DETAILED ACTION
Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status
1. 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 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.
Information Disclosure Statement
2. The information disclosure statements (IDS) submitted on the following dates are in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97 and are being considered by the Examiner: 02/17/2025.
Specification
3. The title of the invention is not descriptive. A new title is required that is clearly indicative of the invention to which the claims are directed.
The following title is suggested:
INFORMATION PROCESSING APPARATUS, INFORMATION PROCESSING SYSTEM, AND PROGRAM CAPABLE OF SUITABLY OPERATING A GUI.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 101
4. 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.
5. Claim 20 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 101 because the claimed invention is directed to non-statutory subject matter.
Claim 20 describes a program per se.
Computer program element claimed as computer listings per se, i.e., the descriptions or expressions of the programs, are not physical "things." They are neither computer components nor statutory processes, as they are not "acts" being performed. Such claimed computer programs do not define any structural and functional interrelationships between the computer program and other claimed elements of a computer which permit the computer program's functionality to be realized. In contrast, a claimed non-transitory computer-readable medium encoded with a computer program is a computer element which defines structural and functional interrelationships between the computer program and the rest of the computer which permit the computer program's functionality to be realized, and is thus statutory. See Lowry, 32 F.3d at 1583-84, 32 USPQ2d at 1035.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
6. 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.
7. Claims 1-2, 12-15 and 19-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Shimada et al., (“Shimada”) [WO-2021/131941-A1]
Regarding claim 1, Shimada discloses an information processing apparatus comprising a video generation unit (Shimada- Figs.1, 3 and ¶0011-0013, at least disclose the information processing system 1 shown in Figure 1 is a system that displays three-dimensional model data on a display device and supports the editing of said model data. Model data includes images that display objects, backgrounds, etc., three-dimensionally in 3D space. Images include, for example, videos, still images, etc. […] the information processing device 30 is electrically connected to the first display device 10, the second display device 20, and the input device 40 […] The first display device 10 is a 3D display capable of displaying three-dimensional model data in 3D under the control of the information processing device 30. The first display device 10 displays a three-dimensional image based on three-dimensional model data. The first display device 10 is comprised of, for example, an active or passive 3D display) configured to generate a video including a 3D object and a GUI having at least three planes arranged in a virtual space (Shimada- Fig. 2 shows the three-dimensional rabbit object 120 [a 3D object] and the frame 201 [a GUI] in the three-dimensional space 110 [a virtual space]; Fig. 7 shows object 120 is projected onto the editing area 210 of marker 200 and ¶0056-0057, at least disclose The first display device 10 displays a three-dimensional object 120 in three-dimensional space 110. The information processing device 30 defines a two-dimensional region enclosed by the frame 201 in the three-dimensional space 110 and displays three movable markers 200A, 200B, and 200C [three planes] on the first display device 10. For example, the information processing device 30 superimposes the markers 200A, 200B, and 200C onto the model data 100 so that they are orthogonal to each other. For example, the information processing device 30 displays markers 200A, 200B, and 200C at positions away from the object 120. Note that markers 200A, 200B, and 200C will simply be referred to as marker 200 if they are not distinguished from each other. In the example shown in Figure 6, markers 200A, 200B, and 200C form rectangular frames; ¶0113, at least discloses The information processing device 30 according to modification (2) of the second embodiment can display the model data 100 on the first display device 10 using the three-dimensional space 110 as a virtual space), the video including in which one portion is cut out along a plane of the GUI in a case where the 3D object and the GUI overlap in the virtual space (Shimada- Fig. 7 with the left figure shows the three-dimensional object 120 [the 3D object] in the three-dimensional space 110. A top portion of the three-dimensional object 120 is cut along the markers 200A [a plane of the GUI] in a case where the three-dimensional object 120 and the markers 200A [the GUI] overlap in the three-dimensional space 110 [the virtual space]).
Regarding claim 2, Shimada discloses the information processing apparatus according to claim 1, and further discloses wherein the video generation unit changes at least one of a position, a direction, or a shape of the GUI on a basis of an input operation in a two-dimensional direction (Shimada- Fig. 2 and ¶0018, at least disclose the marker 200 is a rectangular frame 201, but it is not limited to this. The marker 200 includes, for example, a frame of a geometric shape such as a circle, ellipse, triangle, or polygon. The information processing device 30 controls the first display device 10 to display the marker 200 at any display position in the three-dimensional space 110. The information processing device 30 identifies a new display position corresponding to the movement, rotation, enlargement, reduction, etc., of the marker 200 based on the operation information from the input device 40 and controls the first display device 10 so that the marker 200 moves to the new display position and is displayed).
Regarding claim 12, Shimada discloses the information processing apparatus according to claim 1, and further discloses wherein the GUI includes at least three planes sharing two sides with other planes (Shimada- Fig. 6 shows the cube frame 201 with 3 planes (210A, 210B and 210C) sharing two sides with other planes; ¶0056, at least disclose The information processing device 30 defines a two-dimensional area surrounded by the frame 201 in the three-dimensional space 110, and causes the first display device 10 to display three movable markers 200A, 200B, and 200C. For example, the information processing apparatus 30 superimposes the markers 200A, 200B, and 200C on the model data 100 so that they are orthogonal to each other).
Regarding claim 13, Shimada discloses the information processing apparatus according to claim 1, and further discloses wherein the GUI has a substantially box-like shape surrounded by six planes (Shimada- Fig. 10 shows the marker 200 is a cube frame 201. The marker 200 (GUI) has a substantially box-like shape surrounded by the editing areas 210 (six planes)).
Regarding claim 14, Shimada discloses the information processing apparatus according to claim 1, and further discloses wherein the video generation unit cuts out a portion of the 3D object included in a region on an inner side of the GUI (Shimada- Fig. 7, in the left, shows the three-dimensional object 120 having the portion between the markers 200A and 200B being cutting out in a region on an inner side of the marker 200A (GUI)).
Regarding claim 15, Shimada discloses the information processing apparatus according to claim 1, and further discloses wherein the video generation unit cuts out a portion of the 3D object included in a region on an outer side of the GUI (Shimada- Fig. 7, in the left, shows the three-dimensional object 120 being cutting out in a region that over the marker 200A. The three-dimensional object 120 included in a region on an outer side of the marker 200A (GUI)).
Regarding claim 19, Shimada discloses an information processing system (Shimada- Figs.1, 3 and ¶0011-0013, at least disclose the information processing system 1 shown in Figure 1 is a system that displays three-dimensional model data on a display device and supports the editing of said model data) comprising:
an information processing apparatus (Shimada- Fig.1 and ¶0012, at least disclose an information processing device 30) including a video generation unit that generates a video including a 3D object and a GUI having at least three planes arranged in a virtual space, the video including the 3D object in which one portion is cut out along a plane of the GUI in a case where the 3D object and the GUI overlap in the virtual space (see Claim 1 rejection for detailed analysis); and
a display device (Shimada- Fig.1 and ¶0012, at least disclose the information processing system 1 comprises a first display device 10, a second display device 20, an information processing device 30 […] The information processing device 30 is electrically connected to the first display device 10, the second display device 20, and the input device 40. The first display device 10 is a 3D display capable of displaying three-dimensional model data in 3D under the control of the information processing device 30 […] The second display device 20 displays two-dimensional data under the control of the information processing device 30) that is connected to the information processing apparatus and includes a display unit that displays a video generated by the video generation unit (see Claim 1 rejection for detailed analysis).
Regarding claim 20, Shimada discloses a program that causes a computer to execute a process (Shimada- Fig. 3 and ¶0025-0026, at least disclose the memory unit 32 stores various data and programs […] a CPU (Central Processing Unit) or MCU (Micro Control Unit) executing a program stored inside the information processing device 30 using RAM (Random Access Memory) or the like as the working area; Fig. 5 and ¶0034, at least disclose The processing procedure shown in Figure 5 is realized by the control unit 33 of the information processing device 30 executing a program; Fig. 12 and ¶0090, at least disclose the control unit 33 of the information processing device 30 executing a program) of:
generating a video including a 3D object and a GUI having at least three planes arranged in a virtual space, the video including the 3D object in which one portion is cut out along a plane of the GUI in a case where the 3D object and the GUI overlap in the virtual space (see Claim 1 rejection for detailed analysis).
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
4. 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.
This application currently names joint inventors. In considering patentability of the claims the examiner presumes that the subject matter of the various claims was commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the claimed invention(s) absent any evidence to the contrary. Applicant is advised of the obligation under 37 CFR 1.56 to point out the inventor and effective filing dates of each claim that was not commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the later invention in order for the examiner to consider the applicability of 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(C) for any potential 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) prior art against the later invention.
8. Claims 3-8 and 10 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Shimada in view of Takanashi (“Takanashi”) [US-6,243,096-B1]
Regarding claim 3, Shimada discloses the information processing apparatus according to claim 1, and does not explicitly disclose, but Takanashi discloses wherein in a case where a cursor is on a plane of the GUI, the video generation unit moves the cursor on the plane of the GUI (Takanashi- col 4, lines 10-22, at least discloses the cursor controller forms a mathematical projection of the main cursor onto a plane based on the specified post-motion position and the specified post-motion attitude of the main cursor. The mathematical projection of the main cursor thus formed, which is displayed on the screen of the display device, designates a post-motion position and a post-motion attitude of the object after the object is moved according to the desired motion in the three-dimensional space. Accordingly, the desired instruction to move the object existing in the three-dimensional space is able to be readily and efficiently inputted using the input device and the main cursor displayed on the screen; col 4, line 62 to col 5, line 6, at least discloses it is preferred that the cursor controller specifies a post-motion position and a post-motion attitude of the assistant cursor by applying the desired motion included in the inputted instruction to the assistant cursor, and forms a mathematical projection of the assistant cursor onto the plane based on the specified post-motion position and the specified post-motion attitude of the assistant cursor. The mathematical projection of the assistant cursor is displayed on the screen of the display device).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Shimada to incorporate the teachings of Takanashi, and apply the main cursor onto a plane based on the specified post-motion position and the specified post-motion attitude of the main cursor into the Shimada’s teachings in order in a case where a cursor is on a plane of the GUI, the video generation unit moves the cursor on the plane of the GUI.
Doing so would make it possible to readily and efficiently input instructions to move an object existing in a three-dimensional space using an input device and a cursor displayed on a screen.
Regarding claim 4, Shimada in view of Takanashi, discloses the information processing apparatus according to claim 3, and further discloses wherein the video generation unit moves the GUI on a plane corresponding to one plane of the GUI in response to an operation of moving the cursor in a state where the one plane of the GUI is selected (Shimada- Fig. 7 and ¶0060, at least disclose The information processing device 30 controls the display on the second display device 20 so that the three generated editable data sets 300A, 300B, and 300C are displayed side by side. The information processing device 30 causes the second display device 20 to display data for showing the three data to be edited, 300A, 300B, and 300C, as shown in the three-view drawing. The information processing device 30 displays a pointer P on the second display device 20 that allows the user to select the data to be edited 300A, 300B, and 300C. As a result, the second display device 20 displays the data to be edited 300A, 300B, and 300C within the markers 200A, 200B, and 200C, as shown in the right-hand diagram of Figure 6. This allows the user to simultaneously view different parts of object 120 by referring to the editing target data 300A, 300B, and 300C displayed on the second display device 20. When the information processing device 30 detects editing of any of the data to be edited 300A, 300B, or 300C via the input device 40, it reflects the detection result in the model data 100; Takanashi- col 4, lines 10-22, at least discloses the cursor controller forms a mathematical projection of the main cursor onto a plane based on the specified post-motion position and the specified post-motion attitude of the main cursor. The mathematical projection of the main cursor thus formed, which is displayed on the screen of the display device, designates a post-motion position and a post-motion attitude of the object after the object is moved according to the desired motion in the three-dimensional space. Accordingly, the desired instruction to move the object existing in the three-dimensional space is able to be readily and efficiently inputted using the input device and the main cursor displayed on the screen; col 4, line 62 to col 5, line 6, at least discloses it is preferred that the cursor controller specifies a post-motion position and a post-motion attitude of the assistant cursor by applying the desired motion included in the inputted instruction to the assistant cursor, and forms a mathematical projection of the assistant cursor onto the plane based on the specified post-motion position and the specified post-motion attitude of the assistant cursor. The mathematical projection of the assistant cursor is displayed on the screen of the display device).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Shimada to incorporate the teachings of Takanashi, and apply the main cursor onto a plane based on the specified post-motion position and the specified post-motion attitude of the main cursor into the Shimada’s teachings in order the video generation unit moves the GUI on a plane corresponding to one plane of the GUI in response to an operation of moving the cursor in a state where the one plane of the GUI is selected.
The same motivation that was utilized in the rejection of claim 3 applies equally to this claim.
Regarding claim 5, Shimada in view of Takanashi, discloses the information processing apparatus according to claim 3, and further discloses wherein the video generation unit rotates the GUI on a plane corresponding to one plane of the GUI in response to an operation of moving the cursor in a state where the one plane of the GUI is selected (Shimada- ¶0018, at least discloses the information processing device 30 identifies a new display position corresponding to the movement, rotation, enlargement, reduction, etc., of the marker 200 based on the operation information from the input device 40, and controls the first display device 10 so that the marker 200 moves to the new display position and is displayed; ¶0046, at least discloses Editing operations include, for example, operations to change the indicated coordinates of the data to be edited 300, and operations to change the scale, shape, rotation, etc. of the data to be edited 300 or objects contained in the data to be edited 300; Fig. 7 and ¶0060, at least disclose the information processing device 30 controls the display on the second display device 20 so that the three generated editable data sets 300A, 300B, and 300C are displayed side by side. The information processing device 30 causes the second display device 20 to display data for showing the three data to be edited, 300A, 300B, and 300C, as shown in the three-view drawing. The information processing device 30 displays a pointer P on the second display device 20 that allows the user to select the data to be edited 300A, 300B, and 300C. As a result, the second display device 20 displays the data to be edited 300A, 300B, and 300C within the markers 200A, 200B, and 200C, as shown in the right-hand diagram of Figure 6. This allows the user to simultaneously view different parts of object 120 by referring to the editing target data 300A, 300B, and 300C displayed on the second display device 20. When the information processing device 30 detects editing of any of the data to be edited 300A, 300B, or 300C via the input device 40, it reflects the detection result in the model data 100; Takanashi- col 4, lines 10-22, at least discloses the cursor controller forms a mathematical projection of the main cursor onto a plane based on the specified post-motion position and the specified post-motion attitude of the main cursor. The mathematical projection of the main cursor thus formed, which is displayed on the screen of the display device, designates a post-motion position and a post-motion attitude of the object after the object is moved according to the desired motion in the three-dimensional space. Accordingly, the desired instruction to move the object existing in the three-dimensional space is able to be readily and efficiently inputted using the input device and the main cursor displayed on the screen; col 4, line 62 to col 5, line 6, at least discloses it is preferred that the cursor controller specifies a post-motion position and a post-motion attitude of the assistant cursor by applying the desired motion included in the inputted instruction to the assistant cursor, and forms a mathematical projection of the assistant cursor onto the plane based on the specified post-motion position and the specified post-motion attitude of the assistant cursor. The mathematical projection of the assistant cursor is displayed on the screen of the display device).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Shimada to incorporate the teachings of Takanashi, and apply the operation to change the rotation of the target data defined by the marker in a three-dimensional space into the Shimada’s teachings in order the video generation unit rotates the GUI on a plane corresponding to one plane of the GUI in response to an operation of moving the cursor in a state where the one plane of the GUI is selected.
The same motivation that was utilized in the rejection of claim 3 applies equally to this claim.
Regarding claim 6, Shimada in view of Takanashi, discloses the information processing apparatus according to claim 3, and further discloses wherein the video generation unit changes the size of the GUI according to a predetermined operation in a state where the cursor is on a plane of the GUI (Shimada- ¶0046, at least discloses editing operations include, for example, operations to change the indicated coordinates of the data to be edited 300, and operations to change the scale, shape, rotation, etc. of the data to be edited 300 or objects contained in the data to be edited 300; Fig. 7 and ¶0060, at least disclose the information processing device 30 causes the second display device 20 to display data for showing the three data to be edited, 300A, 300B, and 300C, as shown in the three-view drawing. The information processing device 30 displays a pointer P on the second display device 20 that allows the user to select the data to be edited 300A, 300B, and 300C. As a result, the second display device 20 displays the data to be edited 300A, 300B, and 300C within the markers 200A, 200B, and 200C, as shown in the right-hand diagram of Figure 6. This allows the user to simultaneously view different parts of object 120 by referring to the editing target data 300A, 300B, and 300C displayed on the second display device 20. When the information processing device 30 detects editing of any of the data to be edited 300A, 300B, or 300C via the input device 40, it reflects the detection result in the model data 100; ¶0081, at least discloses the marker 200 includes, for example, geometric shapes such as cylinders, cones, and rectangular prisms. The marker 200 may be sized to accommodate a portion of the object 120; Takanashi- col 4, lines 10-22, at least discloses the cursor controller forms a mathematical projection of the main cursor onto a plane based on the specified post-motion position and the specified post-motion attitude of the main cursor […] Accordingly, the desired instruction to move the object existing in the three-dimensional space is able to be readily and efficiently inputted using the input device and the main cursor displayed on the screen; col 4, line 62 to col 5, line 6, at least discloses it is preferred that the cursor controller specifies a post-motion position and a post-motion attitude of the assistant cursor by applying the desired motion included in the inputted instruction to the assistant cursor, and forms a mathematical projection of the assistant cursor onto the plane based on the specified post-motion position and the specified post-motion attitude of the assistant cursor).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Shimada to incorporate the teachings of Takanashi, and apply sizing to accommodate of the marker into the Shimada’s teachings in order the video generation unit changes the size of the GUI according to a predetermined operation in a state where the cursor is on a plane of the GUI.
The same motivation that was utilized in the rejection of claim 3 applies equally to this claim.
Regarding claim 7, Shimada in view of Takanashi, discloses the information processing apparatus according to claim 3, and further discloses wherein the video generation unit deforms the GUI according to a predetermined operation in a state where the cursor is on a plane of the GUI (Shimada- ¶0046, at least discloses editing operations include, for example, operations to change the indicated coordinates of the data to be edited 300, and operations to change the scale, shape, rotation, etc. of the data to be edited 300 or objects contained in the data to be edited 300; Fig. 7 and ¶0060, at least disclose the information processing device 30 displays a pointer P on the second display device 20 that allows the user to select the data to be edited 300A, 300B, and 300C. As a result, the second display device 20 displays the data to be edited 300A, 300B, and 300C within the markers 200A, 200B, and 200C, as shown in the right-hand diagram of Figure 6. This allows the user to simultaneously view different parts of object 120 by referring to the editing target data 300A, 300B, and 300C displayed on the second display device 20. When the information processing device 30 detects editing of any of the data to be edited 300A, 300B, or 300C via the input device 40, it reflects the detection result in the model data 100; ¶0081, at least discloses the marker 200 includes, for example, geometric shapes such as cylinders, cones, and rectangular prisms. The marker 200 may be sized to accommodate a portion of the object 120; Takanashi- col 4, lines 10-22, at least discloses the cursor controller forms a mathematical projection of the main cursor onto a plane based on the specified post-motion position and the specified post-motion attitude of the main cursor […] Accordingly, the desired instruction to move the object existing in the three-dimensional space is able to be readily and efficiently inputted using the input device and the main cursor displayed on the screen; col 4, line 62 to col 5, line 6, at least discloses it is preferred that the cursor controller specifies a post-motion position and a post-motion attitude of the assistant cursor by applying the desired motion included in the inputted instruction to the assistant cursor, and forms a mathematical projection of the assistant cursor onto the plane based on the specified post-motion position and the specified post-motion attitude of the assistant cursor).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Shimada to incorporate the teachings of Takanashi, and apply sizing to accommodate of the marker into the Shimada’s teachings in order the video generation unit deforms the GUI according to a predetermined operation in a state where the cursor is on a plane of the GUI.
The same motivation that was utilized in the rejection of claim 3 applies equally to this claim.
Regarding claim 8, Shimada in view of Takanashi, discloses the information processing apparatus according to claim 3, and further discloses wherein the video generation unit moves the cursor on a UI plane arranged in the virtual space in a case where the cursor is not on a plane of the GUI (Shimada- Fig. 7 and ¶0060, at least disclose The information processing device 30 controls the display on the second display device 20 so that the three generated editable data sets 300A, 300B, and 300C are displayed side by side. The information processing device 30 causes the second display device 20 to display data for showing the three data to be edited, 300A, 300B, and 300C, as shown in the three-view drawing. The information processing device 30 displays a pointer P on the second display device 20 that allows the user to select the data to be edited 300A, 300B, and 300C. As a result, the second display device 20 displays the data to be edited 300A, 300B, and 300C within the markers 200A, 200B, and 200C, as shown in the right-hand diagram of Figure 6. This allows the user to simultaneously view different parts of object 120 by referring to the editing target data 300A, 300B, and 300C displayed on the second display device 20. When the information processing device 30 detects editing of any of the data to be edited 300A, 300B, or 300C via the input device 40, it reflects the detection result in the model data 100; Takanashi- col 4, lines 10-22, at least discloses the cursor controller forms a mathematical projection of the main cursor onto a plane based on the specified post-motion position and the specified post-motion attitude of the main cursor. The mathematical projection of the main cursor thus formed, which is displayed on the screen of the display device, designates a post-motion position and a post-motion attitude of the object after the object is moved according to the desired motion in the three-dimensional space. Accordingly, the desired instruction to move the object existing in the three-dimensional space is able to be readily and efficiently inputted using the input device and the main cursor displayed on the screen; col 4, line 62 to col 5, line 6, at least discloses it is preferred that the cursor controller specifies a post-motion position and a post-motion attitude of the assistant cursor by applying the desired motion included in the inputted instruction to the assistant cursor, and forms a mathematical projection of the assistant cursor onto the plane based on the specified post-motion position and the specified post-motion attitude of the assistant cursor. The mathematical projection of the assistant cursor is displayed on the screen of the display device; col 10, lines 16-19, at least discloses the motion of the arrow-shaped cursor 20 is independent of that of the planar main cursor 10 and therefore, the main cursor 10 is not moved even if the mouse cursor 20 is moved).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Shimada to incorporate the teachings of Takanashi, and apply the main cursor onto a plane based on the specified post-motion position and the specified post-motion attitude of the main cursor in the three-dimensional space into the Shimada’s teachings in order the video generation unit moves the cursor on a UI plane arranged in the virtual space in a case where the cursor is not on a plane of the GUI.
The same motivation that was utilized in the rejection of claim 3 applies equally to this claim.
Regarding claim 10, Shimada in view of Takanashi, discloses the information processing apparatus according to claim 8, and further discloses wherein a video generated by the video generation unit includes another GUI arranged on the UI plane in the virtual space(Shimada- Fig. 7 and ¶0060, at least disclose The information processing device 30 controls the display on the second display device 20 so that the three generated editable data sets 300A, 300B, and 300C are displayed side by side. The information processing device 30 causes the second display device 20 to display data for showing the three data to be edited, 300A, 300B, and 300C, as shown in the three-view drawing. The information processing device 30 displays a pointer P on the second display device 20 that allows the user to select the data to be edited 300A, 300B, and 300C. As a result, the second display device 20 displays the data to be edited 300A, 300B, and 300C within the markers 200A, 200B, and 200C, as shown in the right-hand diagram of Figure 6; Fig. 7 and ¶0064, at least disclose The information processing device 30 defines a two-dimensional area surrounded by the frame 201 in the three-dimensional space 110, and causes the first display device 10 to display three movable markers 200A, 200B, and 200C).
9. Claims 9 and 11 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Shimada in view of Takanashi, further in view of Yokoyama et al. (“Yokoyama”) [US-11,064,176-B1]
Regarding claim 9, Shimada in view of Takanashi, discloses the information processing apparatus according to claim 8, and further discloses wherein in a case where the cursor enters a region connecting the 3D object, the video generation unit moves the cursor from the UI plane onto a plane of the GUI in the virtual space (Takanashi- col 4, lines 10-22, at least discloses the cursor controller forms a mathematical projection of the main cursor onto a plane based on the specified post-motion position and the specified post-motion attitude of the main cursor. The mathematical projection of the main cursor thus formed, which is displayed on the screen of the display device, designates a post-motion position and a post-motion attitude of the object after the object is moved according to the desired motion in the three-dimensional space. Accordingly, the desired instruction to move the object existing in the three-dimensional space is able to be readily and efficiently inputted using the input device and the main cursor displayed on the screen; col 4, line 62 to col 5, line 6, at least discloses it is preferred that the cursor controller specifies a post-motion position and a post-motion attitude of the assistant cursor by applying the desired motion included in the inputted instruction to the assistant cursor, and forms a mathematical projection of the assistant cursor onto the plane based on the specified post-motion position and the specified post-motion attitude of the assistant cursor).
The prior art does not explicitly disclose, but Yokoyama discloses
a region connecting a viewpoint position of a user and the 3D object (Yokoyama- col 2, lines 5-21, at least discloses a stereoscopic image is displayed on a virtual display surface arranged in a space, in which an arrangement of the virtual display surface in the space is controlled on the basis of a position of a viewpoint of a user […] a display control function that controls display of a display unit such that a stereoscopic image is displayed on a virtual display surface arranged in a space, in which the display control function controls an arrangement of the virtual display surface in the space on the basis of a position of a viewpoint of a user; col 4, line 61 to col 5, line 2, at least discloses a sensor for detecting the position of the viewpoint of the user. The sensor unit 30 may by itself detect, the position of the viewpoint of the user and output information regarding the position of the viewpoint of the user to the display control unit 10, or may output information for detecting the position of the viewpoint of the user to the display control unit 10; col 5, lines 13-15, at least discloses an imaging unit arranged so as to image a region corresponding to the field of view of the user in the real space).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Shimada/Takanashi to incorporate the teachings of Yokoyama, and apply the arrangement of the virtual display surface in the space on the basis of a position of a viewpoint of a user into the Shimada/Takanashi’s teachings in order a case where the cursor enters a region connecting a viewpoint position of a user and the 3D object, the video generation unit moves the cursor from the UI plane onto a plane of the GUI in the virtual space.
Doing so would suppress loss of stereoscopic feeling or the occurrence of sickness.
Regarding claim 11, Shimada in view of Takanashi, discloses the information processing apparatus according to claim 3, and further discloses a plane of the GUI under the cursor (see Claim 3 rejection for detailed analysis)
The prior art does not explicitly disclose, but Yokoyama discloses
wherein the video generation unit colors a plane of the GUI (Yokoyama- col 13, lines 3-15, at least discloses The display control unit 10 displays an effect VE41 like flare around the virtual display surface VD on the basis of the color information regarding stereo content C41 as illustrated in FIG. 14, for example. The color of the effect VE41 may be designated on the basis of the color information regarding the stereo content C41, and may be a color close to the color of the stereo content. C41 or a color that can be seen as if joined to the stereo content C41. For example, for example a primary background color of the stereo content C41, an illumination light color estimated from the stereo content C41, the color of an edge portion of the stereo content C41, or the like may be used as the color of the effect VE41).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Shimada/Takanashi to incorporate the teachings of Yokoyama, and apply the color information regarding stereo content into the Shimada/Takanashi’s teachings in order the video generation unit colors a plane of the GUI under the cursor.
Doing so would suppress loss of stereoscopic feeling or the occurrence of sickness.
10. Claim 16 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Shimada in view of Mereu et al. (“Mereu”) [US-11,199,940-B1]
Regarding claim 16, Shimada discloses the information processing apparatus according to claim 1, and does not explicitly disclose, but Mereu discloses wherein the video generation unit generates a video in which a cross-sectional portion of the 3D object along a plane of the GUI is highlighted (Mereu- col 4, line 29, at least discloses a figure may be a cross section of a part of the 3D object by the canvas plane; Fig. 3A and col 7, lines 19-26, at least disclose the user may select a specific plane (side) of the reference cube using an input device 330, such as a mouse, a keyboard, and the like. For example, as shown, the user may select an L base plane (the “Left” plane, or the xy plane). Responsive to the user's selection, the L base plane may be highlighted (e.g., by changing its color, shading, or by any other means); Fig. 4D and col 9, lines 40-42, at least disclose the user may select a canvas surface by pointing (430) to a desired side of the reference cube 420 (optionally, the selected side may be highlighted—e.g., shaded in FIG. 4D); col 10, lines 54-57, at least discloses the user may select a canvas surface by pointing (530) to a desired plane of the reference cube 520 (optionally, the selected side may be highlighted—e.g., shaded in FIG. 5C), select a drawing tool 540, and add a drawing 550 (a circle projected as ellipse is shown for concreteness) to the selected canvas).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Shimada to incorporate the teachings of Mereu, and apply the base plane may be highlighted into the Shimada’s teachings in order the video generation unit generates a video in which a cross-sectional portion of the 3D object along a plane of the GUI is highlighted.
Doing so would allow rotation of 3D objects for better visualization of the objects and improved efficiency of image development.
11. Claims 17-18 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Shimada in view of Yokoyama et al. (“Yokoyama”) [US-11,064,176 -B1]
Regarding claim 17, Shimada discloses the information processing apparatus according to claim 1, and does not explicitly disclose, but Yokoyama discloses wherein the video generation unit generates a stereoscopic video by binocular parallax (Yokoyama- col 3, lines 54-60, at least discloses So-called stereo content (an example of a stereoscopic image) including a left-eye image and a right-eye image shifted in the horizontal direction is displayed so as to be observed by the user's left eye and right eye, respectively. The user can perceive the depth owing to binocular parallax. (sometimes simply referred to as parallax), which is a shift between the left-eye image and the right-eye image; col 13, lines 37-44, at least discloses In a case where the background of the stereo content displayed on the virtual display surface VD is flat, there are few clues to binocular parallax, and it is difficult for the user to feel the parallax change in such a region; accordingly, it is perceived that a plane exists in the space, and there is a possibility that the sense of depth of the stereo content is impaired).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Shimada to incorporate the teachings of Yokoyama, and apply the binocular parallax into the Shimada’s teachings in order the video generation unit generates a stereoscopic video by binocular parallax.
Doing so would suppress loss of stereoscopic feeling or the occurrence of sickness.
Regarding claim 18, Shimada discloses the information processing apparatus according to claim 1, and does not explicitly disclose, but Yokoyama discloses wherein the video generation unit generates a video on a basis of tracking of a viewpoint position of the user (Yokoyama- col 2, lines 5-21, at least discloses a stereoscopic image is displayed on a virtual display surface arranged in a space, in which an arrangement of the virtual display surface in the space is controlled on the basis of a position of a viewpoint of a user […] a display control function that controls display of a display unit such that a stereoscopic image is displayed on a virtual display surface arranged in a space, in which the display control function controls an arrangement of the virtual display surface in the space on the basis of a position of a viewpoint of a user; col 4, line 61 to col 5, line 2, at least discloses a sensor for detecting the position of the viewpoint of the user. The sensor unit 30 may by itself detect, the position of the viewpoint of the user and output information regarding the position of the viewpoint of the user to the display control unit 10, or may output information for detecting the position of the viewpoint of the user to the display control unit 10; col 16, lines 15-20, at least discloses the position of the user's viewpoint provided from the sensor unit 30. In addition, the arrangement control unit 12 implements arrangement control as in the third display control example on the basis of the parallax range (an example of parallax information) detected by the parallax detection unit 11).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Shimada to incorporate the teachings of Yokoyama, and apply detecting the position of the viewpoint of the user into the Shimada’s teachings in order the video generation unit generates a video on a basis of tracking of a viewpoint position of the user.
Doing so would suppress loss of stereoscopic feeling or the occurrence of sickness.
Conclusion
12. The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. They are as recited in the attached PTO-892 form.
13. Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to MICHAEL LE whose telephone number is (571)272-5330. The examiner can normally be reached 9am-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, Kent Chang can be reached at (571) 272-7667. 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.
/MICHAEL LE/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2614
Prosecution Insights