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.
The factual inquiries for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized as follows:
1. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art.
2. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue.
3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art.
4. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness.
Claims 1-2, 5, 9-12, 15, and 19-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Harviainen (US 20240314380 A1) and Boss et al (US 20160366196 A1, hereinafter Boss).
Regarding claim 1, Harviainen teaches a method comprising: receiving, at a computing device, an input associated with initiating an extended reality scene ([0280] “The viewer client 1604 may process 1640 the user input and scene information and update the viewpoint.”);
initiating, at the computing device, output of the extended reality scene ([0313] “embodiments may be applied to virtual reality (VR), mixed reality (MR), and augmented reality (AR) contexts”, [0316] “displaying the retrieved initial download data and the stream segment comprising a full spatial data scene view”);
receiving, at the computing device, a metadata file indicating a plurality of objects in the extended reality scene ([0146] “the content server provides metadata about the available streams to the viewing client as a manifest file such as a Media Presentation Description (MPD) file for some embodiments”, [0306] “receiving 2402 a manifest file describing a plurality of content element representations of portions of a spatial scene with associated initial download and streaming specifications for a corresponding plurality of content elements”),
wherein the metadata file indicates for each object of the plurality of objects (Claim 10 “the manifest file comprising streaming specifications for a plurality of available content element representations of portions of a spatial scene”):
a plurality of detail levels ([0141] “the content server compiles DoF schema and LoD versions according to the different spatial content formats and quality versions in a manifest file”);
for a single-use object of the plurality of objects having the single-use classification (Claim 10 “selecting a first content element representation from the plurality of available content element representations specified in the manifest file”):
identifying a first detail level of the plurality of detail levels (Claim 10 “selecting a first content element representation from the plurality of available content element representations specified in the manifest file based on a first estimate of available network bandwidth”, [0353] “the selected degrees of freedom representation within the manifest file comprises a plurality of level of detail representations, and the request for the data segment indicates a selected level of detail selected from the plurality of level of detail representations”);
receiving the single-use object at the first detail level (Claim 10 “selecting a first content element representation from the plurality of available content element representations specified in the manifest file based on a first estimate of available network bandwidth, the first content element representation associated with a first degrees of freedom”);
and generating the single-use object for output at the first detail level (Claim 10 “the first content element representation associated with a first degrees of freedom; retrieving streaming segments of the first content element representation; displaying the streaming segments of the first content element representation using the first degrees of freedom;”);
for a multi-use object of the plurality of objects having the multi-use classification (Claim 10 “selecting a second content element representation from the plurality of available content element representations specified in the manifest file”):
identifying a second detail level of the plurality of detail levels (Claim 11 “selecting the second content element representation is based on a second estimate of the available network bandwidth”);
receiving the multi-use object at the second detail level (Claim 10 “the second content element representation associated with a second degrees of freedom different from the first degrees of freedom”, [0141] “the content server compiles DoF schema and LoD versions according to the different spatial content formats and quality versions in a manifest file”);
storing, in a cache, the multi-use object at the second detail level ([0276] “viewing client 1504 may include a local cache, which may be used to store content streams of media presentation descriptions 1514”);
and generating the multi-use object for output at the second detail level (Claim 10 “display the streaming segments of the second content element representation using the second degrees of freedom”).
Harviainen teaches a manifest file of metadata information including initial download data (claim 10 “the manifest file further identifying initial download data for at least one of the plurality of available content element representations”), but fails to explicitly teach wherein the metadata file indicates for each object of the plurality of objects a single-use classification or a multi-use classification.
In related field of endeavor, Boss teaches wherein the metadata file indicates for each object of the plurality of objects a single-use classification or a multi-use classification ([0059] “graphic designers/creators produce an asset that is reusable (e.g., a soccer ball, 2D/3D animations, etc.). Asset designers/creators can upload the asset and globally publish them into the digital asset library. Other entities may have the ability to search this library and use the asset/element/artwork in their own project/content materials/assets. Accordingly, existing assets may be recycled, reused, and repurposed”, [0062] “when a user uploads an asset (e.g., a promotional print advertisement, campaign, etc.), the user may designate/flag the asset thereby identifying that the asset should not expire (other assets may only be available and/or may automatically expire/be removed after a defined or default time period) and is available for inspirational use … the asset is placed into an area that can be accessed globally within the enterprise management framework 100”)
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the time of filing to have modified Harviainen to include wherein the metadata file indicates for each object of the plurality of objects a single-use classification or a multi-use classification as taught by Boss. Doing so would provide the ability for content creators to collaborate, and view what other content creators have created ([0008] “provides an opportunity to such personnel, in real-time, to interface and collaborate with each other, while also enabling access to a content repository (containing marketing and other digital media content assets) such that users can preview, upload, and download inspirational and other assets for further editing, reusing, repurposing”)
Regarding claim 2, Harviainen as modified by Boss teaches the method of claim 1, and Bouazizi further teaches wherein the method further comprises: identifying, based on a first bandwidth available to the computing device, the first detail level and the second detail level ([0303] “determining a respective minimum bandwidth for each of the plurality of content element representations; and selecting the content element representation from the plurality of content element representations associated with a highest level of detail available such that the expected bandwidth exceeds the respective minimum bandwidth”);
identifying an increase in the first bandwidth to a second bandwidth available to the computing device ([0334] “estimating bandwidth available for streaming the content to the client device may include detecting the change in the bandwidth available for streaming the content, and selecting the second degrees of freedom representation responsive to estimating the change in bandwidth available”, [0338] “the change in the bandwidth available may be estimated to be an increase, and the second degrees of freedom representation comprises a higher degree of freedom”);
identifying, for the multi-use object and based on the increase in the first bandwidth, a third detail level of the plurality of detail levels, wherein the third detail level is higher than the second detail level ([0334] “selecting the second degrees of freedom representation responsive to estimating the change in bandwidth available”, [0338] “the change in the bandwidth available may be estimated to be an increase, and the second degrees of freedom representation comprises a higher degree of freedom”);
receiving the multi-use object at the third detail level ([0332] “selecting, at the client device, a second degrees of freedom representation from the ordered plurality of degrees of freedom representations; and requesting the second degrees of freedom representation”);
storing, in the cache, the multi-use object at the third detail level ([0276] “viewing client 1504 may include a local cache, which may be used to store content streams of media presentation descriptions 1514”);
and generating the multi-use object for output at the third detail level ([0361] “and displaying the content streams for the updated adaptation set”).
Regarding claim 5, Harviainen as modified by Boss teaches the method of claim 1, and Harviainen further teaches wherein the method further comprises: identifying, in the metadata file, one or more conditions associated with an object of the plurality of objects ([0159] “The values for, e.g., download size, required network capacity, and resolution, are example values for purposes of the example viewpoints and associated schemas.”, [0234-0239] “Requirements: LoD 1 … Initial content download size: 0MB … Required network capacity: 2.0 Mbps”); identifying that a condition of the one or more conditions is met; receiving the object associated with the condition; and pre-loading the object associated with the condition ([0300] “an estimate of when to start downloading an asset may be based on when the asset may be used by a user experience … such pre-buffering 2316 by the client may estimate how much excess download bandwidth is currently available and given that excess bandwidth, how long initial download of each asset may take”).
Regarding claim 9, Harviainen as modified by Boss teaches the method of claim 1, and
Harviainen further teaches wherein: the method further comprises: identifying that the extended reality scene is a scene from a series of episodes ([0292] “The virtual experience may include several scenes, and each scene may include one or more period blocks, similar to a movie that has several scenes”);
Boss further teaches identifying that the multi-use object is present in a plurality of episodes of the series of episodes ([0085] “the invention provide an inspirational and creative repository that enables the uses of a consistent theme/level of quality/brand throughout a product/region/sport(s)/etc. In other words, an entire brand strategy may be overlaid onto a specific sporting event/television entertainment event/category/episodic to provide a consistent brand strategy over time and over location”); and storing the multi-use object in the cache further comprises causing the multi-use object to be stored in the cache for use with the plurality of episodes of the series of episodes ([0055] “The digital asset library enables the ability to share, reuse, and distribute digital content/assets. As used herein, an asset is a digital file that may define logos, graphics, animations, packages, clips, promos, sets, music, rotoscoping, source and finished files, set design, etc”).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the time of filing to have further modified Harviainen and Boss to include identifying that the multi-use object is present in a plurality of episodes of the series of episodes; and storing the multi-use object in the cache further comprises causing the multi-use object to be stored in the cache for use with the plurality of episodes of the series of episodes as further taught by Boss. Doing so would provide a consistent brand strategy ([0085] “an entire brand strategy may be overlaid onto a specific sporting event/television entertainment event/category/episodic to provide a consistent brand strategy over time and over location”)
Regarding claim 10, Harviainen as modified by Boss teaches the method of claim 1, and Harviainen further teaches wherein the multi-use object is a first multi-use object and the method further comprises: requesting the single-use object at the first detail level ([0282] “process 1700 may further include the client 1704 requesting 1716 initial download data … 1700 may further include the client 1704 requesting 1722 streamed spatial data”);
identifying that the single-use object has not been received within a threshold period of time ([0284] “determining a respective latency time associated with the initial download specification for one or more of the plurality of content element representations; and selecting one of the plurality of content element representations, wherein the latency time of the selected content element representation is less than a threshold”);
identifying a second multi-use object at the first detail level ([0284] “selecting one of the plurality of content element representations, wherein the latency time of the selected content element representation is less than a threshold”);
and generating, for output, the second multi-use object in place of the single-use object ([0284] “a viewing client may determine a respective latency time for each of a plurality of content element representations, such that selecting the content element representation uses the determined respective latency times”, [0282] “process 1700 may further include the client 1704 displaying 1730 the content.”).
Regarding claim 11, the system (Harviainen [0145] “a system 200 may include a viewing client 204 interfacing with a display 206, a sensor 208, and a content server 202.”) claim 11 is similar in scope to the method claim 1, and is rejected under similar rationale.
Regarding claim 12, the system claim 12 is similar in scope to the method of claim 2, and is rejected under similar rationale.
Regarding claim 15, the system claim 15 is similar in scope to the method claim 5, and is rejected under similar rationale.
Regarding claim 19, the system claim 19 is similar in scope to the method claim 9, and is rejected under similar rationale.
Regarding claim 20, the system claim 20 is similar in scope to the method claim 10 and is rejected under similar rationale.
Claims 3 and 13 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Harviainen and Boss as applied to claim 1 and 11 above, and further in view of Crocker et al (US 20200035025 A1, hereinafter Crocker).
Regarding claim 3, Harviainen as modified by Boss teaches the method of claim 1, and Harviainen further teaches wherein the computing device is a first computing device and the method further comprises ([0148] “the content streaming process 344 may include a viewing (or viewer) client 304 receiving 314 a content request from a client or user 302”): receiving, at a second computing device, a manifest file for a content item comprising a plurality of segments ([0256] “The selected degrees of freedom may be selected from an ordered set of available degrees of freedom, which may be indicated in the manifest file (such as an MPD). The data segment request also may indicate an LoD that is selected from a set of available LoDs indicated in the manifest file (e.g., the MPD). The DoF schema of the data segment sent to the viewing client may match the DoF schema indicated in the data segment request.”);
receiving, at the second computing device, a segment of the plurality of segments ([0256] “The DoF schema of the data segment sent to the viewing client may match the DoF schema indicated in the data segment request”);
generating, for output at the second computing device, the segment of the plurality of segments ([0258] “application selects 1008 an initial viewpoint to the spatial data from the MPD and requests 1010 data segments from the content server”, [0259] “The viewing client receives and displays 1012 the requested content … The next set of segments may be requested 1024 for the adjusted DoF and LoD. The process may determine 1026 if the end of processing is requested. If an end of processing is requested, the process ends 1028. Otherwise, the process repeats with receiving and displaying of content”);
and outputting, at the second computing device, the plurality of segments of the content item ([0259] “The viewing client receives and displays 1012 the requested content … The next set of segments may be requested 1024 for the adjusted DoF and LoD. The process may determine 1026 if the end of processing is requested. If an end of processing is requested, the process ends 1028. Otherwise, the process repeats with receiving and displaying of content” where the client device repeats requesting and displaying a plurality of segments until the process ends.)
Harviainen as modified by Boss fails to explicitly teach identifying, in the manifest file, one or more synchronization markers for synchronizing output of the plurality of segments of the content item and the single-use object and/or the multi-use object and segments of the content synchronized with the outputting of the single-use object and/or the multi-use object, but in related field of endeavor, Crocker teaches identifying, in the manifest file, one or more synchronization markers for synchronizing output of the plurality of segments of the content item and the single-use object and/or the multi-use object ([0085] “wherein the first event trigger is embedded as metadata within a file associated with the media content item”), and segments of the content synchronized with the outputting of the single-use object and/or the multi-use object ([0074] “a variety of effects may be generated by synchronizing 2D video triggers with 2D and 3D objects. Further, triggers may be embedded within the generated 2D and 3D objects.”).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the time of filing to have further modified Harviainen as modified by Boss to include identifying, in the manifest file, one or more synchronization markers for synchronizing output of the plurality of segments of the content item and the single-use object and/or the multi-use object and segments of the content synchronized with the outputting of the single-use object and/or the multi-use object as taught by Crocker. Doing so would provide the user the experience of being inside the 2D content rather than viewing the content from an outside perspective ([0074] “As a result, the user has the experience of being inside the 2D media content rather than just viewing the content from an “outsider's” perspective.”)
Regarding claim 13, the system claim 13 is similar in scope to the method claim 3, and is rejected under similar rationale.
Claims 4 and 14 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Harviainen and Boss as applied to claims 1 and 11 above, and further in view of Pasalapudi et al (US 10739944 B1, hereinafter Pasalapudi).
Regarding claim 4, Harviainen as modified by Boss teaches the method of claim 1, and Harviainen further teaches identifying the first and second detail level (Claim 10 “selecting a first content element representation from the plurality of available content element representations specified in the manifest file based on a first estimate of available network bandwidth”, [0353] “the selected degrees of freedom representation within the manifest file comprises a plurality of level of detail representations, and the request for the data segment indicates a selected level of detail selected from the plurality of level of detail representations”, Claim 11 “selecting the second content element representation is based on a second estimate of the available network bandwidth”), but Harviainen and Boss fail to explicitly teach identifying an initiation of a trick-play mode and identifying detail levels based on initiation of the trick play mode.
In related field of endeavor Pasalapudi teaches identifying an initiation of a trick-play mode (Col 5 Line 11-14 “The user input 106 indicative of an interaction with the content may include an instruction to play the content, pause the presentation of the content, fast forward a portion of the content”) and identifying the first detail level further comprises identifying the first detail level based on the initiation of the trick-play mode; and identifying the second detail level further comprises identifying the second detail level based on the initiation of the trick-play mode (Col 9 Line 63 – Col 10 Line 2 “the first interest portion indicator 130, the second interest portion indicator 132, and the third interest portion indicator 134 may be associated with a portion of the content 122 which indicates that the user may increase the volume, decrease the volume, increase the display resolution, decrease the display resolution, change the display mode of the content 122, and so forth”, Col 10 Line 11-15 “the time interval associated with the second interest portion indicator 132 may indicate to change the screen resolution to a lower resolution as most users fast forward through that portion of the content 122”).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the time of filing to have further modified Harviainen and Boss to include identifying an initiation of a trick-play mode and identifying the first detail level further comprises identifying the first detail level based on the initiation of the trick-play mode; and identifying the second detail level further comprises identifying the second detail level based on the initiation of the trick-play mode as taught by Pasalapudi. Doing so would reduce processor requirements and network bandwidth (Col 10 Line 15-17 “By lowering the resolution, the user device 120 may reduce processor requirements, network bandwidth, memory allocation, and so forth.”)
Regarding claim 14, the system claim 14 is similar in scope to the method claim 4, and is rejected under similar rationale.
Claims 6-8, and 16-18 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Harviainen and Boss as applied to claim 1 and 11 above, and further in view of Bouazizi et al (US 20250225726 A1, hereinafter Bouazizi).
Regarding claim 6, Harviainen as modified by Boss teaches the method of claim 1. Harviainen further teaches wherein the third detail level is higher than the second detail level ([0258] “If the viewing client application determines that higher capacity is available, a DoF schema and LoD level with higher requirements may be used.”, [0262] “As the user changes to a lower DoF schema (which may correspond to a limitation on user motion), the LoD schema may be successively increased (e.g., “medium” LoD corresponding to 3 DoF+, and “high” LoD corresponding to 3 DoF) and the amount of content data may still remain below the bandwidth limit”); receiving the single-use object at the third detail level; and generating the single-use object for output at the third detail level ([0269] “an updated DoF schema may be selected that increases the degrees of freedom (such as a switch from a 3 DoF+ schema to a 6 DoF schema). For some embodiments, a content streaming process may include retrieving a content representation and rendering the representation.”), and additionally teaches adjusting assets based on distance from a viewpoint ([0304] Table 4 “select streaming asset to be removed from the list of currently selected assets by using weighting between streaming bandwidth required, remaining duration how long asset is needed according to the timeline and estimated visual value (size of element in current viewpoint, distance from the viewpoint)”), and detecting changes in a client device and adjusting representations based on the change ([0319] “tracking the range of motion of the client device; detecting a change in the range of motion of the client device; and responsive to detecting the change in the range of motion of the client device, selecting another representation from the one or more degrees of freedom representations”)
Harviainen and Boss fail to explicitly teach wherein: the method further comprises, at a first time, identifying that the single-use object is a first distance away from a user in the extended reality scene; identifying the first detail level of the plurality of detail levels further comprises identifying the first detail level based on the first distance; and the method further comprises: at a second time, identifying that the single-use object is a second distance away from a user in the extended reality scene, wherein the second distance is less that the first distance; identifying, for the single-use object and based on the second distance, a third detail level of the plurality of detail levels, wherein the third detail level is higher than the second detail level; receiving the single-use object at the third detail level; and generating the single-use object for output at the third detail level.
In related field of endeavor, Bouazizi teaches wherein: the method further comprises, at a first time, identifying that the single-use object is a first distance away from a user in the extended reality scene ([0073] “UE 184 may determine a distance between a user of UE 184 in a 3D space for the XR session and a user of UE 182 in the 3D space for the XR session”); identifying the first detail level of the plurality of detail levels further comprises identifying the first detail level based on the first distance ([0071] “rendering components 174 may retrieve data of user A avatar base model 172 at an appropriate level of detail, e.g., based on a distance between a current user and user A in a 3D space”); and the method further comprises: at a second time, identifying that the single-use object is a second distance away from a user in the extended reality scene, wherein the second distance is less that the first distance; identifying, for the single-use object and based on the second distance, a third detail level of the plurality of detail levels ([0074] “UE 184 may be configured with various thresholds corresponding to each available LOD for the 3D object model of the avatar … Thus, UE 184 may determine which threshold is satisfied by the determined distance, then request the LOD for the 3D object model for the avatar of the user of UE 182 corresponding to the threshold.”).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the time of filing to have further modified Harviainen and Boss to include wherein: the method further comprises, at a first time, identifying that the single-use object is a first distance away from a user in the extended reality scene; identifying the first detail level of the plurality of detail levels further comprises identifying the first detail level based on the first distance; and the method further comprises: at a second time, identifying that the single-use object is a second distance away from a user in the extended reality scene, wherein the second distance is less that the first distance; identifying, for the single-use object and based on the second distance, a third detail level of the plurality of detail levels as taught by Bouazizi. Doing so would reduce processing operations and bandwidth required while maintaining a good user experience ([0007] “these techniques may reduce processing operations and bandwidth required for 3D objects needing to be rendered, while maintaining a good experience for the user because nearby 3D objects can be rendered at a higher quality level.”)
Regarding claim 7, Harviainen as modified by Boss teaches the method of claim 1, wherein the computing device is a first computing device, the cache is a first cache ([0285] “the content server starts run-time processing such that the content server distributes content to the viewing clients”, [0145] “A viewing client 204 may include local cache memory 214”) and the method further comprises: for an object of the plurality of objects having the single-use classification: receiving, from the first computing device, the single-use object at the first detail level ([0148] “the QoE metrics may indicate that the user experience is below a threshold, and the viewing client 304 may request a segment with a higher LoD. The content server 306 responds 338 with the requested segment, and the viewing client 304 renders and displays 340 the LoD and DoF representations of the content for the user 302.”); for an object of the plurality of objects having the multi-use classification: storing, in a second cache at the second computing device, the multi-use object at the second detail level ([0285] “the content server starts run-time processing such that the content server distributes content to the viewing clients”, [0276] “a viewing client 1504 may include a local cache, which may be used to store content streams of media presentation descriptions 1514”, where the client server distributes content to multiple viewing clients, and the multiple clients each include cache memory); and generating the multi-use object for output, at the second computing device, at the second detail level ([0148] “the viewing client 304 renders and displays 340 the LoD and DoF representations of the content for the user 302.”).
Harviainen and Boss fail to explicitly teach causing a second computing device to join an extended reality session with the first computing device; initiating, at the second computing device, output of the extended reality scene; receiving, at the second computing device and from the first computing device, the metadata file; identifying, at the first computing device, the first detail level of the plurality of detail level; and generating the single-use object for output, at the second computing device, at the first detail level; identifying, at the first computing device, the second detail level of the plurality of detail levels; receiving, from the first computing device, the multi-use object at the second detail level;
In related field of endeavor, Bouazizi further teaches causing a second computing device to join an extended reality session with the first computing device ([0072] “FIG. 4 is a flow diagram illustrating an example XR session between two user equipment (UE) devices and a shared space server device. As shown in the example of FIG. 4, two or more UEs may participate in an XR session”); initiating, at the second computing device, output of the extended reality scene ([0091] “During an XR session between the sender and receiver, the sender may send animation data to the receiver. The receiver may use the animation data to transform and/or warp the base model and display these animations to a user of the receiver via a display device.”); receiving, at the second computing device and from the first computing device, the metadata file ([0088] “A receiver (e.g., client device 40 of FIG. 1) may retrieve a description of the base model details from the AS. The receiver may check the description and make a selection of one of the LODs (252).”); identifying, at the first computing device, the first detail level of the plurality of detail levels ([0087] “a sender (e.g., a first UE, such as content preparation device 20 of FIG. 1 or UE 182 of FIG. 4) publishes base model details (250), such as metadata for a 3D object model (e.g., avatar) and levels of detail available for the 3D object model to an application server (AS)”); and generating the single-use object for output, at the second computing device, at the first detail level ([0090] “The receiver may then decrypt the encrypted components and use the components of the LOD to present the base model (264).”); identifying, at the first computing device, the second detail level of the plurality of detail levels ([0093] “The source device may then construct multiple level of detail (LOD) versions of the base model (282). For example, the source device may construct one or more reduced LOD versions from the initial base model”); receiving, from the first computing device, the multi-use object at the second detail level ([0101] “receiving, by the client device, the data for the 3D object model at the one of the LODs in response to the request, the data for the 3D object model at the one of the LODs having the size, the complexity, and the components of the 3D object model for the one of the LODs.”);
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the time of filing to have further modified Harviainen and Boss to include causing a second computing device to join an extended reality session with the first computing device; initiating, at the second computing device, output of the extended reality scene; receiving, at the second computing device and from the first computing device, the metadata file; identifying, at the first computing device, the first detail level of the plurality of detail level; and generating the single-use object for output, at the second computing device, at the first detail level; identifying, at the first computing device, the second detail level of the plurality of detail levels; and receiving, from the first computing device, the multi-use object at the second detail level; as taught by Bouazizi. Doing so would reduce processing operations and bandwidth required while maintaining a good user experience ([0007] “these techniques may reduce processing operations and bandwidth required for 3D objects needing to be rendered, while maintaining a good experience for the user because nearby 3D objects can be rendered at a higher quality level.”)
Regarding claim 8, Harviainen, Boss, and Bouazizi teach the method of claim 7, and Harviainen further teaches wherein: identifying the first detail level of the plurality of detail levels comprises identifying the first detail level based on a bandwidth available to the first computing device ([0234-0239] “Requirements: LoD 1 … Required network capacity: 2.0 Mbps”, [0250] “For each LoD version of the data, streaming bandwidth requirements may be indicated as well as if the data is progressive (such that higher LoD levels build on top of lower LoD levels”); and identifying the second detail level of the plurality of detail levels comprises identifying the second detail level based on the bandwidth available to the first computing device ([0240-0244] “LoD 2 … Required network capacity: 4.0 Mbps”, [0250] “For each LoD version of the data, streaming bandwidth requirements may be indicated as well as if the data is progressive (such that higher LoD levels build on top of lower LoD levels”).
Regarding claim 16, the system claim 16 is similar in scope to the method claim 6, and is rejected under similar rationale.
Regarding claim 17, the system claim 17 is similar in scope to the method claim 7, and is rejected under similar rationale.
Regarding claim 18, the system claim 18 is similar in scope to the method claim 8, and is rejected under similar rationale.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. Cooley et al (US 9786027 B1, hereinafter Cooley) teaches adapting a level of detail for 3D assets used in a 3D simulation based on network bandwidth, and downloading assets at the level of detail based on network bandwidth (Cooley Abstract "adapting the level of detail for one or more first 3D assets of the first subset of the plurality of 3D assets based at least in part on (a) a bandwidth for downloading the first subset of the plurality of 3D assets through the network, and (b) a processing power of the player device; and downloading the first subset
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to JOHN PATRICK GOCO whose telephone number is (571)272-5872. The examiner can normally be reached M-Th, 7:00 am - 5:00 pm.
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, Kee Tung can be reached at (571)272-7794. 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.
/J.P.G./ Examiner, Art Unit 2611
/KEE M TUNG/ Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2611
Prosecution Insights