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 .
Status of the Claims
Claims 1-20 are currently pending in the present application, with claim 1 being independent.
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted on 04/14/2025 has been considered by the examiner.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 101
35 U.S.C. 101 reads as follows:
Whoever invents or discovers any new and useful process, machine, manufacture, or composition of matter, or any new and useful improvement thereof, may obtain a patent therefor, subject to the conditions and requirements of this title.
Claim(s) 1-20 is/are rejected under 35 USC 101 because the claimed invention is not directed to patentable subject matter. The claimed matter is directed to a judicial exception (i.e. abstract idea not integrated into a practical application) without significantly more.
Regarding claim 1, under Step 1 of the subject matter eligibility analysis, they are directed to a method claim, which falls within the statutory categories of invention.
Under Step 2A Prong 1, the limitations as drafted of claim(s) 1, under its broadest reasonable interpretation, are directed to an abstract idea without significantly more. Claim 1 recites the following (with emphasis added):
projecting in a digital space an original object;
transforming the original object into a collection of disaggregated symbols displayed in the digital space;
assembling the collection of disaggregated symbols into an aggregated object that has qualities or features in common with the original object; and
presenting in the digital space the aggregated object augmented with auditory stimuli;
where projecting, transforming, assembling and presenting are performed without the use of any visual or auditory language.
It is further noted that the steps recited of manipulating, modifying, or reorganizing symbolic information, and presenting a resulting representation can all be considered mental processes, achievable by a human mind alone or with the aid of pen and paper. Recognizing an object, conceptually separating the object into symbols, reorganizing those symbols, and determining whether the result shares characteristics with the original object are observation, evaluation, judgment, and conceptual organization that can performed mentally or with pen and paper. Thus, the limitations fall within the mental processes grouping, reciting an abstract idea. (See MPEP 2106.04(a))
Under Step 2A Prong 2, claim 1 does not recite any additional elements which integrate the judicial exception into a practical application. The additional elements are:
projecting in a digital space an original object;
transforming the original object into a collection of disaggregated symbols displayed in the digital space;
assembling the collection of disaggregated symbols into an aggregated object that has qualities or features in common with the original object; and
presenting in the digital space the aggregated object augmented with auditory stimuli;
where projecting, transforming, assembling and presenting are performed without the use of any visual or auditory language.
Claim 1 limits the mental process operations to the technological environment of digital space and auditory stimuli. However, limiting the application of an abstract idea to a particular technological environment or field of use does not, without more, integrate the exception into a practical application, and appear to provide generic technologic environments in which the symbolic transformation and presentation are carried out. Additionally, although claim 1 recites that “where projecting, transforming, assembling, and presenting are performed without the use of any visual or auditory language,” this limitation states what content is excluded, but does not provide a technological implementation.
The claim merely applies the abstract idea using generic digital presentation technology, and adds output or presentation activity after the symbolic information has been reorganized. Recitation of generic computer devices performing the generic functions of generating, receiving, and presenting data does not however constitute recitation of a particular machine and represent no improvement of any specific machine. Moreover, all of the functional limitations recited as performed operations can be accomplished without reliance on any specific machine and could be accomplished by human minds and interactions between humans as they are not specifically tailored for execution in any specific machine.
Accordingly, the claim recites an abstract idea and these additional claim elements do not integrate the abstract idea into a practical application, because (1) they do not effect improvements to the functioning of a computer, or to any other technology or technical field (see MPEP 2106.05 (a)); (2) they do not apply or use the abstract idea to effect a particular treatment or prophylaxis for a disease or a medical condition (see the Vanda memo); (3) they do not apply the abstract idea with, or by use of, a particular machine (see MPEP 2106.05 (b)); (4) they do not effect a transformation or reduction of a particular article to a different state or thing (see MPEP 2106.05 (c)); (5) they do not apply or use the abstract idea in some other meaningful way beyond generally linking the use of the identified abstract idea to a particular technological environment, such that the claim as a whole is more than a drafting effort designated to monopolize the exception (see MPEP 2106.05 (e) and the Vanda memo). Therefore, per Step 2A, Prong Two, the claim is directed to an abstract idea not integrated into a practical application.
Under Step 2B, claim(s) 1 does not include additional elements that are sufficient to amount to significantly more than the abstract idea judicial exception because when considered individually, these additional claim elements serve merely to implement the abstract idea in conventional digital-display and audio environments. They do not constitute “Improvements to the Functioning of a Computer or to Any Other Technology or Technical Field”. (MPEP 2106.05(a)) It is readily apparent that the claim elements are not directed to any specific improvements of any of these areas.
Further, Step 2B of the analysis takes into consideration all dependent claims as well, both individually and as a combination.
Claim(s) 2-4 merely adds a further limitation to claim 1 regarding changing attributes of the collection of symbols, merely specifying the information or visual attributes of the symbols itself being manipulated. The additional element’s individual and combined significance is still not heavier than the abstract concepts at the core of the claimed invention, a mental step that could be performed unaided by a human, but recited as performed by a generic computing device. Therefore, also neither a practical application nor significantly more than the abstract idea.
Claim(s) 5 merely adds a further limitation to claim 1 regarding augmenting the digital space, merely constituting output activity involving physical phenomena, rather than a meaningful technological integration, and does not recite a particular technical mechanism or technological improvement. The additional element’s individual and combined significance is still not heavier than the abstract concepts at the core of the claimed invention, a mental step that could be performed unaided by a human, but recited as performed by a generic computing device. Therefore, also neither a practical application nor significantly more than the abstract idea.
Claim(s) 6-20 merely adds a further limitation to claim 1 regarding identifying a technological environment, without explaining how that technology performs the claim operation, or how the steps are “implemented on/in/via” the recited device. The additional element’s individual and combined significance is still not heavier than the abstract concepts at the core of the claimed invention, a mental step that could be performed unaided by a human, but recited as performed by a generic computing device. Therefore, also neither a practical application nor significantly more than the abstract idea.
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.
Claim 1-20 is/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 operations are performed “without the use of any visual or auditory language.” It is unclear what constitutes a visual or auditory language, and how such language is distinguished from the claimed displayed symbols and auditory stimuli, because a displayed symbol, object, or auditory stimulus may itself incorporate language or communicate meaning. Therefore, a person of ordinary skill in the art would not be able to reasonably determine the boundary between permitted symbols or stimuli and excluded visual or auditory language.
The examiner respectfully requests the applicant to clarify the scope of the claimed invention.
Claims depending thereon are also rejected for substantially similar reasons as those set forth for the claims from which they depend on.
Claims 1-20 will be examined as best understood by the examiner.
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.
Claim(s) 1-11, 13-15, 17, and 19 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Krishnan (US 20230012960 A1).
Regarding claim 1, Krishnan discloses a method, comprising:
projecting in a digital space an original object (Fig. 11A-11E and Par. 118-0124; In Fig. 11A, the scene can begin with a first set of objects 1102, 1004…focus on a black circle or dot 1102 (e.g. an object) in the center of the scene). Par. 0121; the presentation of the first set of objects can be modified, at 916…the first set of objects 1104 can move toward forming a pattern such, for example, a ring. FIG. 11B depicts the first set of objects 1104 forming a first ring. Fig. 12A-12B and Par. 0129; The scene can have objects such as particles…The presentation of the particles can be modified, e.g., the parties can move toward a specific pattern formation, as depicted in FIG. 12B…Fig. 13A-13E Par. 0130; geometric shapes (e.g., objects) can be generated starting near a center of the scene and expanding outward, as depicted in FIG. 13B and 13C…Par. 14A-14D and Par. 0131; The scene starts in a dark forest setting, as depicted in FIG. A…flowers (e.g., objects) in the scene);
transforming the original object into a collection of disaggregated symbols displayed in the digital space (Par. 0125; the presentation of the first set of objects can change. For example, the first set of objects may move toward more chaotic motion and not form any pattern. Alternatively, the first of objects can scatter or lose its pattern…Par. 0129; When the user's score is below the threshold, then the particles can continue to be presented, e.g., in a randomly placed manner or chaotic pattern-less state…Par. 0130; When the user's score remains below the threshold for a preset amount of time, geometric shapes that have already formed and/or a geometric pattern that has formed can fade away…Par. 0131; When the user's score remains below the threshold for a preset amount of time, the flowers can break into petals…);
assembling the collection of disaggregated symbols into an aggregated object that has qualities or features in common with the original object (Par. 0123-0124; A second set of objects 1106, as depicted in FIG. 11C, can then form. The process can then repeat with the second set of objects 1106 until a second checkpoint is reached and a second ring is formed, as depicted in FIG. 11D…this process can continue, e.g., through a series of checkpoints where subsequent sets of objects are presented after preceding sets of objects form a pattern, until a certain number of rings have been formed, as depicted in FIG. 11E. In the example shown, this is six rings…Par. 0129; Once a pattern has been formed and maintained for a preset amount of time…the user's continuing performance above the threshold can generate a new object (e.g., a new sound) and/or move the particles toward a new pattern formation…additional patterns are formed (e.g., 906-926), until a certain number of patterns have been formed…Par. 0130; generate a new geometric shape, e.g., as depicted in FIG. 13D, and expand outward to form a new pattern, e.g., as depicted in FIG. 13E…Par. 0131; flowers (e.g., objects) in the scene can change, e.g., grow and bloom…); and
presenting in the digital space the aggregated object augmented with auditory stimuli (Par. 0121; additionally, an additional object (e.g., an audio element such as a sound) can be presented…a sound can play to indicate to the user that he is progressing toward a first checkpoint)…Par. 0129; Additionally or alternatively, an additional object can be presented, e.g., a sound that indicates to the user that his state is optimal…Par. 0136; a scene including a set of sensory elements (e.g., audio…can be presented, e.g., using a multi-sensory presentation device…sound machines or audio devices…Par. 0150; As the user focuses on the sound, the user score (e.g., generated by the score generator 143 shown and described with respect to FIG. 1) can be measured in real-time and reflected back to the user through visual and auditory feedback);
where projecting, transforming, assembling and presenting are performed without the use of any visual or auditory language (Fig. 11-14 and Par. 0118-0131. Par. 0074; In some implementations, however, the presenter 147 can be configured to be silent (e.g., about feedback or feedforward to the user) so that the therapy system can adapt to the user in a way that changes the user's mental state whether the user is actively aware of the user's mental state or not).
It is recognized that the citations and evidence provided above are derived from potentially different embodiments of a single reference. Nevertheless, it 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 to employ combinations and sub-combinations of these complementary embodiments, because Krishnan explicitly motivates doing so at least in paragraph [0074] including “so that the therapy system can adapt to the user in a way that changes the user's mental state whether the user is actively aware of the user's mental state or not” and otherwise motivating experimentation and optimization to avoid unnecessary linguistic instructions while preserving Krishnan’s automatic, sensor-controlled visual and auditory feedback in the immersive experience.
Regarding claim 2, Krishnan discloses the method of claim 1, and further discloses wherein assembling includes changing attributes of the collection of symbols (Par. 0102; the configurator 208 can be configured to change or maintain one or more settings (e.g., of a digital therapy session) based on user data, e.g., collected by the sensor(s)…For example, the configurator 208 can be configured to change a visual setting, an audio setting, an olfactory setting, a tactile setting, etc. With visual settings or elements, the configurator 208 can be configured to change a position, color, shape, or other configuration of the visual setting or element. With audio elements, the configuration 208 can be configured to change an intensity, frequency, tone, volume, melody, rhythm, chords, or other characteristic of the audio setting or element. Par. 0121-0131).
Regarding claim 3, Krishnan discloses the method of claim 2, and further discloses wherein changing attributes of the collection of symbols includes changing at least one of the following attributes: geometry, size, perspective, shading, texture, color, and intensity (Par. 0123-0124; the user has reached a first checkpoint and the first set of objects 1104 may have formed a first ring as depicted in FIG. 11B. A second set of objects 1106, as depicted in FIG. 11C, can then form. The process can then repeat with the second set of objects 1106 until a second checkpoint is reached and a second ring is formed, as depicted in FIG. 11D…In the example shown, this is six rings, but it can be appreciated that any number of rings can be formed. When the last checkpoint has been reached (e.g., a last set of objects 1108 has formed a ring as shown in FIG. 11E). Par. 0129; the user's continuing performance above the threshold can generate a new object (e.g., a new sound) and/or move the particles toward a new pattern formation. Par. 0130; generate a new geometric shape, e.g., as depicted in FIG. 13D, and expand outward to form a new pattern, e.g., as depicted in FIG. 13E. Par. 0131; flowers (e.g., objects) in the scene can change, e.g., grow and bloom, as shown in FIG. 14B).
Regarding claim 4, Krishnan discloses the method of claim 2, and further discloses wherein changing attributes of the collection of symbols includes altering at least one symbol through movement, growth, contraction, and position (Par. 0123-0124; the user has reached a first checkpoint and the first set of objects 1104 may have formed a first ring as depicted in FIG. 11B. A second set of objects 1106, as depicted in FIG. 11C, can then form. The process can then repeat with the second set of objects 1106 until a second checkpoint is reached and a second ring is formed, as depicted in FIG. 11D…In the example shown, this is six rings, but it can be appreciated that any number of rings can be formed. When the last checkpoint has been reached (e.g., a last set of objects 1108 has formed a ring as shown in FIG. 11E). Par. 0129; the user's continuing performance above the threshold can generate a new object (e.g., a new sound) and/or move the particles toward a new pattern formation. Par. 0130; generate a new geometric shape, e.g., as depicted in FIG. 13D, and expand outward to form a new pattern, e.g., as depicted in FIG. 13E. Par. 0131; flowers (e.g., objects) in the scene can change, e.g., grow and bloom, as shown in FIG. 14B).
Regarding claim 5, Krishnan discloses the method of claim 1, and further discloses augmenting the digital space with at least one of vibration (Par. 0146; the game and/or the congestive task can involve generating vibrations through meditation. For example, a therapy device (e.g., therapy device 110) or compute device (e.g., compute device 130) can include one or more output devices, including a vibration generating device (e.g., transducer)…As stronger vibrations are generated by the user reaching higher meditative states within the game and/or the congestive task, particles (e.g., that are randomly scattered and/or distributed) that occupy various points in the virtual space in the game and/or the congestive task, can come together and form, for example, a three-dimensional (3D) and/or symmetric geometric pattern…), acoustics, psychoacoustics, subsonic frequences, supersonic frequencies, hypersonic frequences (Par. 0102; With audio elements, the configuration 208 can be configured to change an intensity, frequency, tone, volume, melody, rhythm, chords, or other characteristic of the audio setting or element), and scent (Par. 0136; In some embodiments, a scent delivery device can delivery smells, e.g., of pine, damp moss, fresh air, ocean air, etc.).
It is recognized that the citations and evidence provided above are derived from potentially different embodiments of a single reference. Nevertheless, it 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 to employ combinations and sub-combinations of these complementary embodiments, because Krishnan explicitly motivates doing so at least in paragraph [0087] including “Increasing the user's sense of immersion can lead to more significant and profound changes in mental state and the overall psychedelic experience of the user. Therefore, the therapy system can achieve a higher level of influence and control over the overall psychedelic experience” and paragraph [0136] including “provides various levels of depth and immersion…,” and otherwise motivating experimentation and optimization.
Regarding claim 6, Krishnan discloses the method of claim 1, and further discloses implemented on a head-mounted device (FIG. 1 and Par. 0036; a virtual reality head, an augmented headset. Par. 0075; therapy device 110…a virtual reality or VR device (e.g., Oculus VR™, HoloLens™…In use, the therapy device 110 can be modified to adapt to an appropriate setting(s), e.g., advance to next exercise difficulty (for sequential difficulty levels), and/or adapt to an appropriate exercise difficulty (for non-sequential difficulty levels) based on data collected by the sensor 120 and/or instruction generated by the compute device 130 based on that data…).
Regarding claim 7, Krishnan discloses the method of claim 1, and further discloses implemented on an immersive device (FIG. 1 and Par. 0036; a virtual reality head, an augmented headset. Par. 0075; therapy device 110…a virtual reality or VR device (e.g., Oculus VR™, HoloLens™…In use, the therapy device 110 can be modified to adapt to an appropriate setting(s), e.g., advance to next exercise difficulty (for sequential difficulty levels), and/or adapt to an appropriate exercise difficulty (for non-sequential difficulty levels) based on data collected by the sensor 120 and/or instruction generated by the compute device 130 based on that data…).
Regarding claim 8, Krishnan discloses the method of claim 1, and further discloses implemented in an immersive experience (FIG. 1 and Par. 0036; a virtual reality head, an augmented headset. Par. 0075; therapy device 110…a virtual reality or VR device (e.g., Oculus VR™, HoloLens™…In use, the therapy device 110 can be modified to adapt to an appropriate setting(s), e.g., advance to next exercise difficulty (for sequential difficulty levels), and/or adapt to an appropriate exercise difficulty (for non-sequential difficulty levels) based on data collected by the sensor 120 and/or instruction generated by the compute device 130 based on that data…a visual change toward a positive direction, a visual change of color, a visual change of scenery, an auditory change of a music, and/or a change in a vibration. Par. 0087).
Regarding claim 9, Krishnan discloses the method of claim 1, and further discloses implemented on or via a brain computer interface (Par. 0075; The therapy device 110 (also referred to as the “training device”) can include…Muse™ 2016 brain-computer interface (BCI). Par. 0129-0130; One or more sensors (e.g., a BCI device…can be configured to collect user data…Fig. 5 and Par. 0141; a brain-computer interface (BCI) device (e.g., the therapy device 110 as shown and described with respect to FIG. 1) can simultaneously capture neural activity in the brain. Par. 0147-0148).
Regarding claim 10, Krishnan discloses the method of claim 1, and further discloses implemented on a display device (FIG. 11- 14 and Par. 0074-0075; The presenter 147 of the compute device 130…the presenter 147 can be coupled to a virtual reality interface, an augmented reality interface, a visual display interface, a projection system interface…The therapy device 110 (also referred to as the “training device”) can include, but is not limited to, a virtual reality or VR device (e.g., Oculus VR™, HoloLens™, Muse™ 2016 brain-computer interface (BCI) device, HP Reverb G2™, etc.), an augmented device, a projection system (e.g., including a projector and a screen), a display device (e.g., a television screen), a display system (e.g., aggregated monitors connected and managed by a controller)…).
Regarding claim 11, Krishnan discloses the method of claim 1, and further discloses implemented on multiple display devices (Par. 0075; The therapy device 110 (also referred to as the “training device”) can include…a display system (e.g., aggregated monitors connected and managed by a controller)…Par. 0086-0087; Although in some embodiments the therapy device 110, the sensor 120, and the compute device 130 are shown and described as singular devices, in some embodiments, the therapy system 100 can include multiple therapy devices, multiple sensors, and/or multiple compute devices. For example, in some instances, the multiple sensors can include multiple types of sensor (e.g., photo-electric sensors, cameras, acoustic sensors, heart-beat sensors, accelerometers, humidity sensors, and/or environmental sensors) that collect data associated with various aspects of a user and/or an environment of the user…Par. 0153; The user can be in a room with 4 integrated projectors, each pointed at 1 of the 4 walls in the room).
It is recognized that the citations and evidence provided above are derived from potentially different embodiments of a single reference. Nevertheless, it 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 to employ combinations and sub-combinations of these complementary embodiments, because Krishnan explicitly motivates doing so at least in paragraph [0087] including “the therapy system 100 can increase the user's sense of immersion in the adaptive setting using multiple sensors and multiple therapy devices that surround the user. Increasing the user's sense of immersion can lead to more significant and profound changes in mental state and the overall psychedelic experience of the user. Therefore, the therapy system can achieve a higher level of influence and control over the overall psychedelic experience” and otherwise motivating experimentation and optimization.
Regarding claim 13, Krishnan discloses the method of claim 1, and further discloses implemented on a projection display device (Par. 0075; The therapy device 110 (also referred to as the “training device”) can include…a projection system (e.g., including a projector and a screen). Par. 0136; In some embodiments, the multi-sensory presentation device can include one or more projectors…presenting the scene can involve projecting a scene of a tranquil environment (e.g., a beach, a forest, a room). For example, a scene of a tranquil forest, lit by moonlight, can be projected. Par. 0152-0153 and Par. 0156; The therapy system can include a therapy device 110 that can include a 3D-projection mapping system…The user can be in a room with 4 integrated projectors, each pointed at 1 of the 4 walls in the room…3D projectors can be used to project a scenery of a tranquil forest, lit by the moonlight. The scenery can include trees. Some of the trees in the scene can be projected onto the foam boxes).
It is recognized that the citations and evidence provided above are derived from potentially different embodiments of a single reference. Nevertheless, it 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 to employ combinations and sub-combinations of these complementary embodiments, because Krishnan explicitly motivates doing so at least in paragraph [0136] including “ the scene can be projected on a specific surface or specific structures, e.g., one or more 3D structures (e.g., foam boxes) that can provide a feeling of depth and immersion to the scene” and paragraph [0156] including “giving a feeling of depth and immersion to the scene that otherwise would feel flat” and otherwise motivating experimentation and optimization.
Regarding claim 14, Krishnan discloses the method of claim 1, and further discloses wherein the digital space is two-dimensional (Par. 0075; The therapy device 110 (also referred to as the “training device”) can include…a display device (e.g., a television screen))
It is recognized that the citations and evidence provided above are derived from potentially different embodiments of a single reference. Nevertheless, it 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 to present Krishnan’s dynamic visual objects and imagery within the two-dimensional image space of the disclosed television screen. Doing so allows the experience be provided using a readily available, simple, and cost-effective display hardware without requiring a three-dimensional projector or immersive headset. A person of ordinary skill in the art would have selected one of these known display configurations according to a user’s desired view, immersion, or environment, yielding predictable use or substitution of a known display arrangement for its established display function, and otherwise motivating experimentation and optimization in alternative output devices for presenting dynamic virtual objects and imagery in a digital space.
Regarding claim 15, Krishnan discloses the method of claim 1, and further discloses wherein the digital space is three-dimensional (Par. 0146; particles (e.g., that are randomly scattered and/or distributed) that occupy various points in the virtual space in the game and/or the congestive task, can come together and form, for example, a three-dimensional (3D) and/or symmetric geometric pattern. Par. 0152; a 3D-projection mapping system).
Regarding claim 17, Krishnan discloses the method of claim 1, and further discloses wherein the digital space is augmented with digital audio (Par. 0075; The therapy device 110 (also referred to as the “training device”) can include…an auditory device (e.g., a speaker and/or a headphone), an auditory system (e.g., an immersive audio and/or binaural sound system including multiple speakers and controlled by a controller). Par. 0121; an additional object (e.g., an audio element such as a sound) can be presented, at 916. For example, as the objects move toward forming the ring in FIG. 11B, a sound can play to indicate to the user that he is progressing toward a first checkpoint (e.g., forming a first ring). Par. 0129; an additional object can be presented, e.g., a sound that indicates to the user that his state is optimal (or approaching optimal) …the user's continuing performance above the threshold can generate a new object (e.g., a new sound)).
Regarding claim 19, Krishnan discloses the method of claim 1, and further discloses wherein the digital space is augmented with content from a machine learning model (Par. 0120-0131; at 912, the compute device, e.g., implementing a score generator (e.g., score generator 143), can use a model to determine a score that is indicative of the state of the user based on the user data. In particular, the compute device can input the user data into the model, which can generate an output that is or is indicative of the score of the user. The model, as described with respect to FIG. 3 above, can be a classifier such as, for example, a global score model 303 or a personalized score model 304. Par. 0148; during a calibration phase, a pre-game calibration task can begin, which can enable a brain-computer interface (BCI) process and the VR device to be calibrated or set to the user's brain activities. In some instances, the calibration phase can also be used to collect labeled user data used to train a user-specific machine learning model(s) (e.g., use combined data from the calibration phase with a global machine learning model(s) to develop the user-specific machine learning model(s))).
Claim(s) 12 and 20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Krishnan (US 20230012960 A1), in view of Moskowitz et al. (US 20220241546 A1), hereinafter referred to as “Moskowitz”.
Regarding claim 12, Krishnan discloses the method of claim 1, but does not disclose implemented on a circular display device.
In the same art of display devices for modifying digital space environments, Moskowitz discloses implemented on a circular display device (Par. 0011; The output devices include at least one display, which may be circular. Par. 0013; a circular display).
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to include a circular display arrangement, as taught by Moskowitz, into the multi-sensory environment system of Krishnan. Doing so provides alternative output devices for presenting dynamic virtual objects and imagery in a digital space. A person of ordinary skill in the art would have selected one of these known display configurations according to a user’s desired view, immersion, or environment, yielding predictable use or substitution of a known display arrangement for its established display function.
Regarding claim 20, Krishnan discloses the method of claim 1, but does not disclose implemented on a holographic display.
In the same art of display devices for modifying digital space environments, Moskowitz discloses implemented on a holographic display (Par. 0026-0027; across multiple display surfaces such as a…holographic display).
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to include a holographic display arrangement, as taught by Moskowitz, into the multi-sensory environment system of Krishnan. Doing so provides alternative output devices for presenting dynamic virtual objects and imagery in a digital space. A person of ordinary skill in the art would have selected one of these known display configurations according to a user’s desired view, immersion, or environment, yielding predictable use or substitution of a known display arrangement for its established display function.
Claim(s) 16 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Krishnan (US 20230012960 A1), in view of Nayak et al. (WO 2022261772 A1), hereinafter referred to as “Nayak”.
Regarding claim 16, Krishnan discloses the method of claim 1, but does not disclose wherein the digital space is augmented with analog audio.
In the same art of interactive experiences in VR environments, Nayak discloses wherein the digital space is augmented with analog audio (Par. 34; If the received signal contains audio information, then baseband system 160 decodes the signal and converts it to an analog signal. Then the signal is amplified and sent to a speaker. Baseband system 160 also receives analog audio signals from a microphone. These analog audio signals are converted to digital signals and encoded by baseband system 160).
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to modify Krishnan’s auditory augmentation system to include the analog-audio input and output arrangement taught by Nayak. Doing so allows the interactive digital environment to communicate with conventional analog microphones, amplifiers, speakers, etc. providing compatible and reliable presentation of auditory stimuli, yielding predictable modification of known audio-processing arrangement according to its established function.
Claim(s) 18 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Krishnan (US 20230012960 A1), in view of Hariton (US 20200110560 A1).
Regarding claim 18, Krishnan discloses the method of claim 1, but does not disclose wherein the digital space is augmented with content from an artificial intelligence agent.
In the same art of user interaction with an augmented reality environment, Hariton discloses wherein the digital space is augmented with content from an artificial intelligence agent (Par. 0003; the systems and methods described herein may interact with one or more non-human entities based on user interaction with an augmented reality environment. A non-human entity may comprise a smart device, a software agent (such as a virtual assistant), a connected device, an Internet of Things (IoT) device, an artificial intelligence-powered device, and/or other electronic device or component configured to perform tasks or services based on user input. Par. 0010; The user interface component may be configured to receive user input related to a virtual content object…A non-human entity interaction may comprise an interaction with a non-human entity that is based on or related to user interaction with an augmented reality environment…input received via a brain-computer interface (BCI)).
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to modify Krishnan’s multi-sensory environment system to include content generated or provided by an artificial intelligence software agent, as taught by Hariton. Doing so provides an automated and assist the user in dynamically selecting, generating, or modifying virtual content in response to the user’s input/interaction with the augmented-reality environment, yielding predictable results in reducing the need for manual user control, enabling the system to perform tasks or provide additional services responsive to user input, and improving the interactivity and adaptability of the overall digital experience.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to JENNY NGAN TRAN whose telephone number is (571)272-6888. The examiner can normally be reached Mon-Thurs 8am-5pm.
Examiner interviews are available via telephone, in-person, and video conferencing using a USPTO supplied web-based collaboration tool. To schedule an interview, applicant is encouraged to use the USPTO Automated Interview Request (AIR) at http://www.uspto.gov/interviewpractice.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Alicia Harrington can be reached at (571) 272-2330. 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.
/JENNY N TRAN/Examiner, Art Unit 2615
/ALICIA M HARRINGTON/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2615
Prosecution Insights