 120 is an add-in (sometimes referred to as an add-on, extension, or plug-in). For example, the rule set manager 120 can be available for download by the user computing systems 102 and can be installed locally in volatile or non-volatile memory on the user computing systems 102. In some embodiments, a rule set manager 120 may be executed on a remote server.”
To reiterate, the rule set corresponds to the claimed characterization data. In this passage, Starke teaches that the rule set manager may be imported as an extension, plug-in, downloaded or executed on a remote server. By default, this would require for the rule set manager to be stored in a separate application or computing system).
As per claim 15, the reasons and rationale for the rejection of claim 3 is incorporated herein. In particular, only additional features unique to claim 15 that were not present in claim 3 will be explicitly addressed here.
Starke teaches the claimed:
[…] using a trained machine learning model that is trained based on different instances of characterization data (Starke [0028] “In some embodiments, the animation generation system addresses such issues using a deep learning framework implementing a motion generation machine learning model to create a realistic extrapolation of an in-game character's full-body pose, according to changes in the pose introduced by the player of the video game. The system can be preconfigured with animation rule sets corresponding to various animations, such as animations for a standard walking motion, a standard running motion, a standard kicking motion, or the like.”
In this passage, Starke teaches that the machine learning model will have preconfigured/pre-trained with animation rule sets, which corresponds to the claimed ‘characterization data’ as mentioned above in previous claim explanations. This is how the system is able to have a benchmark for a “standard’ walking, running, kicking motions.)
As per claims 16 - 19, these claims are similar in scope to limitations recited in claims 5-8, respectively, and thus are rejected under the same rationale.
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 of this title, 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 9-10 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Starke in view of Nomura (Pub No. US 8602859 B2 ).
As per claim 9, Starke alone does not explicitly teach the claimed limitations.
However, Starke in combination with Nomura teaches the claimed:
The computer-implemented method of claim 1, wherein determining the particular parameter is unavailable for the particular character is performed prior to selecting the character modifier to apply to the characterization data (Nomura [17] “The HP 202a is a value which represents an ability of the player character to survive in the battle. The HP 202a being reduced, when undergoing an attack by the enemy character during the battle, in accordance with an effectiveness of the attack, in the event that the value reaches zero, the player character becomes unable to fight, and the game is over”
In this passage, Nomura teaches that the character has a survival parameter. Once the survival value reaches 0, the character is unable to fight. In this scenario, fighting mode would be when the character is modified to carry out fighting actions/poses. Prior to selecting that mode, the system determines whether the character in the game is able to carry out the modification or not, by checking the HP value. If the HP value is within the set parameter, that means the character is still able to fight. The HP value corresponds to the parameter in the claimed invention and the fighting mode corresponds to the characterization data.).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to use the character movement limitation as taught by Nomura with the system of Starke in order to determine whether the character is able to be perform the modified poses or not. Doing so allows the character to only make such movements/poses (in this case, the fighting poses), if and only if within the survival parameter.
As per claim 10, Starke alone does not explicitly teach the claimed limitations.
However, Starke in combination with Nomura teaches the claimed:
The computer-implemented method of claim 1, wherein the character modifier corresponds to a movement constraint for the particular character (Please see the explanation in claim 9 above. The movement constraint for the particular character corresponds to the survival parameter. If the survival parameter reaches 0, the movement is constraint for the specific character and is unable to continue fighting in the game.).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to implement the character movement constraint as taught by Nomura with the system of Starke in order to determine whether the character is able to be perform the modified poses or not. Doing so allows the character to only make such movements/poses (in this case, the fighting poses), if and only if within the survival parameter.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to SARAH Y. LEE whose telephone number is (571)272-8374. The examiner can normally be reached 8am-5pm.
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, Daniel F. Hajnik can be reached at (571) 272-7642. 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.
SARAH Y. LEE
Examiner
Art Unit 2616
/DANIEL F HAJNIK/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2616
Prosecution Insights