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 .
Response to Amendment
Prior to examination, claims 3 – 5, 7, 9, 12, and 15 – 17 were amended, and claims 21 – 23 have been cancelled. Claims 1 – 20 are now pending in the current application.
Claim Objections
Claim 1 is objected to because of the following informalities: it has been held that the recitation that an element is “adapted to” perform a function is not a positive limitation but only requires the ability to so perform. In re Hutchison, 69 USPQ 138. Appropriate correction is required.
Claims 5 and 6 are objected to because of the following informalities: There is no period at the end of claims 5 and 6. Appropriate correction is required.
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 therefore, subject to the conditions and requirements of this title.
Claims 1 - 20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 101 because the claimed invention is directed to non-statutory subject matter.
Step 1: It must be determined whether the invention falls into one of the four statutory categories of invention. Claims 1 – 20 are directed towards a system, (machine) which is a statutory category of invention.
Step 2a:
Prong 1: It must be determined whether the invention is directed to judicially recognized exception. Claim 1 is analyzed below with limitations indicating recitations of an abstract idea.
1. An augmented reality system for presenting cues within an augmented reality game environment to a subject who experiences gait impairment, wherein the augmented reality system comprises a display for providing an augmented reality overlay over a subject's field of vision and wherein the augmented reality system is arranged and adapted to: generate for display to the subject an interactive media asset; determine the subject's current position; generate for display to the subject a first virtual asset; determine the position of the first virtual asset relative to the subject's current position; and generate for display to the subject at least one cue which acts to prompt the subject to step forwards and walk from the subject's current position to the position of the first virtual asset.
The abstract idea is defined by the underlined portions exemplary claim 1. Dependent claims 2 - 10 further define the abstract idea or relate to the implementation of the abstract idea. The abstract idea is defined in at least the following grouping below:
Certain methods of organizing human activity (managing personal behavior)
Mental processes (observation, evaluation, judgment)
The claims are directed towards an abstract idea of managing personal behavior which falls into the category of organizing human activity, (See MPEP 2106/04(a)(2)(II)(C)). More specifically, the claimed invention recites an augmented reality system that presents cues to a user with gait impairment within an augmented reality game environment, wherein the claims further disclose providing an augmented reality overlay over a user’s field of vision and generating a cue which prompts a user to walk toward a location of a virtual asset. Controlling a system to generate cues to prompt a user walk toward a virtual asset within an augmented reality game environment represents managing personal behavior. (Intellectual Ventures I LLC v. Capital One Bank (USA), 792 F.3d 1363, 115 USPQ2d 1636 (Fed. Cir. 2015).
The claims are also directed towards a series of steps which can practically be performed by one or more humans, which fall into the category of mental processes, (See MPEP 2106.04(a)(2)(III)). More specifically, the claimed invention recites a system that presents cues to a user with gait impairment within augmented reality game environment, wherein the claims further disclose generating a virtual asset to a user, determine the position of the virtual asset and the user, and then prompting the user to walk to the determined position of the virtual asset. The claims recite instructions with these features. Here, a human can observe a user with gait impairment, observe the cues presented to a user within an augmented reality environment, observe the position of the user and a virtual asset, observe how the user walks towards the virtual asset after being prompted, and then make a determination of next step to make based on how the user walks towards the virtual asset. For example, in the event that a person is performing a gait test within an augmented reality game environment, (e.g. Pokémon Go), a human, such as a clinician, can observe the position of Pokémon character and the person, observe the cues the directs the person to walk towards the Pokémon character, observe how the person walks towards the Pokémon character after being prompted, wherein the clinician can then determine walking stability and efficiency, wherein if the clinician determines that the person is having difficulty walking, the clinician can then determine which adjustments to make to assist the person based on the walking difficulty.
Therefore, since the claimed invention can practically be performed in the human mind, it represents an ineligible abstract mental process. (Intellectual Ventures I LLC v. Symantec Corp., 838 F. 3d 1307).
Prong 2: Does the Claim recite additional elements that integrate the exception into a practical application of the exception?
The claims recite a generic display along with instructions that presents cues within an augmented reality game environment, which is viewed as no more than instructions to implement a judicial exception.
These additional limitations do not represent an improvement to the functioning of a computer, or to any other technology or technical field, (MPEP 2106.05(a)). Nor do they apply the exception using a particular machine, (MPEP 2106.05(b)). Furthermore, they do not affect a transformation. (MPEP 2106.05(c)). Rather, these additional limitations amount to an instruction to “apply” the judicial exception using a computer as a tool to perform the abstract idea.
Step 2b: It must be determined whether the claimed invention recites additional elements that amount to significantly more than the judicial exception.
The claim language does recite a display and a virtual asset, however, viewed as a whole, these additional elements are indistinguishable from conventional computing elements known in the art, (See Akselrod et al. U.S. 9,702,830 col. 5, lines 4 – 9 regarding a displaying an overlay in an augmented reality environment using a display device as being well-known in the art). Therefore, the additional elements fail to supply additional elements that yield significantly more than the underlying abstract idea. Viewing the limitations as an ordered combination adds nothing that is not already present when looking at the elements taken individually. There is no indication that the combination of elements improves the functioning of a computer or improves any other technology.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
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 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)(1) the claimed invention was patented, described in a printed publication, or in public use, on sale, or otherwise available to the public before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claims 1 – 20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a) as being anticipated by Harrises et al. (U.S. 2019/0371028).
Regarding claim 1, Harrises discloses an augmented reality system, (“displaying augmented reality content in the display area”, par. 0005), for presenting cues within an augmented reality game environment to a subject who experiences gait impairment, (“once a user has been determined to have an abnormal gait, the display system may be configured to provide aids for assisting the user with moving with a more normal gait. For example, the display system may be configured to provide augmented reality content (e.g., as part of interactive games or as a walking aid) in the form of a horizontal line and/or display a focus point ahead of the user”, par. 0836, wherein the Examiner views providing a horizontal line as aid to the user as being equivalent to presented cues), wherein the augmented reality system comprises a display for providing an augmented reality overlay over a subject’s field of vision, (“displaying augmented reality content may include displaying a virtual menu with user-selectable options. The virtual menu may be formed by overlaying one or more images of the menu, containing text and/or symbols, onto the user's view of the reflective surface or their view the ambient environment, thereby allowing the viewer to interact with the display system”, par. 0466, wherein the Examiner views overlaying the view of the user’s ambient environment as being equivalent to overlaying over a subject’s field of vision), wherein the augmented reality system is arranged to generate for display to the subject an interactive media asset, (“the display system may be configured to provide augmented reality content (e.g., as part of interactive games or as a walking aid)”, par. 0836, wherein the Examiner views the interactive games as being equivalent to an interactive media asset), determine the subject’s current position, generate for display to the subject a first virtual asset, determine the position of the first virtual asset relative to the subject’s current position, and generate for display to the subject at least one cue which acts to prompt the subject to step forwards and walk from the subject’s current position to the position of the first virtual asset, (“the display system may be configured to provide augmented reality content (e.g., as part of interactive games or as a walking aid) in the form of a horizontal line and/or display a focus point ahead of the user, to encourage the user to move along a straight line. In some embodiments, the display system may be configured to display virtual targets (e.g., a virtual circle) corresponding to the desired locations of the user steps, to encourage the user to take strides of normal lengths”, par. 0836, wherein the Examiner views the virtual targets as being equivalent to virtual assets and the system displaying the virtual targets corresponding to desired locations of the user steps as being equivalent to determining the current position of the user and the virtual asset and prompting the user to step forward and walk towards the virtual asset).
Regarding claim 2, Harrises discloses wherein at least one cue comprises a series of transverse bars, images or other visual cues which appear to the subject to be located on the ground in front of the subject to step on or over, (“the display system may be configured to provide augmented reality content (e.g., as part of interactive games or as a walking aid) in the form of a horizontal line and/or display a focus point ahead of the user”, par. 0836, wherein the Examiner views the horizontal line as being equivalent to a visual cue located in front of the user to step on or over).
Regarding claim 3, Harrises discloses wherein the augmented reality display comprises a headset or glasses, (“The display 62 may be coupled to a frame 64, which is wearable by a display system user or viewer 60 and which is configured to position the display 62 in front of the eyes of the user 60. The wearable display system 80 may be part of a wearable device such as, e.g., head-mounted device (HMD) or an augmented reality device (ARD). A portion of the wearable display system (such as the display 62) may be worn on the head of the user”, par. 0374 and fig. 1b, part 62).
Regarding claim 4, Harrises discloses a second virtual asset determine the position of the second virtual asset relative to the first virtual asset and/or subject's current position; and generate for display to the subject a series of transverse bars, images or other visual cues which appear to the subject to be located on the ground in front of the subject and which act to prompt the subject to step forwards and follow the transverse bars, images, or other visual cues from the position of the first virtual asset to the position of the second virtual asset, (“In some embodiments, the user may be asked to walk towards a virtual object, which then appears to come closer and closer to the user by being displayed on depth planes which are closer and closer to the user”, par. 0826, wherein the Examiner views the virtual object being different from the virtual target cited above, therefore, the virtual object being equivalent to a second virtual asset).
Regarding claim 5, Harrises discloses wherein the series of transverse bars, images or other visual cues is displayed in different colors depending on the subject's current position relative to the position of the series of transverse bars, images, or other visual cues, (“In some embodiments, augmented reality content showing the user's movement may be color-coded”, par. 0801).
Regarding claim 6, Harrises discloses wherein the series of transverse bars, images, or other visual cues is displayed in different colors depending on the subject's walking speed compared to pre-determined threshold walking speeds configured to be associated with respective colors of the series of transverse bars, images, or other visual cues, (“ the user's movement may be compared to the augmented normal movement and shown in a visual historical comparison. In some embodiments, augmented reality content showing the user's movement may be color-coded. For example, if the user does not have any movement, the projected body part having the lack of movement would be red, or if the user's movement is normal, then the projected body part having normal movement would be green”, par. 0801).
Regarding claim 7, Harrises discloses presenting a series of auditory or tactile visual cues to the subject at the same time as the series of transverse bars, images or other visual cues are displayed to the subject, (“the display system may be configured to generate images and/or audio designed to motivate the user or to increase the user's confidence”, par. 0468, wherein the Examiner views the audio designed to motivate the user as being equivalent to auditory cues).
Regarding claim 8, Harrises discloses determining the floor surface of the subject's current position, (“in FIG. 22A, the key points in the room 6000a may include the leaf tips of the plant, the corners of the monitor screen, the top and bottom corners of the desk, etc. These key points may be combined with a dense surface representation to form the world map”, par. 0627, wherein the Examiner views the forming of the world map shown in fig. 22a using surface representation as meeting the claim limitation of determining a floor surface), and determining any variation in the floor surface between the subject's current position and the position of the first visual asset and/or any variation in the floor surface between the position of the first visual asset and second visual asset, wherein any one or more of the visual, auditory, and/or tactile visual cues is changeable to coincide with the subject moving from a first floor surface to a second floor surface, (“the user may be asked to walk towards a virtual object, which then appears to come closer and closer to the user by being displayed on depth planes which are closer and closer to the user”, par. 0826, wherein the Examiner the user being asked to walk towards a virtual object along with Harrises teaching determining surfaces above as meeting the claim limitation of determining any variation in the floor surface between the subject's current position and the position of the first visual asset wherein any one or more of the visual, auditory, and/or tactile visual cues is changeable to coincide with the subject moving from a first floor surface to a second floor surface).
Regarding claim 9, Harrises discloses mapping a physical area surrounding the subject; determining the position of any physical obstacles or hazards within the mapped area; (“A wearable display system may employ various mapping related techniques in order to achieve high depth of field in the rendered light fields. In mapping out the virtual world, it is advantageous to know all the features and points in the real world to accurately portray virtual objects in relation to the real world”, par. 0419, and “In some embodiments, the display system may be configured to provide a warning (e.g., an audible warning) if the user is unstable and there may be a risk of the user falling”, par. 0821), and varying the direction of series of transverse bars, images, or other visual cues to avoid any determined physical obstacles or hazards, (“the display system may be configured to assist the user with aligning their movements and improving their motor skills by providing visual targets”, par. 0824, wherein the Examiner views the system assisting the user to align their movements by providing visual targets as being equivalent to avoiding physical obstacles or hazards).
Regarding claim 10, Harrises discloses placing the first and second visual assets in virtual space such that they are presented to the subject within the mapped area, (“FIG. 22A illustrates an example of a three-dimensional (3D) environment including two rooms joined by a door. FIG. 22A illustrates two rooms 6000a, 6200 connected by a doorway 6550. The room 6000a may include a plurality of physical objects 6010a and 6010b, such as, e.g. a chair, a plant, a roller chair, a table, or a monitor”, par. 0625, wherein the Examiner views the plurality of physical objects as being equivalent to a plurality of visual assets in the virtual space of a mapped area).
Regarding claim 11, Harrises discloses placing at least one intervening visual asset placed between the subjects' current position and the position of the first visual asset or second visual asset; and varying the direction of the series of transverse bars, images or other visual cues to avoid the at least one intervening visual asset, (“FIG. 1A depicts an illustration of a mixed reality (MR) scenario that includes both certain virtual reality objects, and certain physical objects viewed by a user. In FIG. 1A, an MR scene 100 is depicted wherein a user of an MR technology sees a real-world park-like setting 110 featuring people, trees, buildings in the background, and a concrete platform 120. In addition to these items, the user of the MR technology also perceives that he “sees” a robot statue 130 standing upon the real-world platform 120, and a cartoon-like avatar character 140 flying by which seems to be a personification of a bumble bee”, par. 0371).
Regarding claim 12, Harrises discloses receiving an interaction between the subject and the first visual asset and/or second visual asset, wherein such interaction results in the awarding of points or progress towards a point total or progress indicator, (“the game may include opportunities for the user to score points and/or compete with other users, both of which may encourage more gameplay. In addition, the display system may be configured to display goals and the user's progress towards those goals, to encourage further engagement with the game”, par. 0839).
Regarding claim 13, Harrises discloses wherein the awarded points, or progress is variable depending on the speed of travel of the subject from the subject's current position to the first visual asset and/or second visual asset, (“For example, the display system may be configured to generate images and/or audio designed to motivate the user or to increase the user's confidence. As an example, the positive reinforcement may include displaying augmented reality content that shows how close the user is to achieving a goal (e.g., how much more time is remaining, etc.) and/or how much the user has improved their performance (e.g., graphically displaying measures of their speed, strength, etc.) relative to a baseline”, par. 0468).
Regarding claim 14, Harrises discloses wherein the awarded points or progress is variable depending on any degree of deviation from a path defined by the series of transverse bars, images, or other visual cues, (“The user may be instructed (e.g., by the display system) to perform various fine movements and/or to hold various positions. In some embodiments, these movements may be performed in the context of a game in which correcting performing a movement increases the user's game score”, par. 0774).
Regarding claim 15, Harrises discloses wherein the series of transverse bars, images or other visual cues is activated in response to a command from the subject or another person, (“The invention includes methods that may be performed using the subject devices. The methods may comprise the act of providing such a suitable device. Such provision may be performed by the user. In other words, the “providing” act merely requires the user obtain, access, approach, position, set-up, activate, power-up or otherwise act to provide the requisite device in the subject method”, par. 0891, wherein the Examiner views the device requiring a user to activate the device as meeting the claim limitation of activating the visual cues in response to a command from the subject).
Regarding claim 16, Harrises discloses wherein the series of transverse bars, images or other visual cues is selected for display to the subject depending on a theme of the interactive media asset and/or in response to determining that the subject responds positively to a defined series of transverse bars, images, or other visual cues, (“For example, the interactive game may be a boxing game to encourage movement of the user's limbs. Advantageously, by creating an interactive game, the user is more likely to be successful in regaining range of motion since they may be more engaged in therapy involving a game. For example, the game may include opportunities for the user to score points and/or compete with other users, both of which may encourage more gameplay. In addition, the display system may be configured to display goals and the user's progress towards those goals, to encourage further engagement with the game”, par. 0839).
Regarding claim 17, Harrises discloses means for measuring and recording gait parameters of the subject, (“the display system may be configured to monitor and measure the user's gait”, par. 0837).
Regarding claim 18, Harrises discloses wherein one or more cues are presented according to pre-set parameters based on the subject's recorded gait parameters, (“The display system may also be configured to image the reflection of the viewer to analyze their gait. An augmented normal gait may be overlaid the user's reflection to aid the user in understanding the desired motion and/or to allow the user to observe the level of abnormality or change in their gait. In some embodiments, the user may be asked to walk towards a virtual object, which then appears to come closer and closer to the user by being displayed on depth planes which are closer and closer to the user”, par. 0826).
Regarding claim 19, Harrises discloses wherein the subject or another person may adjust and set predefined parameters of the visual, auditory or tactile cues to alter a target gait modifying effect provided by the visual, auditory or tactile cue within the game environment, (“In some embodiments, once a user has been determined to have an abnormal gait, the display system may be configured to provide aids for assisting the user with moving with a more normal gait. For example, the display system may be configured to provide augmented reality content (e.g., as part of interactive games or as a walking aid) in the form of a horizontal line and/or display a focus point ahead of the user”, par. 0836).
Regarding claim 20, Harrises discloses wherein the subject or another person can activate or deactivate cues from UI input through voice command, hand gesture, or controller; wherein, cues are configured to automatically activate/deactivate within a game environment based on the determined motor state of the subject; and wherein the subject can select which visual, auditory , tactile cue they want to assist them within the game environment via a library of cues; and wherein cues are presented in an action relevant way, (“Once the virtual UI has been created, the wearable system may simply wait for a command from the user to generate more virtual content on the virtual UI at block 1150. For example, the UI may be a body centric ring around the user's body. The wearable system may then wait for the command (a gesture, a head or eye movement, input from a user input device, etc.)”, par. 0441 and “The selection of menu items may be made via a “virtual touchscreen,” voice commands, eye tracking, gestures, or other means”, par.0466, wherein the Examiner views the system waiting for a command from the user to generate virtual content, wherein the command may be a voice command as meeting the claim limitation of the subject or another person can activating or deactivating cues from UI input through voice command, hand gesture, or controller; wherein, cues are configured to automatically activate/deactivate within a game environment).
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ERIC M THOMAS whose telephone number is (571)272-1699. The examiner can normally be reached 9:00am - 5:00pm.
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, Dmitry Suhol can be reached at 571-272-4430. 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.
/E.M.T/Examiner, Art Unit 3715
/JUSTIN L MYHR/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3715
Prosecution Insights