DETAILED ACTION
Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status
The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
Priority
This application is a continuation of US Application No. 17/943,418, filed 09/13/2022, which claims the benefit of US Provisional Application No. 63/243,416, filed 09/13/2021, which is a continuation-in-part of US Application No. 17/568,592, filed 06/04/2022, which is a continuation of US Application No. 17/3466,912, filed 06/14/2021, which claims the benefit of US Provisional Application No. 63/038,236, filed 06/12/2020.
Claim Objections
Claim 9 is objected to because of the following informalities: claim 9 recites “wherein the first tracking subsystem is separate and distinct from the second tracking subsystem, wherein the first tracking subsystem is arranged remote from the second tracking subsystem”. There is a lack of antecedent basis for the claim. Appropriate correction is required.
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted is considered by the examiner.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 103 which forms the basis for all obviousness rejections set forth in this Office action:
A patent for a claimed invention may not be obtained, notwithstanding that the claimed invention is not identically disclosed as set forth in section 102, if the differences between the claimed invention and the prior art are such that the claimed invention as a whole would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which the claimed invention pertains. Patentability shall not be negated by the manner in which the invention was made.
Claim(s) 1-2, 8, 10-12, 18-20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Buchner et al. (US Publication Number 2005/0132290 A1) in view of Sheik-Nainar et al. (US Publication Number 2017/0115791 A1, hereinafter “Sheik”).
(1) regarding claim 1:
As shown in figs 1a-1b, Buchner disclosed a method for determining and generating tactile sensation (para. [0027] FIG. 1b is a block diagram showing the feature extraction and tactile stimulation procedure according to the present invention), the method comprising:
determining a first set of inputs comprising a first set of locations associated with a first set of hands of a first user (para. [0073], note that it enables users to "touch" each other despite being at distinct locations);
determining a tactile effect based on the hand gesture (para. [0077], note that a hand gesture initiating a caress can be detected and translated into actuator impulses); and
in response to detecting the hand gesture and determining the tactile effect, conveying tactile sensation corresponding to the tactile effect at a tactile stimulation device for a second user (para. [0078], note that if a tactile communication channel (sensor input and actuator output) is used on the sender as well as on the receiver side, information reflecting emotional states of a first user (the sender) wearing a piece of clothing equipped with sensing means for measuring e.g. biometric signals of the first user and actuating means for generating pressure, vibrational and/ or electric impulses based on perceived sensations of said first user can directly be transmitted to a second user (the receiver) wearing such a piece of clothing by mapping a set of sensor values).
Buchner disclosed most of the subject matter as described above except for specifically teaching determining a set of distances between locations of the first set of inputs; generating a set of comparisons based on the set of distances, comprising: comparing at least a subset of the set of distances with a set of predetermined distance thresholds; and comparing at least a subset of the set of distances with other distances of the set of distances; based on the set of comparisons, detecting a hand gesture performed by the first set of hands, wherein the hand gesture is associated with a set of predetermined hand gestures.
However, Sheik disclosed determining a set of distances between locations of the first set of inputs (as shown in fig. 3A &3B, para. [0048], note that FIGS. 3A-3B illustrate various gesture distances (i.e., gesture distance A (331), gesture distance B (332)) that may describe the length of movement as well as the direction of movement that the input objects); generating a set of comparisons based on the set of distances, comprising: comparing at least a subset of the set of distances with a set of predetermined distance thresholds (para. [0087], note that in Step 740, a determination is made whether a change in position of one or more input objects exceeds a distance threshold in accordance with one or more embodiments. Specifically, the change in position determined in Step 715 may be compared to a distance threshold); and comparing at least a subset of the set of distances with other distances of the set of distances (para. [0088], note that processing system may determine that the change in position from Step 715 is greater than distance threshold A, but less than distance threshold B. In one or more embodiments, an interface action may be selected according to which distance thresholds are exceed by the change in position); based on the set of comparisons, detecting a hand gesture performed by the first set of hands, wherein the hand gesture is associated with a set of predetermined hand gestures (para. [0095], note that the finger (810) maintains an input force applied to the screen of the smartphone (800), while the finger (810) also slides along the screen to a final force location (825). Thus, the finger (810) produces a gesture motion between the previous finger position (840) and a final finger position as shown in FIG. 8B.).
At the time of filing for the invention, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skilled in the art to teach determining a set of distances between locations of the first set of inputs; generating a set of comparisons based on the set of distances, comprising: comparing at least a subset of the set of distances with a set of predetermined distance thresholds; and comparing at least a subset of the set of distances with other distances of the set of distances; based on the set of comparisons, detecting a hand gesture performed by the first set of hands, wherein the hand gesture is associated with a set of predetermined hand gestures. The suggestion/motivation for doing so would have been in order to improve usability by performing an interface action within a graphical user interface in response to determining that the input force comparison (para. [0004]). Therefore, it would have been obvious to combine Buchner with Sheik to obtain the invention as specified in claim 1.
(2) regarding claim 2:
Buchner further disclosed the method of claim 1, further comprising:
determining a second tactile effect based on the hand gesture (para. [0077], note that a hand gesture initiating a caress can be detected and translated into actuator impulses. Tactile sensations can be triggered as soon as they are received or upon acknowledgment of the recipient only); and
in response to detecting the hand gesture and determining the second tactile effect, conveying second tactile sensation corresponding to the second tactile effect at a second tactile stimulation device for the first user (para. [0077], note that biometric signals measured by the first user can be evaluated and transmitted to said second user. This implies that both users (the sender and the recipient) wear a smart piece of clothing equipped with a wearable computing device. In this case, the sender is equipped with a number of biometric sensors (body temperature, blood volume pressure, respiration rate and/or pulse rate sensors, etc.) which are used for monitoring a number of biometric signals indicating the physiological, physical and/or psychological condition, tactile sensations perceived and/or physical expressions of affection reflecting feelings, impressions, emotional states and states of mind of the sender).
(3) regarding claim 8:
Buchner further disclosed the method of claim 1, wherein the first set of locations comprise a set of tips of digits of a first hand of the first set, and wherein the second set of locations comprises a set of tips of digits of a second hand of the second set (para. [0096], note that in FIGS. 13a-c, a single gemstone (or bead) 1300a can be mounted on a finger ring 1300b or an earring. If the user wears two ear rings, he/she has a two-actuator array. Using finger rings, the user can have up to ten actuators).
(4) regarding claim 10:
Buchner further disclosed the method of claim 1, wherein:
determining the tactile effect comprises selecting the tactile effect from a predefined library of tactile effects (para. [0089], note that a user wants to feel the vibro-tactile sensations in a strong way, and in other cases in a soft way according to the tactile sensitiveness of his/her skin);
the tactile effect is associated with an algorithm defining evolution of a tactile point set (para. [0089], note that the user thus has a possibility to tune parameters of the vibro-tactile signal); and
conveying the tactile sensation at the tactile stimulation device is performed based on the algorithm (para. [0089], note that the user thus has a possibility to tune parameters of the vibro-tactile signal, e.g. its frequency, duration and intensity, for his/her personal comfort).
(5) regarding claim 11:
Buchner further disclosed the method of claim 1, wherein detecting the hand gesture is performed based further on a set of motion parameters associated with the first set of locations, wherein the set of motion parameters comprise at least one of: speed, acceleration, or change in orientation of the first set of hands (para. [0077], note that the sensations can also be triggered when the user is reading, but this may imply an eye-tracking system since different readers have different reading speeds. In the future, gestures can also be a possible input. For example, a hand gesture initiating a caress can be detected and translated into actuator impulses).
(6) regarding claim 14:
Buchner further disclosed the system of claim 12, wherein the hand gesture is a predetermined hand gesture (para. [0077], note that a hand gesture initiating a caress can be detected and translated into actuator impulses. Tactile sensations can be triggered as soon as they are received or upon acknowledgment of the recipient only).
(7) regarding claim 15:
Buchner disclosed most of the subject matter as described above except for specifically teaching wherein detecting that the first user has formed the hand gesture comprises determining that, for a subset of the set of distances, the distances of the subset satisfy a predefined threshold condition.
However, Sheik disclosed wherein detecting that the first user has formed the hand gesture comprises determining that, for a subset of the set of distances, the distances of the subset satisfy a predefined threshold condition (fig. 3A &3B, para. [0048], note that FIGS. 3A-3B illustrate various gesture distances (i.e., gesture distance A (331), gesture distance B (332)) that may describe the length of movement as well as the direction of movement that the input objects).
At the time of filing for the invention, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skilled in the art to teach wherein detecting that the first user has formed the hand gesture comprises determining that, for a subset of the set of distances, the distances of the subset satisfy a predefined threshold condition. The suggestion/motivation for doing so would have been in order to improve usability by performing an interface action within a graphical user interface in response to determining that the input force comparison (para. [0004]). Therefore, it would have been obvious to combine Buchner with Sheik to obtain the invention as specified in claim 15.
(8) regarding claim 19:
Buchner further disclosed the system of claim 12, further comprising a wearable suit, the wearable suit comprising the first tactile stimulation device (para. [0026], note that FIG. 1a shows a user wearing a piece of clothing which includes integrated electronic devices and actuators worn on or placed near the user's body).
The proposed rejection of claim 1, renders obvious the system of claim 12 (A system for determining and generating tactile sensation, fig 1A , the system comprising: a set of tactile stimulation devices, the set of tactile stimulation devices comprising a first tactile stimulation device and a second tactile stimulation device (para. [0049], FIG. 1a shows a user wearing a "smart" jacket 101, which smart jacket 101 has integrated therein at least one actuator 106 which is able to generate vibrational, heat, pressure or electric pulses to transmit information using the skin of the user as an interface. Note that the smart jacket 101 is just one example for a wearable computing device); a set of processing subsystems in communication with the first tactile stimulation device and the second tactile stimulation device, para. [0053], 106' designates processing means for processing e.g. the biometric signals taken from the user of the jacket 101 and/or measured environmental parameters of the use) because these steps occur in the operation of the proposed rejection as discussed above. Thus, the arguments similar to that presented above for claim 1 is equally applicable to claim 12.
Claim(s) 7, 9, 13 and 16-17 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Buchner and Sheik, further in view of Caron et al. (US Patent Number 10,852,814 B2).
(1) regarding claim 7:
Buchner disclosed most of the subject matter as described above except for specifically teaching wherein detecting the hand gesture comprises using a trained machine learning model.
However, Caron disclosed wherein detecting the hand gesture comprises using a trained machine learning model (col. 5, lines 57-62, note that the processor 12 may then determine that the plurality of respective depths include a pattern corresponding to all or part of the hand 46 of the user. For example, this pattern may be detected using a machine learning algorithm executed by processor 12).
At the time of filing for the invention, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skilled in the art to teach wherein detecting the hand gesture comprises using a trained machine learning model. The suggestion/motivation for doing so would have been in order to track the position of a user's hands or fingers to determine when the user is interacting with a virtual object and to facilitate for the user to tell when the user's hand is close to a virtual object (col. 2, lines 19-23). Therefore, it would have been obvious to combine Buchner and Sheik with Caron to obtain the invention as specified in claim 7.
(2) regarding claim 9:
Buchner disclosed most of the subject matter as described above except for specifically teaching wherein the first tracking subsystem is separate and distinct from the second tracking subsystem, wherein the first tracking subsystem is arranged remote from the second tracking subsystem.
However, Caron disclosed wherein the first tracking subsystem is separate and distinct from the second tracking subsystem, wherein the first tracking subsystem is arranged remote from the second tracking subsystem (col. 5, lines 36-39, note that wherein the first tracking subsystem is separate and distinct from the second tracking subsystem, wherein the first tracking subsystem is arranged remote from the second tracking subsystem).
At the time of filing for the invention, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skilled in the art to teach wherein the first tracking subsystem is separate and distinct from the second tracking subsystem, wherein the first tracking subsystem is arranged remote from the second tracking subsystem. The suggestion/motivation for doing so would have been in order to track the position of a user's hands or fingers to determine when the user is interacting with a virtual object and to facilitate for the user to tell when the user's hand is close to a virtual object (col. 2, lines 19-23). Therefore, it would have been obvious to combine Buchner and Sheik with Caron to obtain the invention as specified in claim 9.
(3) regarding claim 13:
Buchner disclosed most of the subject matter as described above except for specifically teaching a tracking subsystem in communication with the first tactile stimulation device, wherein the tracking subsystem is configured to determine the first set of locations.
However, Caron disclosed a tracking subsystem in communication with the first tactile stimulation device, wherein the tracking subsystem is configured to determine the first set of locations (col. 5, lines 49-52, note that the processor 12 may be further configured to determine a world-space distance 52 between a hand 46 of the user and the world-locked location 54 of the virtual object 42).
At the time of filing for the invention, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skilled in the art to teach a tracking subsystem in communication with the first tactile stimulation device, wherein the tracking subsystem is configured to determine the first set of locations. The suggestion/motivation for doing so would have been in order to track the position of a user's hands or fingers to determine when the user is interacting with a virtual object and to facilitate for the user to tell when the user's hand is close to a virtual object (col. 2, lines 19-23). Therefore, it would have been obvious to combine Buchner and Sheik with Caron to obtain the invention as specified in claim 13.
(4) regarding claim 16:
Buchner disclosed most of the subject matter as described above except for specifically teaching wherein detecting that the first user has formed the hand gesture comprises using a trained machine learning model.
However, Caron disclosed wherein detecting that the first user has formed the hand gesture comprises using a trained machine learning model (col. 5, lines 57-62, note that the processor 12 may then determine that the plurality of respective depths include a pattern corresponding to all or part of the hand 46 of the user. For example, this pattern may be detected using a machine learning algorithm executed by the processor 12).
At the time of filing for the invention, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skilled in the art to teach wherein detecting that the first user has formed the hand gesture comprises using a trained machine learning model. The suggestion/motivation for doing so would have been in order to track the position of a user's hands or fingers to determine when the user is interacting with a virtual object and to facilitate for the user to tell when the user's hand is close to a virtual object (col. 2, lines 19-23). Therefore, it would have been obvious to combine Buchner and Sheik with Caron to obtain the invention as specified in claim 16.
(5) regarding claim 17:
Buchner disclosed most of the subject matter as described above except for specifically teaching wherein the set of processing subsystems determines an equation representative of the tactile effect using a trained machine learning model, wherein the set of tactile commands is generated based on the equation.
However, Caron disclosed wherein the set of processing subsystems determines an equation representative of the tactile effect using a trained machine learning model, wherein the set of tactile commands is generated based on the equation (col. 4, lines 48-50, note that the output device suite 30 may further include one or more haptic feedback devices 136 configured to provide tactile output (e.g., vibration).).
At the time of filing for the invention, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skilled in the art to teach wherein the set of processing subsystems determines an equation representative of the tactile effect using a trained machine learning model, wherein the set of tactile commands is generated based on the equation. The suggestion/motivation for doing so would have been in order to track the position of a user's hands or fingers to determine when the user is interacting with a virtual object and to facilitate for the user to tell when the user's hand is close to a virtual object (col. 2, lines 19-23). Therefore, it would have been obvious to combine Buchner and Sheik with Caron to obtain the invention as specified in claim 17.
Claim(s) 18 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Buchner and Sheik, further in view of Karmon et al. (US Publication Number 2017/0192513 A1).
(1) regarding claim 18:
Buchner disclosed most of the subject matter as described above except for specifically teaching a content control module in communication with the set of processing subsystems, wherein the system is configured to transition from a first interaction state to a second interaction state in response to detecting the hand gesture.
However, Karmon disclosed a content control module in communication with the set of processing subsystems, wherein the system is configured to transition from a first interaction state to a second interaction state in response to detecting the hand gesture (para. [0005], note that the one or more sequential logic models of the hand gestures may be represented by a finite state machine (FSM) documenting transitions between hand pose(s) and/or hand motion(s).).
At the time of filing for the invention, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skilled in the art to teach a content control module in communication with the set of processing subsystems, wherein the system is configured to transition from a first interaction state to a second interaction state in response to detecting the hand gesture. The suggestion/motivation for doing so would have been in order to provide an electrical device for detecting hand gestures of a user by estimating a runtime sequence of runtime hand datasets through analysis of one or more images depicting movement of hand(s) of a user with respect to a plurality of pre-defined hand gestures to identify the runtime sequence as a valid hand gesture (para. [0005]). Therefore, it would have been obvious to combine Buchner and Sheik with Karmon to obtain the invention as specified in claim 18.
Claim(s) 3-6 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Buchner et al. (US Publication Number 2005/0132290 A1) in view of Welch et al. (US Patent Number 11,042,028 B1).
(1) regarding claim 3:
Buchner disclosed most of the subject matter as described above except for specifically teaching determining a second set of inputs comprising a second set of locations associated with a second set of hands of a second user; determining a second set of distances between locations of the second set of inputs; generating a second set of comparisons based on the second set of distances; and based on the second set of comparisons, detecting a second hand gesture performed by the second set of hands, wherein the second hand gesture is associated with the set of predetermined hand gestures.
However, Sheik disclosed determining a second set of distances between locations of the second set of inputs (as shown in fig. 3A &3B, para. [0048], note that FIGS. 3A-3B illustrate various gesture distances (i.e., gesture distance A (331), gesture distance B (332)) that may describe the length of movement as well as the direction of movement that the input objects); generating a second set of comparisons based on the second set of distances (para. [0087], note that in Step 740, a determination is made whether a change in position of one or more input objects exceeds a distance threshold in accordance with one or more embodiments. Specifically, the change in position determined in Step 715 may be compared to a distance threshold); and based on the second set of comparisons, detecting a second hand gesture performed by the second set of hands, wherein the second hand gesture is associated with the set of predetermined hand gestures (para. [0095], note that the finger (810) maintains an input force applied to the screen of the smartphone (800), while the finger (810) also slides along the screen to a final force location (825). Thus, the finger (810) produces a gesture motion between the previous finger position (840) and a final finger position as shown in FIG. 8B).
At the time of filing for the invention, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skilled in the art to teach determining a second set of distances between locations of the second set of inputs; generating a second set of comparisons based on the second set of distances; and based on the second set of comparisons, detecting a second hand gesture performed by the second set of hands, wherein the second hand gesture is associated with the set of predetermined hand gestures. The suggestion/motivation for doing so would have been in order to improve usability by performing an interface action within a graphical user interface in response to determining that the input force comparison (para. [0004]). Therefore, it would have been obvious to combine Buchner with Sheik to obtain the invention as specified in claim 3.
Also, Welch disclosed determining a second set of inputs comprising a second set of locations associated with a second set of hands of a second user (col. 7, lines 10-16, note that the first user 10 extends a first rendered hand 120 to touch a common shared virtual object 111, while the second user 11 extends a second rendered hand 115 in an attempt to touch the same common shared virtual object 111 at the same location on the common shared virtual object 125 as the first user 10).
At the time of filing for the invention, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skilled in the art to teach determining a second set of inputs comprising a second set of locations associated with a second set of hands of a second user. The suggestion/motivation for doing so would have been in order to improve the relative accuracy and realism of computer simulations (col. 1, lines 9-10). Therefore, it would have been obvious to combine Buchner and Sheik with Welch to obtain the invention as specified in claim 3.
(2) regarding claim 4:
Buchner disclosed most of the subject matter as described above except for specifically teaching wherein the tactile effect is determined based further on the second hand gesture.
However, Welch disclosed wherein the tactile effect is determined based further on the second hand gesture (col. 11, lines 47-50, note that haptic means the generation of a simulated sense of touch (or a tactile sensation) by applying various surrogate stimuli such as motions to the user).
At the time of filing for the invention, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skilled in the art to teach wherein the tactile effect is determined based further on the second hand gesture. The suggestion/motivation for doing so would have been in order to improve the relative accuracy and realism of computer simulations (col. 1, lines 9-10). Therefore, it would have been obvious to combine Buchner and Sheik with Welch to obtain the invention as specified in claim 4.
(3) regarding claim 5:
Buchner disclosed most of the subject matter as described above except for specifically teaching wherein determining the second set of inputs is performed substantially concurrently with determining the first set of inputs.
However, Welch disclosed wherein determining the second set of inputs is performed substantially concurrently with determining the first set of inputs (col. 7, lines 14-16, note that the second user 11 extends a second rendered hand 115 in an attempt to touch the same common shared virtual object 111 at the same location on the common shared virtual object 125 as the first user 10)).
At the time of filing for the invention, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skilled in the art to teach wherein determining the second set of inputs is performed substantially concurrently with determining the first set of inputs. The suggestion/motivation for doing so would have been in order to improve the relative accuracy and realism of computer simulations (col. 1, lines 9-10). Therefore, it would have been obvious to combine Buchner and Sheik with Welch to obtain the invention as specified in claim 5.
(4) regarding claim 6:
Buchner disclosed most of the subject matter as described above except for specifically teaching determining a second tactile effect based on the second hand gesture; and in response to detecting the second hand gesture and determining the second tactile effect, conveying second tactile sensation corresponding to the second tactile effect at a second tactile stimulation device for the first user.
However, Welch disclosed determining a second tactile effect based on the second hand gesture (col. 7, lines 11-22, note that the second user 11 extends a second rendered hand 115 in an attempt to touch the same common shared virtual object 111 at the same location on the common shared virtual object 125 as the first user 10); and in response to detecting the second hand gesture and determining the second tactile effect, conveying second tactile sensation corresponding to the second tactile effect at a second tactile stimulation device for the first user (col. 7, lines 11-22, note that the measurements made by the equipment on or held by first user 10 and second user 11 cooperate so that the relative accuracy of the rendered hands and the common shared virtual object 111 is improved. This is particularly useful in virtual and augmented reality training scenarios where two or more participants in a co-located space are attempting to manipulate common virtual objects).
At the time of filing for the invention, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skilled in the art to teach determining a second tactile effect based on the second hand gesture; and in response to detecting the second hand gesture and determining the second tactile effect, conveying second tactile sensation corresponding to the second tactile effect at a second tactile stimulation device for the first user. The suggestion/motivation for doing so would have been in order to improve the relative accuracy and realism of computer simulations (col. 1, lines 9-10). Therefore, it would have been obvious to combine Buchner and Sheik with Welch to obtain the invention as specified in claim 6.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Li et al. (US Publication Number 2021/0333884 A1) disclosed methods, devices, and processor-readable media for adjusting the control-display gain of a gesture-controlled device are described. Adjusting the control-display gain may facilitate user interaction with content or UI elements rendered on a display screen of the gesture-controlled device. The control-display gain may be adjusted based on a property of how a mid-air dragging gesture is being performed by a user's hand.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communication from the examiner should be directed to Hilina K Demeter whose telephone number is (571) 270-1676.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, King Y. Poon could be reached at (571) 270- 0728. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300.
Information regarding the status of an application may be obtained from the Patent Application Information Retrieval (PAIR) system. Status information for published applications may be obtained from either Private PAIR or Public PAIR. Status information for unpublished applications is available through Private PAIR only. For more information about PAIR system, see http://pari-direct.uspto.gov. Should you have questions on access to the Private PAIR system, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative or access to the automated information system, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000.
/HILINA K DEMETER/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2617
