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
Acknowledgment is made of applicant's claim for foreign priority based on applications filed in Japan on 03/22/2024. It is noted that an attempt by the Office to electronically retrieve, under the priority document exchange program, the foreign application JP2024-046320 to which priority is claimed has FAILED on 08/22/2025. Useful information is provided at the Electronic Priority Document Exchange (PDX) Program Website (https://www.uspto.gov/patents/basics/international- protection/electronic-priority-document-exchange-pdx).including practice tips for priority document exchange https://www.uspto.gov/patents/basics/international-protection/electronic-priority- document-exchange-pdx#Practice2tips). For further questions or assistance, please contact the Patent Electronic Business Center (EBC) toll-free at 1-866-217-9197 or locally at 571-272-4100, open M-F from 6AM to Midnight EST or at PDX@uspto.gov.
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted on 03/21/2025 is in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statement is being considered by the examiner.
Specification
Applicant is reminded of the proper content of an abstract of the disclosure.
A patent abstract is a concise statement of the technical disclosure of the patent and should include that which is new in the art to which the invention pertains. The abstract should not refer to purported merits or speculative applications of the invention and should not compare the invention with the prior art.
If the patent is of a basic nature, the entire technical disclosure may be new in the art, and the abstract should be directed to the entire disclosure. If the patent is in the nature of an improvement in an old apparatus, process, product, or composition, the abstract should include the technical disclosure of the improvement. The abstract should also mention by way of example any preferred modifications or alternatives.
Where applicable, the abstract should include the following: (1) if a machine or apparatus, its organization and operation; (2) if an article, its method of making; (3) if a chemical compound, its identity and use; (4) if a mixture, its ingredients; (5) if a process, the steps.
Extensive mechanical and design details of an apparatus should not be included in the abstract. The abstract should be in narrative form and generally limited to a single paragraph within the range of 50 to 150 words in length.
See MPEP § 608.01(b) for guidelines for the preparation of patent abstracts.
The abstract of the disclose is objected to because it does not “enable the Office and the public generally to determine quickly from a cursory inspection the nature and gist of the technical disclosure.” 37 CFR 1.72(b). Specifically, it is not clear what this technology is used for or what the advantage may include. A corrected abstract of the disclosure is required and must be presented on another sheet, apart from any other text/ See MPEP § 608.01(b).
Further, the abstract is objected to because of the following informalities:
“a processor cause a display” should read “a processor causing a display”.
“operation on the 3-dimensional graph by …” should read “operation on a 3-dimensional graph by …”.
“display a 3-dimensional graph” should read “display the 3-dimensional graph”.
Appropriate correction is required.
Claim Objections
Claims 1-9, 13, 18, and 20 are objected to because of the following informalities:
In Claim 1, “a processor cause a display” should read “a processor causing a display”.
In Claim 20, “a processor cause a display” should read “a processor causing a display”.
The language in Claims 1-9 and 20 is inconsistent:
Claims 1, 4, 6-9 and 20 recite: “wherein … the processor: …”
Claims 2, 3, and 5 recite “wherein … the processor …”
In Claim 8, “dynamically sets an event handler displaying” should read “dynamically sets an event handler for displaying”.
In Claim 13, “dynamically sets an event handler displaying” should read “dynamically sets an event handler for displaying”.
In Claim 18, “dynamically sets an event handler displaying” should read “dynamically sets an event handler for displaying”.
Appropriate correction is required.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(b):
(b) CONCLUSION.—The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph:
The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the applicant regards as his invention.
Claims 1, 4, 8-10, 13-15 and 18-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor (or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the applicant), regards as the invention.
Claim 1 recites the limitation "the 3-dimensional graph" in line 5. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. Further, Claim 1 recites in line 7, “a 3-dimensional graph”, it is unclear whether this refers to the initial 3-dimensional graph in line 5 or a new one. For the sake of further prosecution, Examiner will interpret there to only be one 3-dimensional graph.
Claim 4 recites the limitation “a result of the solution for the solution target object” in lines 11-12, it is unclear whether this refers to the result of a solution for a solution target object in Claim 1 or a new one. For the sake of further prosecution, Examiner will interpret this as the same result of a solution for a solution target object.
Claim 8 recites the limitation “a result of a solution for the solution target object” in lines 4-5, it is unclear whether this refers to the result of a solution for a solution target object in Claim 1 or a new one. For the sake of further prosecution, Examiner will interpret this as the same result of a solution for a solution target object. Further, Claim 8 recites “a user operation on the 3-dimensional graph” in lines 7-8, it is unclear whether this refers to the user operation in Claim 1 or a new one. For the sake of further prosecution, Examiner will interpret this to be the same user operation.
Claim 9 recites the limitation “a result of the solution” in lines 7-8, it is unclear whether this refers to the results of the solution for a solution target object in Claim 1. For the sake of further prosecution, Examiner will interpret this as the same result of the solution for the solution target object.
Claim 10 recites the limitation “a solution target object, which is a solution target object specified based on 3-dimensional coordinates on the 3-dimensional graph designated through a user operation and is a solution target object” in lines 6-10, it is unclear whether these recitations of “a solution target object” reference the same solution target object. For the sake of further prosecution, Examiner will interpret the claim to be referencing a singular solution target object. Further, Claim 10 recites the limitation “… on the 3-dimensional graph designated through a user operation” in lines 8-9 and the limitation “on the 3-dimensional graph in response to a user operation” in line 12, it is unclear whether these reference the same operation on the 3-dimensional graph. For the sake of further prosecution, Examiner will interpret the recitations to be referencing the same user operation.
Claim 13 recites the limitation “a user operation on the 3-dimensional graph” in lines 6-7, it is unclear whether this references the same user operation on the 3-dimensional graph recited in Claim 10 or a new user operation of the 3-dimensional graph. For the sake of further prosecution, Examiner will interpret this user operation to be referencing the same user operation.
Claim 14 recites the limitation “a result of the solution” in lines 6-7, it is unclear whether this refers to the results of the solution for a solution target object in Claim 14. For the sake of further prosecution, Examiner will interpret this as the same result of the solution for the solution target object.
Claim 15 recites the limitation “a solution target object, which is a solution target object specified based on 3-dimensional coordinates on the 3-dimensional graph designated through a user operation and is a solution target object” in lines 6-10, it is unclear whether these recitations of “a solution target object” reference the same solution target object. For the sake of further prosecution, Examiner will interpret the claim to be referencing a singular solution target object. Further, Claim 15 recites the limitation “… on the 3-dimensional graph designated through a user operation” in lines 8-9 and the limitation “on the 3-dimensional graph in response to a user operation” in line 12, it is unclear whether these reference the same operation on the 3-dimensional graph. For the sake of further prosecution, Examiner will interpret the recitations to be referencing the same user operation.
Claim 18 recites the limitation “a user operation on the 3-dimensional graph” in lines 6-7, it is unclear whether this references the same user operation on the 3-dimensional graph recited in Claim 15 or a new user operation of the 3-dimensional graph. For the sake of further prosecution, Examiner will interpret this user operation to be referencing the same user operation.
Claim 19 recites the limitation “a result of the solution” in lines 6-7, it is unclear whether this refers to the results of the solution for a solution target object in Claim 15. For the sake of further prosecution, Examiner will interpret this as the same result of the solution for the solution target object.
Claim 20 recites the limitation "the 3-dimensional graph" in line 6. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. Further, Claim 20 recites in line 8, “a 3-dimensional graph”, this will also require correction.
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.
Claims 1-2, 4, 9-11, 14-16, and 19 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over 3d Surface Plotter Comments (Disquis comments in 3D Surface Plotter of academo.org, 2016-2023), hereinafter referenced as 3dSPC, in view of Tanaka (US 2019/0096103 A1), hereinafter referenced as Tanaka.
Regarding Claim 1, 3dSPC discloses
receives a user operation on the 3-dimensional graph by an operation unit in response to causing the display to display a 3-dimensional graph corresponding to a 3-variable function (3dSPC: [Page 7], discloses clicking <a user operation> the graph, which is 3 dimensional, <the computer where the clicking is performed is interpreted as the operation unit> in response to calculating a graph <causing the display to display a 3-dimensional graph> based on an expression <corresponding to a 3-variable function, see image below, the image was clicked because the x, y, z values at a particular point are revealed on the 3-dimensional graph of “z=x*x-y*y” <3-variable function>),
PNG
media_image1.png
760
1216
media_image1.png
Greyscale
and causes the display to display a solution target object specified based on 3-dimensional coordinates on the 3-dimensional graph designated through the user operation on the 3-dimensional graph in response to the user operation on the 3-dimensional graph, and causes the display to display a result of a solution for the solution target object (3dSPC: [Page 7], illustrates causing the screen to display a data point of multiple data points <wherein the singular data point is the solution target object> specified based on 3-dimensional coordinates on the 3-dimensional graph designated through the user selection of resolution <user operation> on the 3-dimensional graph in response to the user operation on the 3-dimensional graph, and causes the screen to display coordinates for the selected point <result of a solution for the solution target object>, see above where the selected data point is interpreted as the solution target object and resolution is set to maximum, below illustrates the result of a solution, the coordinates of the selected data point, for the solution target object, data point).
PNG
media_image2.png
426
482
media_image2.png
Greyscale
While 3dSPC teaches an interactive web applet, 3dSPC fails to explicitly disclose
An information processing apparatus comprising a processor cause a display to display information, wherein the processor:
However, Tanaka discloses
An information processing apparatus comprising a processor cause a display to display information (Tanaka: [Abs], discloses a graph drawing system <information processing apparatus> comprising a processor that causes the display to display a graph corresponding to a function <information>), wherein the processor: …
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to apply and/or modify the teachings of 3dSPC by applying them to an apparatus comprising a processor and display as taught by Tanaka. One of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention would have been motivated to make this application for direct hardware control, enabling low-level interaction with device components.
Regarding Claim 2, the combination of 3dSPC and Tanaka disclose(s) the apparatus of Claim 1. The combination of 3dSPC and Tanaka further disclose wherein the processor causes
an object indicating a state in which a value of at least one variable among three variables included in the 3-variable function is fixed to values indicated by the 3-dimensional coordinates to be displayed on the 3-dimensional graph as the solution target object (3dSPC: [Page 7], illustrates the point graphic <object> at the selected point indicating a state in which the value of the 3 variables are fixed, at the selected point, within the graphed 3-dimensional function, is fixed to values indicated by the 3-dimensional coordinates to be displayed on the 3-dimensional graph, interpreted as the solution target object).
PNG
media_image3.png
630
1030
media_image3.png
Greyscale
Regarding Claim 4, the combination of 3dSPC and Tanaka disclose the apparatus of Claim 1. The combination of 3dSPC and Tanaka further disclose wherein the processor: causes
a plurality of the solution target objects specified based on the 3-dimensional coordinates to be displayed on the 3-dimensional graph (3dSPC: [Page 7], illustrates a plurality of data points <solution target objects> specified based on the 3-dimensional coordinates to be displayed on the 3-dimensional graph, the set resolution determines the plurality of data points, they are based on coordinates because they lie on the 3-dimensional graph in the 3-dimensional plane, see screenshot from [Pages 3-4] below, illustrating a plurality of data points),
PNG
media_image4.png
646
992
media_image4.png
Greyscale
and causes to the operation unit to receive a designation through a user operation on one solution target object among the plurality of solution target objects displayed on the 3-dimensional graph (3dSPC: [Page 7], discloses revealing the coordinates <causes the computer <operation unit> to receive a designation> through clicking <a user operation> on a data point <solution target object> among the plurality of data points <solution target objects> displayed on the 3-dimensional graph),
and causes the display to display a result of the solution for the solution target object designated through the user operation (3dSPC: [Page 7], discloses the revealing of the coordinates of the data point <result of the solution for the solution target object> designated through the click <user operation> on the selected data point).
Regarding Claim 10, 3dSPC discloses:
causing a display to display a 3-dimensional graph corresponding to a 3-variable function (3dSPC: [Page 7], illustrates a screenshot displaying <a display to display> a 3-dimensional graph corresponding to “z=x*x-y*y” <a 3-variable function>);
and causing the display to display a solution target object, which is a solution target object specified based on 3-dimensional coordinates on the 3-dimensional graph designated through a user operation and is a solution target object for which a solution is to be found for the 3-variable function, on the 3-dimensional graph in response to a user operation on the 3-dimensional graph and causing the display to display a result of the solution for the solution target object (3dSPC: [Page 7], illustrates a screenshot where a display displays a 3-dimensional graph containing data points <a data point is interpreted as the solution target object>, which is a data point based on 3-dimensional coordinates on the 3-dimensional graph designated through the user selection of resolution <user operation> on the 3-dimensional graph in response to the user operation on the 3-dimensional graph, and causes the screen to display coordinates for the selected point <result of a solution for the solution target object>, see above where the selected data point is interpreted as the solution target object and resolution is set to maximum).
3dSPC fails to disclose
an information processing method causing a computer of an information processing apparatus to execute …
However, Tanaka discloses
an information processing method causing a computer of an information processing apparatus to execute (Tanaka: [Claim 6], discloses a method including differential calculation <information processing method> performed by a processor of a server <a computer, because the processor computes, of an information processing apparatus>) …
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to apply and/or modify the teachings of 3dSPC by applying them to an information processing method as taught by Tanaka. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to making this application to implement an automated process ensuring quality and enhancing precision of method steps.
Regarding Claim 15, it recites limitations similar to the method of Claim 10 but as a non-transitory computer-readable medium. As shown in the rejection, the combination of 3dSPC and Tanaka disclose the limitations of Claim 10. The combination of 3dSPC and Tanaka further disclose(s)
A non-transitory computer-readable storage medium storing a program causing a computer of an information processing apparatus to execute (Tanaka: [Claim 19], discloses a non-transitory computer-readable storage medium storing a program for performing steps of a method using a processor <this system is interpreted as a computer of an information processing device>): …
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to apply and/or modify the method disclosed by the combination of 3dSPC and Tanaka by a applying it to a non-transitory computer-readable storage medium as further taught by Tanaka . One of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention would have been motivated to make this modification to protect data when power is lost.
Regarding Claims 11 and 16, 3dSPC and Tanaka disclose(s) the method and non-transitory computer-readable storage medium of Claims 10 and 15. 3dSPC and Tanaka disclose(s)
displaying a plurality of the solution target objects specified based on the 3-dimensional coordinates on the 3-dimensional graph (3dSPC: [Page 7], illustrates a plurality of data points <solution target objects> specified based on the 3-dimensional coordinates to be displayed on the 3-dimensional graph, the set resolution determines the plurality of data points, they are based on coordinates because they lie on the 3-dimensional graph in the 3-dimensional plane, see screenshot from [Pages 3-4], illustrating a plurality of data points);
and causing an operation unit to receive a designation through a user operation on one solution target object among the plurality of solution target objects displayed on the 3-dimensional graph (3dSPC: [Page 7], discloses revealing the coordinates <causes the computer <operation unit> to receive a designation> through clicking <a user operation> on a data point <solution target object> among the plurality of data points <solution target objects> displayed on the 3-dimensional graph),
and causing the display to display the result of the solution for the solution target object designated through the user operation (3dSPC: [Page 7], discloses the revealing of the coordinates of the data point <result of the solution for the solution target object> designated through the click <user operation> on the selected data point).
Regarding Claims 9, 14, and 19, the combination of 3dSPC and Tanaka disclose(s) the method and non-transitory computer-readable storage medium of Claims 1, 10, and 15 respectively. The combination of 3dSPC and Tanaka further disclose wherein the processor:
causes the display to display the 3-dimensional graph and the solution target object in a first electronic tag (3dSPC: [Pages 1, 9-10], share examples of displayed 3-dimensional graphs and their data points <including a data point, interpreted as the solution target object> where this graph is interpreted the first electronic tag),
PNG
media_image5.png
262
464
media_image5.png
Greyscale
and causes the display to display a result of the solution in a second electronic tag different from the first electronic tag (3dSPC: [Page 7], discloses the coordinates will be revealed <a result of a solution> when a data point is selected, this additional graphic on top of the initial graphic is interpreted as the second electronic tag, different from the first electronic tag).
Claims 3 and 5 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over the combination of 3dSPC and Tanaka in view of “Show Tangent Lines to a Surface using 3D Calc Plotter – Directional Derivative” (YouTube, 2017, Mathispower4u), hereinafter referenced as 3dCalcPlotter.
Regarding Claim 3, the combination of 3dSPC and Tanaka disclose the apparatus of Claim 1. The combination of 3dSPC and Tanaka fail to disclose the limitations of Claim 3, however, 3dCalcPlotter discloses wherein the processor causes
a line or a plane tangent to the 3-dimensional coordinates to be displayed on the 3- dimensional graph as the solution target object (3dCalcPlotter: [1:51-2:46], discloses a black line tangent to the surface of a selected point in the 3-dimensional space <3-dimensional coordinates> displayed on the 3-dimensional graph, interpreted as the solution target object, where the black tangent line illustrates the value of the directional derivative).
PNG
media_image6.png
1084
1916
media_image6.png
Greyscale
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to apply and/or modify the apparatus disclosed by the combination of 3dSPC and Tanaka by having a plane tangent to 3-dimensional coordinates displayed as taught by 3dCalcPlotter. One of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention would have been motivated to make this modification to evaluate the rate of change, find surface normals, and extract further insights from the visualization.
Regarding Claim 5, the combination of 3dSPC and Tanaka disclose the apparatus of Claim 4. The combination of 3dSPC and Tanaka fail to disclose the limitations of Claim 5, however, 3dCalcPlotter discloses wherein the processor causes the display to
display a result obtained by executing a solving function designated through a user operation among a plurality of solving functions for the solution target object designated through the user operation (3dCalcPlotter: [1:14-2:07], discloses displaying a directional derivative trace <result> obtained by executing a <solving function> designated through the user clicking “Show dir derivative trace” among a plurality of options on the menu for the selected coordinates <solution target object> designated through user selection).
PNG
media_image7.png
360
329
media_image7.png
Greyscale
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to apply and/or modify the apparatus disclosed by the combination of 3dSPC and Tanaka by selecting an operation among a plurality of operations as taught by 3dCalcPlotter. One of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention would have been motivated to make this modification for an improved user experience, users would be able to use the tool for more than one function.
Claims 6 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over the combination of 3dSPC, Tanaka, and 3dCalcPlotter in view of Zhang et al. (US 11287952 B2), hereinafter referenced as Zhang.
Regarding Claim 6, the combination of 3dSPC and Tanaka, and 3dCalcPlotter disclose the apparatus of Claim 5. The combination of 3dSPC and Tanaka, and 3dCalcPlotter further disclose wherein
plurality of solving functions executable for the solution target object (3dCalcPlotter: [1:14], discloses a drop-down list with a plurality of options <solving functions> executable for the graph made up of data points <where one data point is a solution target object>)
and causes the display to display a result obtained by executing the solving function selected from the selection menu through a user operation (3dCalcPlotter: [2:07], shows the screen displaying the directional derivative trace of a selected point <a result> obtained by selecting the “Show dir derivative trace” <a solving functions> selected from the selection menu through a user click <operation>).
options of the solving function (3dCalcPlotter: [1:14], discloses a drop-down list with a plurality of options for a selection)
solution target object (3dCalcPlotter: [1:14], discloses a graph made up of data points <where one data point is a solution target object>)
plurality of solving functions (3dCalcPlotter: [1:14], discloses a drop-down list with a plurality of options <solving functions>)
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to apply and/or modify the apparatus disclosed by the combination of 3dSPC, Tanaka, and 3dCalcPlotter by selecting an operation among a plurality of operations as further taught by 3dCalcPlotter. One of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention would have been motivated to make this modification for an improved user experience, users would be able to use the tool for more than one function.
The combination of 3dSPC, Tanaka, and 3dCalcPlotter fail to disclose
at least some of the plurality of solving functions executable for the solution target object are different for each type of solution target object
causes the display to display a selection menu including options of the solving function corresponding to the type of solution target object designated through the user operation among the plurality of solving functions, causes the operation unit to receive a selection on the selection menu
However, Zhang discloses
at least some of the menu of actions executable for the user selection are different for each type of content item (Zhang: [Claims 19-20], discloses a different menu of actions <at least some> contextual to the different particular content item <where each particular content would be a type>),
and the processor (Zhang: [Col 6, ln 24], discloses a processor executing instructions):
causes the display to display a selection menu including options (Zhang: [Claims 19-20], discloses displaying a menu including options <selection menu> corresponding to a particular item designated through a dragging action <user operation> among particular <types of> content items <solution target objects>, causing the medium to perform the selected different specific action in relation to a particular content item <receives the selection>),
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to apply and/or modify the apparatus disclosed by the combination of 3dSPC, Tanaka, and 3dCalcPlotter by using a dynamic menu as taught by Zhang. One of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention would have been motivated to make this modification to streamline and automate data entry/execution with automated dependent inputs and improve user experience.
Claims 12 and 17 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over the combination of 3dSPC and Tanaka in view of 3dCalcPlotter, and in further view of Zhang.
Regarding Claims 12 and 17, the combination of 3dSPC and Tanaka disclose the method and non-transitory computer-readable storage medium of Claims 11 and 16. The combination of 3dSPC and Tanaka fail to disclose the limitations of Claims 12 and 17, however, 3dCalcPlotter discloses
causing the display to display a result obtained by executing a solving function designated in response to a user operation among a plurality of solving functions for the solution target object designated through the user operation (3dCalcPlotter: [2:07], shows the screen displaying the directional derivative trace of a selected point <a result> by executing the selected “Show dir derivative trace” <a solving functions> selected <in response to a user operation> from the selection menu with a plurality of options for the selected point designated through a user click <operation>);
and causing the display to display a result obtained by executing the solving function selected from the selection menu through a user operation (3dCalcPlotter: [2:07], shows the screen displaying the directional derivative trace of a selected point <a result> obtained by selecting the “Show dir derivative trace” <a solving functions> selected from the selection menu through a user click <operation>),
plurality of solving functions executable for the solution target object (3dCalcPlotter: [1:14], discloses a drop-down list with a plurality of options <solving functions> executable for the graph made up of data points <where one data point is a solution target object>)
options of the solving function (3dCalcPlotter: [1:14], discloses a drop-down list with a plurality of options for a selection)
solution target object (3dCalcPlotter: [1:14], discloses a graph made up of data points <where one data point is a solution target object>)
plurality of solving functions (3dCalcPlotter: [1:14], discloses a drop-down list with a plurality of options <solving functions>)
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to apply and/or modify the method or non-transitory computer-readable storage medium disclosed by the combination of 3dSPC and Tanaka by selecting an operation among a plurality of operations as taught by 3dCalcPlotter. One of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention would have been motivated to make this modification for an improved user experience, users would be able to use the tool for more than one function.
The combination of 3dSPC, Tanaka, and 3dCalcPlotter fail to disclose wherein
at least some of the plurality of solving functions executable for the solution target object are different for each type of solution target object
and causing the display to display a selection menu formed by options of the solving function corresponding to a type of solution target object designated through the user operation among the plurality of solving functions, causing the operation unit to receive a selection from the selection menu,
However, Zhang discloses wherein
at least some of the plurality of menu actions executable for the user selection are different for each type of user selection (Zhang: [Claims 19-20], discloses a different menu of actions <at least some> contextual to the different particular content item <where each particular content would be a type>),
and causing the display to display a selection menu formed by options (Zhang: [Claims 19-20], discloses displaying a menu including options <selection menu> corresponding to a particular item designated through a dragging action <user operation> among particular <types of> content items <solution target objects>, causing the medium to perform the selected different specific action in relation to a particular content item <receives the selection>),
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to apply and/or modify the apparatus disclosed by the combination of 3dSPC, Tanaka, and 3dCalcPlotter by using a dynamic dropdown menu as taught by Zhang. One of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention would have been motivated to make this modification to streamline and automate data entry/execution with automated dependent inputs and improve user experience.
Claim 7 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over the combination of 3dSPC and Tanaka in view of 12.6: Quadric Surfaces (Libretexts, 2019), hereinafter referenced as Quadric Surfaces.
Regarding Claim 7, the combination of 3dSPC and Tanaka disclose the apparatus of Claim 1. The combination of 3dSPC and Tanaka further disclose
wherein the 3-dimensional graph is formed by a set of sample points corresponding to the 3-variable function (3dSPC: [Page 7], discloses the 3-dimensional graph is formed by a set of data points <sample points> corresponding to the inputted 3-variable function), the processor:
The combination of 3dSPC and Tanaka fail to disclose
causes the display to display the 3-dimensional graph as a 2-dimensional image by mapping the sample points in a 2-dimensional space, and specifies 3-dimensional coordinates on the 3-dimensional graph designated through the user operation with values of three variables corresponding to the sample points mapped to positions on the 2-dimensional image selected through the user operation.
However, Quadric Surfaces discloses
causes the display to display the 3-dimensional graph as a 2-dimensional image by mapping the sample points in a 2-dimensional space, and specifies 3-dimensional coordinates on the 3-dimensional graph designated through the user operation with values of three variables corresponding to the sample points mapped to positions on the 2-dimensional image selected through the user operation (Quadric Surfaces: [Images 7 and 8], illustrates displaying the 3-dimesional graph as a 2-dimensional image by mapping the points from the 3-dimensional graph <sample points> in a 2-dimensional space, and specifies 3-dimensional coordinates on the 3-dimensional graph through the user operation with values of 3 variables corresponding to the sample points mapped to positions of the 2-dimensional image selected through the user operation <where the user operation Is selecting the trace in plane>, see below where values from the paraboloid are mapped in a 2-dimensional image plane corresponding to selected trace planes).
PNG
media_image8.png
838
1136
media_image8.png
Greyscale
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to apply and/or modify the apparatus disclosed by the combination of 3dSPC and Tanaka by projecting sample points of a 3-dimensional graph to a 2-dimensional plane using selected sample points as taught by Quadric Surfaces. One of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention would have been motivated to make this modification to enhance visualization and improve interpretability.
Claims 8, 13, and 18 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over the combination of 3dSPC and Tanaka in view of Lee et al. (US 2010/0153883 A1), hereinafter referenced as Lee.
Regarding Claims 8, 13, and 18, the combination of 3dSPC and Tanaka disclose the apparatus, method, and non-transitory computer-readable storage medium of Claims 1, 10, and 15 respectively. The combination of 3dSPC and Tanaka further disclose wherein the processor:
displaying a result of a solution for the solution target object in the solution target object in response to detection of an event occurring through a user operation on the 3-dimensional graph (3dSPC: [Page 7], shows displayed coordinates <a result of a solution> for a selected data point <solution target object> in the location of the data point in response to detecting a click <an event occurring through user operation> on a 3-dimensional graph)
The combination of 3dSPC and Tanaka fail to disclose
dynamically sets an event handler displaying a result of a solution for the solution target object in the solution target object in response to detection of an event occurring through a user operation on the 3-dimensional graph,
and executes the event handler in response to the detection of the event occurring through the user operation on the solution target object.
However Lee discloses
dynamically sets an event handler displaying something different (Lee: [0027], discloses defining an event handler that can alter a presently displaying interface <dynamic>),
and executes the event handler in response to the detection of the event occurring through the user operation on the solution target object (Lee: [0027], discloses executing the event hander in response to a detected event such as a user interaction on a menu <solution target object>).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to apply and/or modify the apparatus, method, or non-transitory computer-readable storage medium taught by the combination of 3dSPC and Tanaka by dynamically executing an event handler as taught by Lee. One of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention would have been motivated to make this modification to improve user experience by allowing an application to respond in real-time and adapt to changing conditions, while efficiently managing elements/objects of the application.
Claim 20 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Tanaka in view of 3dSPC.
Regarding Claim 20, Tanaka discloses a system (Tanaka: [0006], discloses a system) comprising:
a server including a first processor (Tanaka: [0006], discloses a server including a processor <first>; [Figs. 1-3]);
PNG
media_image9.png
466
618
media_image9.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image10.png
498
264
media_image10.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image11.png
418
218
media_image11.png
Greyscale
and an information processing apparatus including a second processor (Tanaka: [0006], discloses an electronic device <information processing apparatus> including a processor <second>; [Figs. 1-3]), wherein the second processor: …
and transmits information on the calculation inquiry to the server (Tanaka: [0006], discloses transmits information on a calculation inquiry to the server; [Figs. 1-3]), the first processor: …
derives a solution of the calculation inquiry acquired by the information processing apparatus (Tanaka: [0006], discloses deriving a solution of the calculation inquiry acquired by the electronic device; [Figs. 1-3]),
and transmits solution display information for displaying the derived solution to the information processing apparatus (Tanaka: [0006], discloses transmitting the calculated drawing information for displaying the derived solution to the electronic device <information processing apparatus>; [Figs. 1-3]),
and the second processor causes the display to display a graph corresponding to the function, based on the drawing information (Tanaka: [0006], discloses the processor of the electronic device <the second processor> causes the display to display a graph corresponding to the function, based on the drawing information; [Figs. 1-3])
Tanaka fails to disclose
3-dimensional coordinates
receives a user operation on the 3-dimensional graph by an operation unit in response to causing a display to display a 3-dimensional graph corresponding to a 3-variable function, and causes the display to display a solution target object specified based on 3-dimensional coordinates on the 3-dimensional graph designated through the user operation on the 3-dimensional graph,
the display to display the solution based on the solution display information as a result of a solution for the solution target object.
However, 3dSPC discloses
3-dimensional coordinates (3dSPC: [Image 1], discloses 3-dimensional coordinates)
receives a user operation on the 3-dimensional graph by an operation unit in response to causing a display to display a 3-dimensional graph corresponding to a 3-variable function, and causes the display to display a solution target object specified based on 3-dimensional coordinates on the 3-dimensional graph designated through the user operation on the 3-dimensional graph (3dSPC: [Image 1], discloses a user operation on the 3-dimensional graph by clicking <whatever is doing the clicking is interpreted as the operation unit> in response to a generating a 3-dimensional graph corresponding to a 3-variable function on the screen <causing a display to display>, and causes the display to display a selected point graphic <solution target object> specified based on the location of the selected point <3-dimensional coordinates> on the 3-dimensional graph designated through the click <user operation> on the 3-dimensional graph),
causes the display to display the solution based on the solution display information as a result of a solution for the solution target object (3dSPC: [Image 1], discloses revealing <causing the display to display> the coordinates <solution> based on the x, y, z values as a result of a solution for the solution target object <solution display information, the location of the selected point>).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to apply and/or modify the system disclosed by Tanaka by implementing the 3d plotting application to it as taught by 3dSPC. One of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention would have been motivated to make this modification to visualize multivariable functions, enabling holistic understanding of abstract equations.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Pócsová et al. (“Web tool for creating 3D visualizations with focus on real-time direct manipulation of mathematical objects’ attributes”, 2019) discloses a plurality of web tools for visualizing and interacting with 3D graphs.
“edwardball/academo.org/demos/3d-surface-plotter”, 2016, Github discloses the source code for the 3d Surface Plotter, including event handling and electronic tags, see vis.min.js in “3dSPC Source Code – NPL.pdf”.
Tanaka (US 2018/0204389 A1) discloses drawing 3-dimensional surfaces.
Tanaka et al. (US 2018/2004388 A1) discloses a figure drawing apparatus.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ISABELLA OCHSNER whose telephone number is (571)272-9322. The examiner can normally be reached 9:30 - 6:00 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, Devona Faulk can be reached at (571) 272-7515. 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.
/I.O./Examiner, Art Unit 2618
/DEVONA E FAULK/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2618
Prosecution Insights