DETAILED ACTION
Status of the Application
1. Applicant’s Preliminary Amendment to the Claims filed July 7, 2025 are received and entered.
2. Claims 1 – 5 and 7 are amended. Claims 1 – 7 are pending and are under examination in this action.
3. The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
4. 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.
5. Claims 1 – 2 and 5 – 7 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) as being anticipated by Singh (U.S. Pub. 2024/0214454).
Regarding claim 1, Singh teaches: a context prediction device (FIG. 6; paragraph [0080]; user device 601) comprising:
at least one memory configured to store instructions (FIG. 6; paragraph [0081]; storage 608 [memory] stores instructions for the SIMS (social inclusivity monitoring system) which corresponds to the functions and operations performed as described below); and
at least one processor configured to execute the instructions (FIG. 6; paragraph [0081]; control circuitry 604 [processor] executes instructions stored in storage 608 [memory]) to:
acquire state information regarding a plurality of avatars and a plurality of virtual objects (FIG. 4B; paragraphs [0027], [0044], [0104]; a plurality of avatars 402, 406, and 408, may be present in an XR environment 403. The avatars can interact with objects or other avatars in the XR environment 403. In order to interact with objects, the relative location [state information] of the objects and avatar(s) is necessarily required, i.e., inherent. Additionally, the body posture / language [state information] of a user, and thus of their avatar, is also monitored / acquired);
acquire motion information regarding the plurality of avatars and the plurality of virtual objects by user operations (FIG. 4B; paragraphs [0044], [0065]; real-world movements and actions [motion information] of a user may be detected which causes corresponding avatar(s) to mimic such real-world movements and actions. Objects with which a user may interact may be virtual objects that can be moved, such as a virtual lawnmower. In order for user’s avatars to interact with such virtual objects, the tracking of movement thereof is necessarily required, i.e., inherent);
recognize behaviors of the plurality of avatars based on the state information and the motion information (FIG. 4B; Table 1; paragraph [0027]; the “state information” and “motion information” are used to determine a particular behavior performed by the user and mimicked by the user’s avatar. Specific examples including a first behavior “transition to open body language” and a second behavior of “transition to closed body language”. These behaviors are recognized based on a combination of state information [body language] and motion information [transition]); and
predict contexts regarding the behaviors of the plurality of avatars based on the state information, the motion information, and the behaviors of the plurality of avatars (FIG. 4B; Table 1; paragraph [0027]; behaviors are determined [predicted] to correspond to a positive or negative interaction [context]. This is determined [predicted] based on the underlying “state information” and “motion information” of each determined behavior of each avatar in the XR environment).
Regarding claim 6, this claim includes method recitations that are identical in scope to the operational and functional configurations of the device of claim 1. Accordingly, this claim is rejected for at least the same reasons set forth above with regard to claim 1. A duplication of the above rejection is not included in this Office Action for the purpose or brevity.
Regarding claim 7, Singh teaches: a non-transitory computer readable recording medium recording a program for causing a computer to execute processing (paragraph [0082]; the instructions for performing any disclosed operations or functions of the SIMS may be encoded on a non-transitory computer readable media, such as storage 608, and execute by control circuitry 604).
This claim includes executable operations that are identical in scope to the operational and functional configurations of the device of claim 1. Accordingly, this claim is rejected for at least the same reasons set forth above with regard to claim 1. A duplication of the above rejection is not included in this Office Action for the purpose or brevity.
Regarding claim 2, Singh teaches: wherein the at least one processor acquires multimodal information from a user (paragraph [0049]; a user’s behavior is determined by monitoring and analyzing audio, body posture, body language, gestures, actions, etc. Since multiple factors regarding a user are monitored and analyzed, the information obtained by the processer regarding the user is multimodal information),
wherein the at least one processor predicts the contexts regarding the behaviors of the plurality of avatars based on the state information, the motion information, the behaviors of the plurality of avatars, and the multimodal information (FIG. 4B; Table 1; paragraph [0027]; as set forth above, determined [predicted] behaviors are based on the underlying “state information” and “motion information”, which is determined using multimodal information set forth above).
Regarding claim 5, Singh teaches: wherein the at least one processor estimates a state or an emotion of a user based on the content of the context and reflects the state or the emotion of the user in an avatar (Table 1; paragraph [0027], [0070]; as set forth above with regard to claim 1, behaviors are determined [predicted] to correspond to a positive or negative interaction [context]. These behaviors and corresponding interactions [contexts] may include a user’s facial expressions. For example, a behavior of “smiling” may correspond to an estimated “happy” or positive state and thus a positive interaction [context]. Conversely, a behavior of “scowling” may be correspond to an estimated “upset” or negative state and thus a negative interaction [context]. The behavior of the avatar may mimic that of the user, including providing corresponding facial expressions such as “smiling” or “scowling”).
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
6. 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.
7. Claims 3 and 4 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Singh, as applied to claim 2 above, in further view of Maini (U.S. Pub. 2022/0053165).
Regarding claim 3, Singh teaches: wherein the at least one processor determines whether a content of the context is positive or negative (FIG. 4B; Table 1; paragraph [0027]; behaviors are determined [predicted] to correspond to a positive or negative interaction [context]. For example, the first behavior “transition to open body language” is a positive interaction while a second behavior of “transition to closed body language” is a negative interaction).
Singh fails to explicitly disclose: wherein the at least one processor performs notification to a system administrator and an avatar that has performed a negative behavior in a case where the content of the context is negative.
However, in a related field of environment, Maini discloses displaying a plurality of users in a virtual collaboration environment (Abstract).
With regard to claim 3, Maini teaches: wherein the at least one processor performs notification to a system administrator and an avatar that has performed a negative behavior in a case where the content of the context is negative (Table 3; paragraphs [0033], [0053]; moderator client application 211 allows a moderator [system admin] as to the particular attention level or facial expression of participating users. For example, if a user is distracted [negative behavior], the moderator [system admin] is alerted. Additionally, if a user has an angry facial expression [negative behavior], their name is displayed dark red to the moderator [system admin]).
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of Applicant’s claimed invention to combine the known teachings of Singh and Maini to yield predictable results. More specifically, the teachings of a system that monitors a user’s behavior to determine positive or negative interactions in an XR environment, as taught by Singh, are known. Additionally, the teachings of a system that monitors a user’s attention level and facial expressions to alert a moderator [system admin] of a negative interaction, as taught by Maini, are known as well. The combination of the known teachings of Singh and Maini would yield the predictable results of a system that monitors a user’s behavior to determine positive or negative interactions in an XR environment where a moderator [system admin] receives alerts in response to detected negative interactions. Such a combination requires nothing more than incorporating the alert of a moderator [system admin] with regard to negative interactions, as taught by Maini, into the system of Singh. This provides more oversight in Singh to behaviors that have a negative context. Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of Applicant’s claimed invention to combine the known teachings of Singh and Maini to yield the aforementioned predictable results.
Regarding claim 4, Singh teaches: wherein the at least one processor gives an incentive to an avatar that has performed a positive behavior in a case where the content of the context is positive (FIG. 4B; Table 1; paragraph [0027]; a positive interaction receives a positive score which is type of incentive to pursue positive interactions).
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to RYAN A LUBIT whose telephone number is (571)270-3389. The examiner can normally be reached M - F, ~6am - 3pm.
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, Temesghen Ghebretinsae can be reached at 571-272-3017. 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.
/RYAN A LUBIT/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2626
Prosecution Insights