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 .
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.
Claim Interpretation
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(f):
(f) Element in Claim for a Combination. – An element in a claim for a combination may be expressed as a means or step for performing a specified function without the recital of structure, material, or acts in support thereof, and such claim shall be construed to cover the corresponding structure, material, or acts described in the specification and equivalents thereof.
The following is a quotation of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph:
An element in a claim for a combination may be expressed as a means or step for performing a specified function without the recital of structure, material, or acts in support thereof, and such claim shall be construed to cover the corresponding structure, material, or acts described in the specification and equivalents thereof.
The claims in this application are given their broadest reasonable interpretation using the plain meaning of the claim language in light of the specification as it would be understood by one of ordinary skill in the art. The broadest reasonable interpretation of a claim element (also commonly referred to as a claim limitation) is limited by the description in the specification when 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is invoked.
As explained in MPEP § 2181, subsection I, claim limitations that meet the following three-prong test will be interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph:
(A) the claim limitation uses the term “means” or “step” or a term used as a substitute for “means” that is a generic placeholder (also called a nonce term or a non-structural term having no specific structural meaning) for performing the claimed function;
(B) the term “means” or “step” or the generic placeholder is modified by functional language, typically, but not always linked by the transition word “for” (e.g., “means for”) or another linking word or phrase, such as “configured to” or “so that”; and
(C) the term “means” or “step” or the generic placeholder is not modified by sufficient structure, material, or acts for performing the claimed function.
Use of the word “means” (or “step”) in a claim with functional language creates a rebuttable presumption that the claim limitation is to be treated in accordance with 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph. The presumption that the claim limitation is interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is rebutted when the claim limitation recites sufficient structure, material, or acts to entirely perform the recited function.
Absence of the word “means” (or “step”) in a claim creates a rebuttable presumption that the claim limitation is not to be treated in accordance with 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph. The presumption that the claim limitation is not interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is rebutted when the claim limitation recites function without reciting sufficient structure, material or acts to entirely perform the recited function.
Claim limitations in this application that use the word “means” (or “step”) are being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, except as otherwise indicated in an Office action. Conversely, claim limitations in this application that do not use the word “means” (or “step”) are not being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, except as otherwise indicated in an Office action.
This application includes one or more claim limitations that do not use the word “means,” but are nonetheless being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, because the claim limitation(s) uses a generic placeholder that is coupled with functional language without reciting sufficient structure to perform the recited function and the generic placeholder is not preceded by a structural modifier. Such claim limitation(s) is/are: an image analysis module, a figure image generation module, a file generation module, an environment detection module, a description generation module in claims 1-11, 16 and 20.
The support available in the specification: “[0046] In the example of the present disclosure described above, the control apparatus 100 is implemented as a module, but it should be noted herein that each module may be a program module implemented by a hardware circuit, firmware, or a software program, and implements a module function under the execution of a controller or other processors of the vehicle host system”.
Because this/these claim limitation(s) is/are being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, it/they is/are being interpreted to cover the corresponding structure described in the specification as performing the claimed function, and equivalents thereof.
If applicant does not intend to have this/these limitation(s) interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, applicant may: (1) amend the claim limitation(s) to avoid it/them being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph (e.g., by reciting sufficient structure to perform the claimed function); or (2) present a sufficient showing that the claim limitation(s) recite(s) sufficient structure to perform the claimed function so as to avoid it/them being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph.
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 1-14, 16 and 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.
Claims 1, 12 and 20 recite “the figure”, “the basis”. Here there is a lack of antecedent basis for the phrases. So the scope is indefinite.
Claims 2-11, 13-14 and 16 are also rejected by virtue of dependency.
Claims, 2, 5 and 13 recite “the basis”. Here there is a lack of antecedent basis for the phrase. So the scope is indefinite.
Claim 16 recites “the graphical user interface”. Here there is a lack of antecedent basis for the phrase. So the scope is indefinite.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
The following is a quotation of the appropriate paragraphs of 35 U.S.C. 102 that form the basis for the rejections under this section made in this Office action:
A person shall be entitled to a patent unless –
(a)(2) the claimed invention was described in a patent issued under section 151, or in an application for patent published or deemed published under section 122(b), in which the patent or application, as the case may be, names another inventor and was effectively filed before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claim(s) 1-2, 4, 12-14 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) as being anticipated by AMTHOR (US Pat. Pub. No. 20250117105 “Amthor”).
Regarding claim 1 Amthor teaches A control device (Fig. 4) for changing the figure of a digital assistant, comprising:
an image analysis module (Fig. 4 integral part of element11), configured to determine, on the basis of image data related to at least one person, figure features of the at least one person (“[0091] The method begins with step S10. In step S20, sensor data is acquired from at least one vehicle sensor. In step S30, the sensor data is processed to determine occupant data associated with an occupant inside the vehicle”); and
a figure image generation module (Fig. 4 integral part of element11), configured to change the figure of the digital assistant, so that the changed figure of the digital assistant matches the figure features of the at least one person (“[0064]…. The avatar of the occupant may be dynamically adapted based on or using the sensor data and/or the physical state and/or the attention score of the occupant.
[0065] These avatars may be animated and/or depicted as interacting with each other based on the vehicle sensor data and/or the occupant data”).
Claim 12 is directed to a method claim and its steps are similar in scope and functions performed by the elements of the device claim 1 and therefore claim 12 is also rejected with the same rationale as specified in the rejection of claim 1.
Regarding claims 2 and 13 Amthor teaches wherein the image data comprises a video stream or one or more image frames captured at different times; the image analysis module further determines, on the basis of the image frames or video stream related to the at least one person, changes in the figure features of the at least one person; and the figure image generation module changes the figure of the digital assistant, so that the changed figure of the digital assistant reflects the changes in the figure features of the at least one person (“[0038] An in-cabin camera may be positioned to capture the interior of the vehicle, specifically targeting the driver's and passengers' seating and activity zones. This type of sensor can acquire real-time video or image data of the vehicle's occupants.[0064]…. The avatar of the occupant may be dynamically adapted based on or using the sensor data and/or the physical state and/or the attention score of the occupant.
[0065] These avatars may be animated and/or depicted as interacting with each other based on the vehicle sensor data and/or the occupant data”
As the avatar gets animated dynamically, so the sensor data comes at different times).
Regarding claim 4 Amthor teaches wherein the image analysis module receives the image data captured by an in-vehicle camera, and the at least one person comprises one or more of a driver and a passenger (“[0010] In a step, sensor data from at least one vehicle sensor is acquired. Sensing the inside and/or outside of the vehicle in order to gather data associated with or corresponding to the occupant may be used to identify presence and/or identity of the occupant within the vehicle”).
Regarding claim 14 Amthor teaches wherein the figure features comprise at least one of clothing features and appearance features of the person; and the method comprises: receiving the image data captured by an in-vehicle camera, wherein the at least one person comprises one or more of a driver and a passenger ((“[0010] In a step, sensor data from at least one vehicle sensor is acquired. Sensing the inside and/or outside of the vehicle in order to gather data associated with or corresponding to the occupant may be used to identify presence and/or identity of the occupant within the vehicle. [0039] A fatigue detection sensor may utilize infrared technology to monitor the driver's eye movements and facial expressions. The fatigue detection sensor uses infrared emitters to illuminate the driver's face with non-visible light. The reflecting infrared light is captured by an infrared camera sensor. This light data is processed to analyze eyelid movement, gaze, head pose, etc. to detect signs of fatigue. The sensor may provide data representing eye closure rate, blink duration, and facial expressions.”).
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) 3 and 6 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Amthor in view of CHUNG et al. (US Pat. Pub. No. 20180330491 “Chung”).
Regarding claim 3 Amthor teaches wherein the figure features comprise at least one of clothing features and appearance features of the person (“[0039] A fatigue detection sensor may utilize infrared technology to monitor the driver's eye movements and facial expressions. The fatigue detection sensor uses infrared emitters to illuminate the driver's face with non-visible light. The reflecting infrared light is captured by an infrared camera sensor. This light data is processed to analyze eyelid movement, gaze, head pose, etc. to detect signs of fatigue. The sensor may provide data representing eye closure rate, blink duration, and facial expressions. [0065] These avatars may be animated and/or depicted as interacting with each other based on the vehicle sensor data and/or the occupant data”) but is silent about the control device further comprises a file generation module, configured to generate a first clothing file on the basis of the clothing features, wherein the first clothing file comprises a plurality of elements defining the clothing, and the plurality of elements comprise at least one of: style, texture, material, color, and logo;
Chung teaches a file generation module, configured to generate a first clothing file on the basis of the clothing features, wherein the first clothing file comprises a plurality of elements defining the clothing, and the plurality of elements comprise at least one of: style, texture, material, color, and logo (“[0119] For example, the electronic apparatus 101 may extract the picture 801, and identify that the color of clothes worn by the identified user is “yellow” and that the style is “outdoor clothing”. The electronic apparatus 101 may extract the color as “yellow” and the style as “outdoor clothing” as attribute information of the clothes, and store the extracted attribute information of clothes in the picture 801 or create the information in a separate file and store the file in the electronic apparatus 101 or in the server 106”);
Amthor and Chung are analogous art as both of them are related to image processing.
Therefore it would have been obvious for an ordinary skilled person in the art before the effective filing date of claimed invention to have modified Amthor by generating a first clothing file on the basis of the clothing features, wherein the first clothing file comprises a plurality of elements defining the clothing, and the plurality of elements comprise at least one of: style, texture, material, color, and logo as taught by Chung.
The motivation for the above is to provide different clothing attributes for synthesizing with an avatar image.
Amthor modified by Chung teaches the figure image generation module loads the first clothing file to change the figure of the digital assistant (Chung creates clothing file and synthesizes clothing file with image. By using this technique with Amthor’s avatar modification, Amthor modified by Chung creates digital assistant with clothing file for better visualization).
Regarding claim 6 Amthor modified by Chung teaches an environment detection module (Amthor Fig. 4 integral part of element11), configured to extract one or more environment features of a current environment of a vehicle; and a description generation module, configured to generate a clothing description text on the basis of the environment features, wherein the file generation module is further configured to generate a second clothing file on the basis of the clothing description text; and the figure image generation module is configured to selectively load the first clothing file and the second clothing file to change the figure of the digital assistant (Amthor “[0011] In various examples, sensor data from at least one onboard vehicle sensor, which may monitor the interior of the vehicle, for example, the cabin, or the exterior, and/or for example the traffic or surrounding environment of the vehicle, is acquired. Among various types of sensors, the at least one vehicle sensor can include for example one of an in-cabin camera, fatigue detection sensor, seat-embedded pressure sensor, or a digital key sensor”.
Chung “[0119] For example, the electronic apparatus 101 may extract the picture 801, and identify that the color of clothes worn by the identified user is “yellow” and that the style is “outdoor clothing”. The electronic apparatus 101 may extract the color as “yellow” and the style as “outdoor clothing” as attribute information of the clothes, and store the extracted attribute information of clothes in the picture 801 or create the information in a separate file and store the file in the electronic apparatus 101 or in the server 106.
Also, the electronic apparatus 101 may analyze the picture 801, and identify a location of background of the picture 801 as “mountain”, the weather as “clear”, and the context as “mountain climbing”. The electronic apparatus 101 may extract “mountain”, “clear” and “mountain climbing” as attribute information on background of the picture from the picture 801, and store the extracted attribute information of the background in the picture 801 or store the information in the electronic apparatus 101 or the server 106 as a separate file”.
Fig 12 steps 1202-1205).
Claim(s) 5 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Amthor modified by Chung as applied to claim 3 above and further in view of HAAS et al. (US Pat. No. 11218666 “Hass”).
Regarding claim 5 Amthor modified by Chung is silent about wherein the image analysis module further recognizes, on the basis of one or more pieces of the image data, a currently speaking person, and outputs the figure features of the currently speaking person; and the figure image generation module switches the figure of the digital assistant, so that the changed figure of the digital assistant remains consistent with the figure features of the currently speaking person.
Hass teaches recognize, on the basis of one or more pieces of the image data, a currently speaking person, and outputs the figure features of the currently speaking person; and the figure image generation module switches the figure of the digital assistant, so that the changed figure of the digital assistant remains consistent with the figure features of the currently speaking person ((Col 2 lines 35-40 “ Video images of the person speaking or gesturing may correspond to words and the phonemes of the words. When video images show a person's face (e.g., lips) while speaking, image analysis techniques may allow for an identification of a facial expression in individual frames of video”. Col 15 lines 24- 31 “At block 408, the device may generate second images and/or second audio based on the facial expressions corresponding to the identified phonemes. For example, the second images may include images of the user (e.g., the user, an avatar of the user, or another person stored in the image storage 328) expressing facial expressions that correspond to the identified phonemes and/or images corresponding the user performing gestures of the words that use the identified phonemes”);
Hass and Amthor modified by Chung are analogous art as both of them are related to image processing.
Therefore it would have been obvious for an ordinary skilled person in the art before the effective filing date of claimed invention to have modified Amthor modified by Chung by recognizing, on the basis of one or more pieces of the image data, a currently speaking person, and outputs the figure features of the currently speaking person; and the figure image generation module switches the figure of the digital assistant, so that the changed figure of the digital assistant remains consistent with the figure features of the currently speaking personas taught by Hass.
The motivation for the above is to dynamically update the digital assistant.
Claim(s) 7 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Amthor modified by Chung as applied to claim 6 above and further in view of Walli et al. (US Pat. Pub. No. 20220300759 “Walli”).
Regarding claim 7 Amthor modified by Chung is silent about wherein the current environment comprises a current host interface of a vehicle host, and the environment features comprise image features extracted from the host interface of the vehicle.
Walli teaches current environment comprises a current host interface of a vehicle host, and the environment features comprise image features extracted from the host interface of the vehicle (“[0052] The system 300 includes a camera 302 (similar to the camera 112 of FIG. 1), positioned in a vehicle, to capture images of a field of interest in the vehicle that contains a visual data source. In the example shown, the field of interest in the vehicle is presented as a vehicle dashboard that contains various instruments (visual data sources) that convey vehicle information, including a speedometer, tachometer, odometer, turn signal indicators, fuel gauge, and engine oil temperature gauge. The camera 302 may be fixed (e.g., mounted) in a location in the vehicle that is in view of the field of interest. For example, the camera 302 may be strapped or mounted to the steering column, behind the steering wheel, facing toward the instrumentation panel.
[0053] The system 300 further includes an image processing unit 310 (similar to the image processing unit 114 of FIG. 1). The image processing unit 310 is operatively coupled to the camera 302, for example, by any suitable wired or wireless connection. The image processing unit 310, as described in greater detail below, receives images captured by the camera 302 and analyses the images to determine vehicle information. That is, the image processing unit 310 may run one or more image processing models to extract vehicle information from one or more images captured by the camera 302”);
Walli and Amthor modified by Chung are analogous art as both of them are related to image processing.
Therefore it would have been obvious for an ordinary skilled person in the art before the effective filing date of claimed invention to have modified Amthor modified by Chung by having current environment that comprises a current host interface of a vehicle host, and the environment features comprise image features extracted from the host interface of vehicle as taught by Walli.
The motivation for the above is to update the digital assistant based on multiple features easily capturable from an interface.
Claim(s) 8 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Amthor modified by Chung as applied to claim 6 above and further in view of Blattner et al. (US Pat. Pub. No. 20070113181 “Blattner”).
Regarding claim 8 Amthor modified by Chung is silent about wherein the current environment comprises background music being played by the vehicle, and the environment features comprise music style features.
Blattner teaches current environment comprises background music being played, and the environment features comprise music style features (“[0156]….. Additionally or alternatively, the appearance of the avatar may be changed based on the type of music to which the sender is listening.
[230]…… Another example of user behavior is the activity performed during a communications session, such as the type of music that a user is playing. A mood of "tired" may be determined based on a user being signed-on and working online for a long period of time, such as 12 or more hours, or a user selecting a genre of music that connotes a mood, such as playing "Blues" melodies rather than more upbeat jazz tunes”)
Blattner and Amthor modified by Chung are analogous art as both of them are related to image processing.
Therefore it would have been obvious for an ordinary skilled person in the art before the effective filing date of claimed invention to have modified Amthor modified by Chung by having current environment that comprises background music being played by the vehicle, and the environment features comprise music style features similar to having current environment comprises background music being played, and the environment features comprise music style features as taught by Blattner.
The motivation for the above is to update the digital assistant based on additional environmental features available inside the vehicle..
Claim(s) 9, 10 and 11 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Amthor modified by Chung and Battner as applied to claim 8 above and further in view of LEE et al. (US Pat. Pub. No. 20210350441 “Lee”).
Regarding claim 9 Even though Amthor modified by Chung and Battner teaches the description generation module processes the environment features to generate the clothing description text, and the clothing description text describes clothing characteristics that matches the current environment as shown above but is silent about wherein the description generation module processes the environment features using a trained clothing description language model to generate the clothing description text;
Lee teaches description generation module processes environment features using a trained clothing description language model to generate the clothing description text (“[0081] The second neural network 300 according to an embodiment may be a generative adversarial network (GAN) including a generator network (generator) for generating a clothing image from an input user image and a discriminator network, for example a discriminator, for discriminating whether a generated clothing image is real or fake. In this state, the generator network may be trained to generated a clothing image having metadata, for example attributes information, corresponding to the clothing item extracted from the user image”);
Lee and Amthor modified by Chung and Blattner are analogous art as both of them are related to image processing.
Therefore it would have been obvious for an ordinary skilled person in the art before the effective filing date of claimed invention to have modified Amthor modified by Chung and Blattner by having description generation module that processes environment features using a trained clothing description language model to generate the clothing description text as taught by Lee.
The motivation for the above is to automate retrieval of best clothing description language.
Regarding claim 10 Amthor modified by Chung and Blattner and Lee teaches wherein the clothing description language model assigns different weights to the environment features when processing the environment features (Lee “[0098]…..For example, the appropriateness information about a candidate coordination set may be represented by a score, and may indicate a higher score as clothing items included in the candidate coordination set go better with each other. However, the disclosure is not limited thereto.
[0099] The third neural network 600 according to an embodiment may be a neural network trained by a plurality of recommended coordination sets 620 and appropriateness information corresponding to the recommended coordination sets 620. For example, the third neural network 600 may train a combination of clothing items that go well with each other, by training colors, patterns, styles, and the like of clothing items included in the coordination sets recommended by an expert”).
Regarding claim 11 Amthor modified by Chung and Blattner and Lee teaches wherein the file generation module processes the clothing description text using a trained clothing generation model, wherein the second clothing file comprises a plurality of elements defining the clothing, and the plurality of elements comprise at least one of: style, texture, material, color, and logo (Lee “[0082] Furthermore, the metadata corresponding to the clothing item may include at least one of category information, style information, color information, season information, material information, weather information, or user preference information regarding about the clothing item”).
Claim(s) 16 and 20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over BANDAI et al. (US Pat. Pub. No. 20210150195 “Bandai”) in view of Kolen et al. (US Pat. Pub. No. 20210275925 “Kolen”).
Regarding claim 20 Bandai teaches A control device (Fig. 3) for changing the figure , comprising:
an environment detection module (integral part of element 10), configured to extract one or more environment features of a current environment of a vehicle (“[0046] FIG. 4 is a flowchart of processing of acquiring clothing information. The image acquisition unit 20 of the server device 10 acquires the captured image and the location information on a location at which the image is captured from the in-vehicle device 18 (S10). The vehicle information acquisition unit 22 acquires the vehicle state information from the in-vehicle device 18 (S12). In addition, the weather information acquisition unit 24 acquires the weather information corresponding to the location information on a location at which the image is captured”);
a description generation module (integral part of element 10), configured to generate a clothing description text on the basis of the environment features (“[0038]….. The specifying unit 28 specifies the clothing information of the person included in the captured image obtained when the weather information indicates that it is a fine day. Consequently, it is possible to exclude the captured images of which the image quality is low. [0047] The extraction unit 26 extracts a captured image in which clothing information is to be specified by the specifying unit 28, based on the vehicle state information and/or the weather information (S14). Consequently, it is possible to efficiently acquire the clothing information while reducing the load of the image analysis”);
a file generation module (integral part of element 10), configured to generate a clothing file on the basis of the clothing description text (“[0048] The specifying unit 28 specifies the clothing information of the person included in the captured image extracted by the extraction unit 26 (S16). The storage unit 30 stores the clothing information, which is specified by the specifying unit 28, in association with the location information (S18)”);
However Bandai is silent about changing the figure of a digital assistant; a figure image generation module, configured to load the clothing file to change the figure of the digital assistant.
Kolen teaches changing the figure of a digital assistant; a figure image generation module (Fig. 8 element 20), configured to load clothing file to change the figure of a digital assistant (“[0076] Block 306 additionally includes generating one or more clothing items and/or accessory items based on the person depicted in input media 302. As illustrated, the custom virtual clothing and accessory items 310 include a virtual shirt resembling the shirt worn by the real person in input media 302 [0091] At block 428, the custom character system 130 may cause in-game presentation of the custom 3D virtual character wearing one or more of the custom clothing or accessory items generated above. For example, the custom character system 130 may provide the virtual character data and corresponding clothing item data to the application host systems 122”);
Bandai and Kolen are analogous art as both of them are related to image processing.
Therefore it would have been obvious for an ordinary skilled person in the art before the effective filing date of claimed invention to have modified Bandai by changing the figure of a digital assistant; load clothing file to change the figure of a digital assistant as taught by Kolen and use this feature with Bandai’s system.
The motivation for the above is to provide enjoyment to the driver.
Regarding 16 Bandai modified by Kolen teaches wherein the current environment comprises: the graphical user interface, wherein the environment features comprise image features extracted from the graphical user interface; and/or music being played by the vehicle, wherein the environment features comprise music style features (Kolen “[0067] The illustrative method 200 begins at block 202, where the media processing system 132 may obtain video data, image data and/or other input media depicting a person to be imported into a game or otherwise made into a virtual character. The input media may be provided by a player, such as by the player selecting to upload images or videos of the player or another person to be made into a virtual character from the player computing system 102 (or another computing device of the player's) to the interactive computing system 120. The player may do so via an in-game user interface generated by a game application 104, or via a browser or other user interface generated by the interactive computing system 120. [0094] At block 504, the behavior learning system 134 may extract or determine traits and typical action sequences of the person depicted in the input media”).
Conclusion
Schubert et al. (US Pat. 12250448) teaches recognizing speaking occupant of the vehicle.
Endo (US Pat. 11379547) provides clothing recommendation base don weather information of the vehicle.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to SAPTARSHI MAZUMDER whose telephone number is (571)270-3454. The examiner can normally be reached 8 am-4 pm PST.
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, Said Broome can be reached at (571)272-2931. 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.
/SAPTARSHI MAZUMDER/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2612
Prosecution Insights