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 .
Patent Eligibility (not a rejection)
Examiner finds ”and a received user interaction instruction, wherein the post-interaction spatial constraint is configured to drive visualization elements to balance to a new spatial layout” is a non-judicial exception element that, when read as whole with the remaining elements of claim 1, reflect an improvement disclosed in the specification in Figs. 4-5. As such, claims 1-18 are directed to patent eligible subject matter.
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)(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.
Claim(s) 1-3 and 10-12 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Kristiansen Content-Driven Layout for Visualization Design 31 Oct 2022.
Claim Element
Reference: Kristiansen Content-Driven Layout for Visualization Design
1. A method for adding a direct interaction to a static visualization, comprising following steps: S1: deconstructing a common visualization spatial layout into an atomic spatial constraint
p. 4 Fig. 1:
Here we see the steps for generating a set of attractive forces from an initial grid layout (a), which corresponds to a
grid layout hierarchy (b). From this hierarchy (b) we infer all adjacent elements in the grid layout (a) using Algorithm 1, and
store them as a neighborhood graph (c). This neighborhood graph is again used to determine which elements are central in the
original layout (a). In this case, elements B and I are inferred to be central nodes (d). This results in attractive forces directed
only towards B and I, indicated by the direction of the arrows along the links (d).
(Examiner finds attractive force teaches an atomic spatial constraint; see also abstract (collision detection));
Fig. 4 2nd row
S2: taking an initial chart as input
page 4 and Fig. 1(a) (“Figure 1: Here we see the steps for generating a set of attractive forces from an initial grid layout (a)”);
(Examiner finds initial grid layout teaches initial chart)
Fig. 4 2nd row
and inferring an original spatial constraint of the common visualization spatial layout from an existing visualization chart
p. 4 Fig. 1:
Here we see the steps for generating a set of attractive forces from an initial grid layout (a), which corresponds to a
grid layout hierarchy (b). From this hierarchy (b) we infer all adjacent elements in the grid layout (a) using Algorithm 1, and
store them as a neighborhood graph (c). This neighborhood graph is again used to determine which elements are central in the
original layout (a). In this case, elements B and I are inferred to be central nodes (d). This results in attractive forces directed
only towards B and I, indicated by the direction of the arrows along the links (d).
(Examiner finds inferred attractive force teaches an inferred spatial constraint);
Fig. 4 2nd row (spatial constraint also includes the placement of white space and/or placement of an image)
and S3: calculating a post-interaction spatial constraint based on the inferred original spatial constraint of the common visualization spatial layout
p. 6
Our final case study considers the optimization of white space under two changing conditions in a visualization: (1) changing the
accompanying image element in a visualization and (2) changing the scales of the axes of a plot that leads to a different distribution of white space.
p. 7
A complication to this brief is that the plot
scales can be adjusted to zoom in to different regions of the plot,
which requires a different layout for the map element depending
on the changing white space.
. . .,
Our content-driven approach enables the country map element to slide in near the data point of interest to reduce white space in
the visualization, and to reduce the number of places the user must focus their attention on the visualization. In the first scenario
at the bottom left two images of Figure 4, the differently-shaped country maps of China and Japan each are able to position efficiently
in the white space in the lower right of the bubble plot. When adjusting the plot scales to show only the healthiest and wealthiest
countries (bottom rightmost), our algorithm positions the Japan
map element more optimally in the upper right of the bubble plot. This case study thus demonstrates our algorithm’s capabilities both
in conditions of (1) changing elements and (2) changing white space
(interaction is the changing of the image and/or changing of the scales of the axes )
“and a received user interaction instruction, wherein the post-interaction spatial constraint is configured to drive visualization elements to balance to a new spatial layout”
Fig. 4 last row
p. 7
A complication to this brief is that the plot
scales can be adjusted to zoom in to different regions of the plot,
which requires a different layout for the map element depending
on the changing white space.
. . .,
Our content-driven approach enables the country map element to slide in near the data point of interest to reduce white space in
the visualization, and to reduce the number of places the user must focus their attention on the visualization. In the first scenario
at the bottom left two images of Figure 4, the differently-shaped country maps of China and Japan each are able to position efficiently
in the white space in the lower right of the bubble plot. When adjusting the plot scales to show only the healthiest and wealthiest
countries (bottom rightmost), our algorithm positions the Japan map element more optimally in the upper right of the bubble plot. This case study thus demonstrates our algorithm’s capabilities both
in conditions of (1) changing elements and (2) changing white space
(Visualization is balanced in that white space is balanced and the placement of the image is balanced; new spatial layout is any of the layouts in Fig. 4 last row)
Claim 10 is rejected for the reasons given above for claim 1.
2. (Currently Amended) [Claim 2] The method according to claim 1, wherein in the step S1, the atomic spatial constraint comprises a support force
Examiner finds Fig. 4 inherently illustrates a support force; See Examiner added annotation below
PNG
media_image1.png
460
1513
media_image1.png
Greyscale
and an attraction force from an external environment of elements,
Examiner finds Fig. 4 inherently illustrates an attraction force from an external environment of elements,; See Examiner added annotation below
PNG
media_image2.png
451
1532
media_image2.png
Greyscale
a collision force between the elements
Abstract
Furthermore, we utilize an image based
approach for collision detection and avoidance that works
accurately for highly irregular shapes. We demonstrate the utility
of our approach with three case studies;
p. 4 section 3.4 first paragraph
and a fixed force within the elements.
p. 4 section 3.4 last paragraph
. . it is often desirable to have a certain margin M around the content of an element. This requires correspondingly enlarging
the bounding rectangle of an element to avoid issues when the content is close to its borders
(Examiner finds margin M is a fixed force within the elements);
Claim 11 is rejected for the same reason given above for claim 2.
3. (Currently Amended) [The method for adding the direct interaction to the static visualization according to claim 2, wherein the step S2 comprises: inferring the original spatial constraint based on an element type and spatial position of the existing visualization chart;
(element type is an image; spatial position of image is used to infer spatial constraint—See Fig. 4; and p. 7 left column last para);
p. 4 section 3.4 1st paragraph (element determined by type of content);
spatial constraint such as attraction based on position—see Fig. 1 elements B and I);
and the step S2 comprises following sub-steps: S21:extracting a spatial constraint control point from the existing visualization chart;
Spatial constraint includes attraction see Fig. 1 elements B and I
S22: applying a fixed constraint to the extracted spatial constraint control point;
. 4 section 3.4 last paragraph
. . it is often desirable to have a certain margin M around the content of an element. This requires correspondingly enlarging
the bounding rectangle of an element to avoid issues when the content is close to its borders
(Examiner finds margin M is a fixed constraint );
S23: identifying a baseline axis based on the spatial constraint control point
p. 7 Fig. 4 teaches a baseline X axis and baseline Y axis;
S24: applying the support force and the attraction force to the visualization elements based on the identified baseline axis:
p. 7 Fig. 4 inherently teaches a support and attraction force based on the axis; See claim 2 above and associated screen captures
S25 determining whether a collision relationship exists;
abstract
Furthermore, we utilize an image based
approach for collision detection and avoidance that works
accurately for highly irregular shapes. We demonstrate the utility
of our approach with three case studies;
p. 4 section 3.4 first paragraph
and S26: applying a collision constraint if-when the collision relationship exists.
Abstract
Furthermore, we utilize an image based
approach for collision detection and avoidance that works
accurately for highly irregular shapes. We demonstrate the utility
of our approach with three case studies;
p. 4 section 3.4 first paragraph
Claim 12 is rejected for the same reason given above for claim 4.
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) 4 and 13 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kristiansen as applied to claim 3 and claim 12 above and further in view of , Saket, Visualization by Demonstration: An Interaction Paradigm for Visual Data Exploration, 2017.
Claim Element
Reference: Kristiansen Content-Driven Layout for Visualization Design teaches Oct 2022
4. (Currently Amended) The method for adding the direct interaction to the static visualization according to claim 3, wherein in the step S3, the received user interaction instruction comprises a direct interaction with the visualization elements
p. 6 section 5.3
Our final case study considers the optimization of white space under two changing conditions in a visualization: (1) changing the accompanying image element in a visualization and (2) changing the scales of the axes of a plot that leads to a different distribution of white space.
a direct interaction with a visualization axis,
p. 6 section 5.3
Our final case study considers the optimization of white space under two changing conditions in a visualization: (1) changing the accompanying image element in a visualization and (2) changing the scales of the axes of a plot that leads to a different distribution of white space.
and a direct interaction with a visualization constraint.
It appears Kristiansen fails to teach and a direct interaction with a visualization constraint.
However, Saket, Visualization by Demonstration: An Interaction Paradigm for Visual Data Exploration, 2017 teaches “a direct interaction with a visualization constraint” on p. 338
Recoloring: Users can recolor a data point by right clicking on it and picking a color from the pop-up menu. VisExemplar currently supports three colors: red, blue, and green (default
(Examiner finds the color of visual component is a visualization constraint).
Saket and Kristiansen are analogous art because they are from the same field of endeavor as the claimed invention.
It would have been obvious to one skilled in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify the received user interaction instructions in Kristiansen to include “a direct interaction with a visualization constraint.”
The motivation would have been the following:
The paradigm advocates for decreasing the level of formalism and fundamental knowledge required for visual data exploration. Instead of specifying which visualization technique, mappings, and parameters to generate and update a visualization, Visualization by Demonstration allows users to provide visual demonstrations of incremental changes to the visual representation from which transformations are recommended. Using these demonstrations, the system estimates the intentions and generates potential transformations (e.g., a bar chart, mapping color to a data attribute). This iterative process allows users to visually explore their data without requiring direct visualization specification.
Saket p. 332.
Claim 13 is rejected for the same reason given above for claim 4.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 5-9 and 14-18 objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, but would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
Conclusion
The following prior art is relevant to Applicant’s specification:
US 20100162152 A1; Saket, Investigating Direct Manipulation of Graphical Encodings as a Method for User Interaction, 2020
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ALBERT M PHILLIPS, III whose telephone number is (571)270-3256. The examiner can normally be reached 10a-6:30pm EST M-F.
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, Ann J Lo can be reached at (571) 272-9767. 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.
/ALBERT M PHILLIPS, III/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2159
Prosecution Insights