DETAILED ACTION
This Office Action is sent in response to Applicant's Communication received 04/08/2025 for 19173485. Claims 1-25 are presented.
Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status
The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis 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.
Drawings
The drawings are objected to under 37 CFR 1.83(a). The drawings must show every feature of the invention specified in the claims. Therefore, the "at a computing system including a first display generation component, a second display generation component, and one or more input devices, wherein the first display generation component and the second display generation component are enclosed in a first housing: [] while displaying the computer-generated environment via the first display generation component, displaying status information corresponding to the computing system via the second display generation component, including concurrently displaying: a visual representation of a portion of a user of the computing system who is in a position to view the computer-generated environment via the first display generation component, and one or more graphical elements that provide a visual indication of content in the computer-generated environment; … in response to detecting the respective event: changing a level of immersion of the computer-generated environment displayed via the first display generation component; and changing the status information that is displayed via the second display generation component, including changing an appearance of the visual representation of the portion of the user of the computing system" (claims 1, 25); "a first display generation component; a second display generation component, wherein the first display generation component and the second display generation component are enclosed in a same housing; [] while displaying the computer-generated environment via the first display generation component, displaying status information corresponding to the computing system via the second display generation component, including concurrently displaying: a visual representation of a portion of a user of the computing system who is in a position to view the computer-generated environment via the first display generation component, and one or more graphical elements that provide a visual indication of content in the computer-generated environment; in response to detecting the respective event: changing a level of immersion of the computer-generated environment displayed via the first display generation component; and changing the status information that is displayed via the second display generation component, including changing an appearance of the visual representation of the portion of the user of the computing system" (claim 24); and the method steps as recited in claims 7-13, 16-17, and 19-23 must be shown or the feature(s) canceled from the claim(s). No new matter should be entered.
Corrected drawing sheets in compliance with 37 CFR 1.121(d) are required in reply to the Office action to avoid abandonment of the application. Any amended replacement drawing sheet should include all of the figures appearing on the immediate prior version of the sheet, even if only one figure is being amended. The figure or figure number of an amended drawing should not be labeled as “amended.” If a drawing figure is to be canceled, the appropriate figure must be removed from the replacement sheet, and where necessary, the remaining figures must be renumbered and appropriate changes made to the brief description of the several views of the drawings for consistency. Additional replacement sheets may be necessary to show the renumbering of the remaining figures. Each drawing sheet submitted after the filing date of an application must be labeled in the top margin as either “Replacement Sheet” or “New Sheet” pursuant to 37 CFR 1.121(d). If the changes are not accepted by the examiner, the applicant will be notified and informed of any required corrective action in the next Office action. The objection to the drawings will not be held in abeyance.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(b):
(b) CONCLUSION.—The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention.
Claim 16 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention.
Claim 16 recites the limitation "the value of which" which is unclear as the term "the value" lacks antecedent basis and the term "which" is unclear if it refers to "the one or more graphical elements", "a visual indication", "content", or "the computer-generated environment" as recited in the instant claim.
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 therefor, subject to the conditions and requirements of this title.
Claim 20 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 101 because the claimed invention is directed to non-statutory subject matter.
As per claim 20, the claim(s) is/are rejected because Applicant has provided evidence that Applicant intends the term "computer readable storage medium" to include non-statutory matter and does/do not fall within at least one of the four categories of patent eligible subject matter. Applicant describes a computer-readable storage medium as including open ended language and thus it is reasonable to interpret it to include all possible media, including non-statutory media [Specification, para 0065]. The words "storage" and/or "medium" are insufficient to convey only statutory embodiments to one of ordinary skill in the art absent an explicit and deliberate limiting definition or clear differentiation between storage media and transitory media in the disclosure.
As such, the claim(s) is/are drawn to a form of energy. Energy is not one of the four categories of invention and therefore this/these claim(s) is/are not statutory. Energy is not a series of steps or acts and thus is not a process. Energy is not a physical article or object and as such is not a machine or manufacture. Energy is not a combination of substances and therefore not a composition of matter. Applicants are advised to insert the phrase "non-transitory" prior to "computer readable storage medium" to overcome rejection of claims 20 under 35 U.S.C. 101.
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.
The factual inquiries set forth in Graham v. John Deere Co., 383 U.S. 1, 148 USPQ 459 (1966), that are applied for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized as follows:
1. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art.
2. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue.
3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art.
4. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness.
Claims 1-6, 10-12, and 14-25 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Imoto et al. (US 20160018655 A1) in view of Harviainen et al. (US 20210240279 A1).
As to claim 1, Imoto discloses a method, including:
at a computing system including a first display generation component, a second display generation component, and one or more input devices, wherein the first display generation component and the second display generation component are enclosed in a first housing [Figs. 8A-8B, para 0147-0148, device with inner display screen (read: first display generation component), outer display screen (read: second display generation component), and sensor units (read: input devices) in main body part (read: first housing)]:
displaying, via the first display generation component, a computer-generated environment [Figs. 4A-4E, 8A-8B, para 0110-0113, 0149, 0185, inner display screen displays content image information (read: computer-generated environment)];
while displaying the computer-generated environment via the first display generation component, displaying status information corresponding to the computing system via the second display generation component [Figs. 13-14, para 0147-0148, 0192-0194, outer display screen displays information indicating state of device user], including … displaying:
a visual representation of a portion of a user of the computing system who is in a position to view the computer-generated environment via the first display generation component [Fig. 14, para 0192-0193, displayed information includes pattern (read: graphical element) resembling eyes (read: portion) of device user viewing content image displayed on inner display screen], and
one or more graphical elements … [para 0173, outer display screen displays object];
while displaying the computer-generated environment via the first display generation component and displaying the status information via the second display generation component, detecting a respective event [Figs. 4B-4D, 14, para 0157-0158, 0192-0194, determine change in user degree of awareness while inner display screen displays content image information and outer display screen displays information indicating state]; and
in response to detecting the respective event:
changing a level of immersion of the computer-generated environment displayed via the first display generation component [Fig. 14, para 0162-0163, 0192-0194, inner display screen changes presentation state (read: level of immersion) from displaying content image information to outside image]; and
changing the status information that is displayed via the second display generation component, including changing an appearance of the visual representation of the portion of the user of the computing system [Fig. 14, para 0165, 0167, 0192-0194, outer display screen changes display of pattern resembling eyes of device user based on degree of awareness].
However, Imoto does not specifically disclose one or more graphical elements that provide a visual indication of content in the computer-generated environment.
Harviainen discloses while displaying the computer-generated environment via the first display generation component, displaying status information corresponding to the computing system via the second display generation component [Figs. 7A-7B, para 0129, 0149-0150, primary display device (read: first display generation component) displays content (read: computer-generated environment) while chained display device (read: second display generation component) displays environment (read: status information) chained to primary display content on primary device], including concurrently displaying:
position to view the computer-generated environment via the first display generation component [Figs. 7A-7B, para 0129, 0149-0150, chained display environment displays avatar of primary user viewing content on primary display device], and
one or more graphical elements that provide a visual indication of content in the computer-generated environment [Figs. 7A-7B, para 0129, 0149-0150, chained display environment additionally displays information (read: graphical elements) indicating content on primary display device].
Imoto and Harviainen are analogous art to the claimed invention being from a similar field of endeavor of computer-generated environments. Thus, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the displayed status information and graphical objects as disclosed by Imoto with displaying status information concurrently displaying a visual representation of a portion of a user and graphical elements providing a visual indication of content in a computer-generated environment as disclosed by Harviainen with a reasonable expectation of success.
One of ordinary skill in the art would be motivated to modify Imoto as described above to facilitate user communication and content monitoring [Harviainen, para 0124].
As to claim 2, Imoto discloses the method of claim 1, wherein: the computing system is configured to display the computer-generated environment with at least a first level of immersion, a second level of immersion, and a third level of immersion [Figs. 4A-4B, 14, para 0109-0111, 0192-0194, inner display screen displays notification states including displaying information of content image (read: second level), content image superimposed with outside image (read: first level), and outside image (read: third level)].
As to claim 3, Imoto discloses the method of claim 2, wherein changing the level of immersion of the computer-generated environment displayed via the first display generation component [Fig. 14, para 0162-0163, 0192-0194, inner display screen changes presentation state of displaying content image information] in response to detecting the respective event.
Note one of ordinary skill in the art would recognize that the broadest reasonable interpretation of a method (or process) claim having contingent limitations requires only those steps that must be performed and does not include steps that are not required to be performed because the condition(s) precedent are not met, thus the claim scope does not require the contingent limitations "switching from displaying the computer-generated environment with the second level of immersion to displaying the computer-generated environment with the first level of immersion" or "switching from displaying the computer-generated environment with the second level of immersion to displaying the computer-generated environment with the third level of immersion" to be performed if the precedent conditions "in accordance with a determination that the respective event is an event that meets first criteria" or "in accordance with a determination that the respective event is an event that meets second criteria different from the first criteria" are not met, respectively [see MPEP 2111.04(II)].
Nevertheless, in an effort to advance compact prosecution, Imoto teaches wherein changing the level of immersion of the computer-generated environment displayed via the first display generation component in response to detecting the respective event includes:
in accordance with a determination that the respective event is an event that meets first criteria, switching from displaying the computer-generated environment with the second level of immersion to displaying the computer-generated environment with the first level of immersion [Figs. 4B, 14, para 0110-0111, 0191-0193, determine user awareness as low (read: first criteria) and switch inner screen display from displaying content image to content image superimposed with outside image]; and
in accordance with a determination that the respective event is an event that meets second criteria different from the first criteria, switching from displaying the computer-generated environment with the second level of immersion to displaying the computer-generated environment with the third level of immersion [Figs. 4B-4D, 14, para 0110-0111, 0157-0158, 0192-0194, determine user awareness as high (read: second criteria) and switch inner screen display from displaying content image to outside image].
As to claim 4, Imoto discloses the method of claim 1, wherein:
changing the level of immersion of the computer-generated environment displayed via the first display generation component includes switching from displaying the computer-generated environment with a second level of immersion to displaying the computer-generated environment with a first level of immersion, wherein the computer-generated environment displayed with the first level of immersion provides a view of a physical environment with less than a threshold amount of computer-generated content [Figs. 4A-4B, 14, para 0109-0111, 0162-0163, 0192-0194, inner display screen changes presentation state from displaying content image information (read: second level) to outside image (read: first level), where inner display screen displays outside image with image of outside situation (read: view of physical environment) without any (read: threshold amount) content image]; and
changing the status information that is displayed via the second display generation component includes: in conjunction with switching from displaying the computer-generated environment with the second level of immersion to displaying the computer-generated environment with the first level of immersion, … displaying the visual representation of the portion of the user of the computing system with the one or more graphical elements … [Fig. 14, para 0162-0165, 0167, 0173, 0192-0194, outer display screen changes displayed pattern resembling user eyes and object based on inner display screen changing presentation state of displayed content image information to outside image].
However, Imoto does not specifically disclose switching from displaying the visual representation of the portion of the user of the computing system with the one or more graphical elements that provide the visual indication of the content in the computer-generated environment to displaying the visual representation of the portion of the user without the one or more graphical elements.
Harviainen discloses changing the status information that is displayed via the second display generation component includes: in conjunction with switching from displaying the computer-generated environment with the second level of immersion to displaying the computer-generated environment with the first level of immersion, switching from displaying the visual representation of the portion of the user of the computing system with the one or more graphical elements that provide the visual indication of the content in the computer-generated environment to displaying the visual representation of the portion of the user without the one or more graphical elements [Figs. 6A-6B, 7A-7B, 11-12, para 0124, 0129, 0137, 0149-0150, 0170-0172, transition chained display environment (read: status information) of chained display device (read: second display generation component) from displaying one immersiveness level (read: second level) displaying avatar (read: visual representation) of primary device user in addition to information (read: graphical elements) about content in primary display environment (read: computer-generated environment) to another (read: first level) alternatively displaying avatar of primary user while primary display environment changes immersiveness levels].
Imoto and Harviainen are analogous art to the claimed invention being from a similar field of endeavor of computer-generated environments. Thus, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the changed status information as disclosed by Imoto with changing status information including switching display of the visual representation of the portion of the user of the computing system with the one or more graphical elements that provide the visual indication of the content in the computer-generated environment to displaying the visual representation of the portion of the user without the graphical elements as disclosed by Harviainen with a reasonable expectation of success.
One of ordinary skill in the art would be motivated to modify Imoto as described above to facilitate content monitoring [Harviainen, para 0124].
As to claim 5, Imoto discloses the method of claim 1.
Note one of ordinary skill in the art would recognize that the broadest reasonable interpretation of a method (or process) claim having contingent limitations requires only those steps that must be performed and does not include steps that are not required to be performed because the condition(s) precedent are not met, thus the claim scope does not require the contingent limitations "wherein the computing system concurrently displays the visual representation of the portion of the user and the one or more graphical elements that provide a visual indication of content in the computer-generated environment" to be performed if the precedent conditions "in accordance with a determination that the computer-generated environment is a mixed reality environment that includes a representation of a physical environment surrounding the first display generation component and at least a threshold amount of virtual objects" are not met, respectively [see MPEP 2111.04(II)].
Nevertheless, in an effort to advance compact prosecution, Imoto teaches the method of claim 1, wherein the computing system concurrently displays the visual representation of the portion of the user and the one or more graphical elements … in accordance with a determination that the computer-generated environment is a mixed reality environment that includes a representation of a physical environment surrounding the first display generation component and at least a threshold amount of virtual objects [Figs. 4A-4B, 14, para 0157-0158, 0173, 0191-0193, outer display screen displays pattern resembling user eyes and object when detecting user awareness and inner display screen displays content information (read: threshold amount of virtual objects) superimposed (read: mixed reality environment) with image of situation (read: representation of physical environment) outside of user wearing device with inner display screen].
However, Imoto does not specifically disclose the one or more graphical elements that provide a visual indication of content in the computer-generated environment.
Harviainen discloses wherein the computing system concurrently displays the visual representation of the portion of the user and the one or more graphical elements that provide a visual indication of content in the computer-generated environment [Figs. 7A-7B, para 0129, 0149-0150, chained display device displays environment including avatar of primary user in addition to information indicating content on primary display device].
Imoto and Harviainen are analogous art to the claimed invention being from a similar field of endeavor of computer-generated environments. Thus, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the graphical elements as disclosed by Imoto with the concurrently displaying the visual representation of the portion of the user and the one or more graphical elements that provide a visual indication of content in the computer-generated environment as disclosed by Harviainen with a reasonable expectation of success.
One of ordinary skill in the art would be motivated to modify Imoto as described above to facilitate content monitoring [Harviainen, para 0124].
As to claim 6, Imoto discloses the method of claim 1, wherein:
changing the level of immersion of the computer-generated environment displayed via the first display generation component includes switching from displaying the computer-generated environment with a second level of immersion to displaying the computer- generated environment with a third level of immersion, wherein the computer-generated environment displayed with the third level of immersion provides a virtual environment with less than a threshold amount of representation of a physical environment [Figs. 4A-4B, 14, para 0109-0111, 0162-0163, 0192-0194, inner display screen changes presentation state from displaying content image information (read: second level) to content image superimposed (read: third level) with outside image, where screen displays content image (read: virtual environment) superimposed with image of outside situation (read: representation of physical environment) on a partial area of entire screen (read: threshold amount)]; and
changing the status information that is displayed via the second display generation component includes: in conjunction with switching from displaying the computer-generated environment with the second level of immersion to displaying the computer-generated environment with the third level of immersion, … displaying the visual representation of the portion of the user of the computing system with the one or more graphical elements … [Fig. 14, para 0162-0165, 0167, 0173, 0192-0194, outer display screen changes displayed pattern resembling user eyes and object based on inner display screen changing presentation state of displayed content image information to content image superimposed with outside image].
However, Imoto does not specifically disclose switching from displaying the visual representation of the portion of the user of the computing system with the one or more graphical elements that provide the visual indication of the content in the computer-generated environment to displaying the one or more graphical elements without the visual representation of the portion of the user.
Harviainen discloses changing the status information that is displayed via the second display generation component includes: in conjunction with switching from displaying the computer-generated environment with the second level of immersion to displaying the computer-generated environment with the third level of immersion, switching from displaying the visual representation of the portion of the user of the computing system with the one or more graphical elements that provide the visual indication of the content in the computer-generated environment to displaying the one or more graphical elements without the visual representation of the portion of the user [Figs. 6A-6B, 7A-7B, 11-12, para 0124, 0129, 0137, 0149-0150, 0170-0172, transition chained display environment (read: status information) of chained display device (read: second display generation component) from displaying one immersiveness level (read: second level) displaying avatar (read: visual representation) of primary device user in addition to information (read: graphical elements) about content in primary display environment (read: computer-generated environment) to another (read: third level) displaying information about content while primary display environment changes immersiveness levels].
Imoto and Harviainen are analogous art to the claimed invention being from a similar field of endeavor of computer-generated environments. Thus, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the changed status information as disclosed by Imoto with changing status information including switching from displaying the visual representation of the portion of the user with the one or more graphical elements that provide the visual indication of the content in the computer-generated environment to displaying the one or more graphical elements without the visual representation of the portion of the user as disclosed by Harviainen with a reasonable expectation of success.
One of ordinary skill in the art would be motivated to modify Imoto as described above to facilitate content monitoring [Harviainen, para 0124].
As to claim 10, Imoto discloses the method of claim 1, including:
while displaying the computer-generated environment via the first display generation component, detecting a second user request to activate a Do-Not-Disturb (DND) mode of the computing system [Fig. 6A, para 0126-0127, 0130-0131, 0179-0180, user sets setting prohibiting disturbances while at work with inner display screen displaying content image]; and
in response to detecting the second user request, displaying a visual indicator via the second display generation component to indicate that the DND mode is active [Fig. 10B, para 0179-0180, outer display screen displays text (read: visual indicator) indicating prohibition of disturbances according to user setting].
As to claim 11, Imoto discloses the method of claim 10, including:
while the DND mode is active on the computing system, detecting a third respective event that changes a level of immersion of the computer-generated environment displayed via the first display generation component [Figs. 6A-6C, 10B, para 0127, 0130-0131, 0179-0180, detect outside person approaching (read: third respective event) and switch notification state (read: level of immersion) for content image displayed on inner display screen while user is concentrating and prohibiting disturbances]; and
in response to detecting the third respective event and the corresponding change in the level of immersion of the computer-generated environment displayed via the first display generation component, forgoing changing the status information that is displayed via the second display generation component [Fig. 10B, para 0179-0180, outer display screen maintains displayed text when outside person approaches and device switches notification state on inner display screen].
As to claim 12, Imoto discloses the method of claim 1.
However, Imoto does not specifically disclose while displaying the computer-generated environment via the first display generation component, detecting a third user request to activate a parental control mode of the computing system, wherein the parental control mode requires that the one or more graphical elements displayed via the second display generation component have more than a third threshold visibility; and, in response to detecting the third user request: in accordance with a determination that the third user request is received while visibility of the one or more graphical elements that provide a visual indication of content in the computer-generated environment is less than the third threshold visibility corresponding to the parental control mode, increasing the visibility of the one or more graphical elements on the second display generation component above the third threshold visibility corresponding to the parental control mode..
Harviainen discloses while displaying the computer-generated environment via the first display generation component, detecting a third user request to activate a parental control mode of the computing system, wherein the parental control mode requires that the one or more graphical elements displayed via the second display generation component have more than a third threshold visibility [Fig. 7C, para 0112, 0123-0125, 0151-0152, user selects chaining mode for parental monitoring (read: parental control mode) while primary display device (read: first display generation component) displays primary display environment (read: computer-generated environment), where chained display device (read: second display generation component) displays chained display environment (read: graphical element) with immersiveness level (read: third threshold visibility) displaying time-synchronized content in primary display environment].
Note one of ordinary skill in the art would recognize that the broadest reasonable interpretation of a method (or process) claim having contingent limitations requires only those steps that must be performed and does not include steps that are not required to be performed because the condition(s) precedent are not met, thus the claim scope does not require the contingent limitations "increasing the visibility of the one or more graphical elements on the second display generation component above the third threshold visibility corresponding to the parental control mode" to be performed if the precedent conditions "in accordance with a determination that the third user request is received while visibility of the one or more graphical elements that provide a visual indication of content in the computer-generated environment is less than the third threshold visibility corresponding to the parental control mode" are not met, respectively [see MPEP 2111.04(II)].
Nevertheless, in an effort to advance compact prosecution, Harviainen teaches in response to detecting the third user request:
in accordance with a determination that the third user request is received while visibility of the one or more graphical elements that provide a visual indication of content in the computer-generated environment is less than the third threshold visibility corresponding to the parental control mode, increasing the visibility of the one or more graphical elements on the second display generation component above the third threshold visibility corresponding to the parental control mode [Figs. 6A-6B, 7A-7C, 11-12, para 0123-0125, 0129, 0149-0152, transition chained display environment of chained display device from displaying one immersiveness level displaying summary information (read: less than third threshold visibility) of content in primary display environment to another immersiveness level displaying time-synchronized content when user selects chaining mode during initial immersiveness level].
Imoto and Harviainen are analogous art to the claimed invention being from a similar field of endeavor of computer-generated environments. Thus, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the computer-generated environment and graphical elements as disclosed by Imoto with a user request to activate a parental control mode and increasing visibility of graphical elements in accordance with a determination that the third user request is received while visibility of the one or more graphical elements that provide a visual indication of content in the computer-generated environment is less than the third threshold visibility corresponding to the parental control mode as disclosed by Harviainen with a reasonable expectation of success.
One of ordinary skill in the art would be motivated to modify Imoto as described above to facilitate parental content monitoring [Harviainen, para 0124].
As to claim 14, Imoto discloses the method of claim 1, wherein displaying the visual representation of the portion of the user … includes displaying the visual representation of the portion of the user at a first depth … from an external viewpoint of the status information displayed via the second display generation component [Fig. 14, para 0192-0193, displayed information indicating user state with pattern resembling eyes of device user as recognized by approaching user (read: external viewpoint)] but not explicitly wherein concurrently displaying the visual representation of the portion of the user and the one or more graphical elements includes displaying the visual representation of the portion of the user at a first depth and displaying the one or more graphical elements at a second depth, smaller than the first depth, from an external viewpoint of the status information displayed via the second display generation component.
However, Imoto teaches displaying an element at a first depth and displaying another element at a second depth, smaller than the first depth [Fig. 4E, para 0114, display content image at position (read: first depth) and outside image three-dimensionally superimposed at position (read: second depth) toward viewing user] and Harviainen teaches concurrently displaying the visual representation of the portion of the user and the one or more graphical elements includes displaying the visual representation of the portion of the user … and displaying the one or more graphical elements [Figs. 7A-7B, para 0129, 0149-0150, chained display environment displays avatar of primary user in addition to information indicating content on primary display device].
Imoto and Harviainen are analogous art to the claimed invention being from a similar field of endeavor of computer-generated experiences. Thus it would have been obvious to one skilled in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention combine the teachings of Imoto displaying graphical elements at different depths with the teachings of Harviainen concurrently displaying a visual representation of a portion of a user and one or more graphical elements with a reasonable expectation of success to result in wherein concurrently displaying the visual representation of the portion of the user and the one or more graphical elements includes displaying the visual representation of the portion of the user at a first depth and displaying the one or more graphical elements at a second depth, smaller than the first depth, from an external viewpoint of the status information displayed via the second display generation component [see MPEP 2143].
One of ordinary skill in the art would be motivated to apply this teaching to Imoto to facilitate user communication and content monitoring [Harviainen, para 0124].
As to claim 15, Imoto discloses the method of claim 1.
However, Imoto does not specifically disclose wherein the one or more graphical elements that provide a visual indication of content in the computer-generated environment includes at least a progress indicator indicating a progress of the content in the computer-generated environment as displayed via the first display generation component.
Harviainen discloses wherein the one or more graphical elements that provide a visual indication of content in the computer-generated environment includes at least a progress indicator indicating a progress of the content in the computer-generated environment as displayed via the first display generation component [Fig. 7A, para 0129, 0148-0149, chained display environment displays information (read: graphical elements) about playback state (read: progress) of content in augmented reality display environment (read: computer-generated environment) displayed by primary head-mounted device, note progress bar in chained display environment shown in Figure 7A].
Imoto and Harviainen are analogous art to the claimed invention being from a similar field of endeavor of computer-generated environments. Thus, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the displayed graphical elements as disclosed by Imoto with the graphical elements that provide a visual indication of content including at least a progress indicator as disclosed by Harviainen with a reasonable expectation of success.
One of ordinary skill in the art would be motivated to modify Imoto as described above to facilitate content monitoring [Harviainen, para 0124].
As to claim 16, Imoto discloses the method of claim 1.
However, Imoto does not specifically disclose wherein the one or more graphical elements that provide a visual indication of content in the computer-generated environment have a first display property the value of which is based on a value of the first display property of the content in the computer-generated environment.
Harviainen discloses wherein the one or more graphical elements that provide a visual indication of content in the computer-generated environment have a first display property the value of which is based on a value of the first display property of the content in the computer-generated environment [Figs. 7E-7F, para 0134, 0154-0156, chained display environment displays object (read: graphical element) with text (read: value) of augmented content (read: first display property) as shared by content text of object in primary augmented reality display environment (read: computer-generated environment)].
Imoto and Harviainen are analogous art to the claimed invention being from a similar field of endeavor of computer-generated environments. Thus, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the graphical elements as disclosed by Imoto with graphical elements providing a visual indication of content in the computer-generated environment and having a first display property value based on a value of the first display property of the content in the computer-generated environment as disclosed by Harviainen with a reasonable expectation of success.
One of ordinary skill in the art would be motivated to modify Imoto as described above to facilitate content monitoring [Harviainen, para 0124].
As to claim 17, Imoto discloses the method of claim 1.
However, Imoto does not specifically disclose wherein the one or more graphical elements that provide a visual indication of content in the computer-generated environment includes one or more sub-portions of the content of the computer-generated environment.
Harviainen discloses wherein the one or more graphical elements that provide a visual indication of content in the computer-generated environment includes one or more sub-portions of the content of the computer-generated environment [Fig. 7E, para 0127, 0154-0155, chained display environment displays object (read: graphical element) shared from object in primary augmented reality display environment (read: computer-generated environment), where primary display environment shares subset objects of objects displayed in chained display environment].
Imoto and Harviainen are analogous art to the claimed invention being from a similar field of endeavor of computer-generated environments. Thus, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the graphical elements as disclosed by Imoto with the graphical elements that provide a visual indication of content in the computer-generated environment including sub-portions of the content of the computer-generated environment as disclosed by Harviainen with a reasonable expectation of success.
One of ordinary skill in the art would be motivated to modify Imoto as described above to facilitate content monitoring [Harviainen, para 0124].
As to claim 18, Imoto discloses the method of claim 1.
However, Imoto does not specifically disclose wherein the one or more graphical elements that provide a visual indication of content in the computer-generated environment includes metadata identifying the content of the computer-generated environment.
Harviainen discloses wherein the one or more graphical elements that provide a visual indication of content in the computer-generated environment includes metadata identifying the content of the computer-generated environment [Fig. 7A, para 0148-0149, chained display environment displays information (read: graphical elements) about playback state (read: metadata) of content in augmented reality display environment (read: computer-generated environment) displayed by primary head-mounted device].
Imoto and Harviainen are analogous art to the claimed invention being from a similar field of endeavor of computer-generated environments. Thus, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the graphical elements as disclosed by Imoto with the graphical elements that provide a visual indication of content in the computer-generated environment including metadata identifying the content of the computer-generated environment as disclosed by Harviainen with a reasonable expectation of success.
One of ordinary skill in the art would be motivated to modify Imoto as described above to facilitate content monitoring [Harviainen, para 0124].
As to claim 19, Imoto discloses the method of claim 1, wherein displaying the one or more graphical elements … [para 0173, outer display screen displays object] includes:
detecting first movement of a second user who is in a position to view of the status information displayed via the second display generation component relative to the second display generation component [Figs. 3-4E, 14, para 0136, 0192, determine outside user (read: second user) approaching (read: first movement) user who recognizes state information presented on outer display screen worn by device user].
However, Imoto does not specifically disclose one or more graphical elements that provide a visual indication of content in the computer-generated environment.
Harviainen discloses one or more graphical elements that provide a visual indication of content in the computer-generated environment [Figs. 7A-7B, para 0129, 0149-0150, chained display environment additionally displays information indicating content on primary display device].
Imoto and Harviainen are analogous art to the claimed invention being from a similar field of endeavor of computer-generated environments. Thus, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the graphical elements as disclosed by Imoto with the graphical elements providing a visual indication of content in the computer-generated environment as disclosed by Harviainen with a reasonable expectation of success.
Note one of ordinary skill in the art would recognize that the broadest reasonable interpretation of a method (or process) claim having contingent limitations requires only those steps that must be performed and does not include steps that are not required to be performed because the condition(s) precedent are not met, thus the claim scope does not require the contingent limitations "updating display of the one or more graphical elements to increase an information density of the visual indication of content in the computer-generated environment that is provided by the one or more graphical elements" to be performed if the precedent conditions "in accordance with a determination that a distance between the second user and the second display generation component has decreased from above a first threshold distance to below the first threshold distance" are not met, respectively [see MPEP 2111.04(II)].
Nevertheless, in an effort to advance compact prosecution, Imoto teaches in response to detecting the first movement of the second user relative to the second display generation component, in accordance with a determination that a distance between the second user and the second display generation component has decreased from above a first threshold distance to below the first threshold distance, … display of the one or more graphical elements… [para 0127-0128, 0173, 0178-0179, 0197, outer display screen displays object as outside user approaches user wearing device with outer display screen and detected distance to device user is closer].
However, Imoto does not specifically disclose updating display of the one or more graphical elements to increase an information density of the visual indication of content in the computer-generated environment that is provided by the one or more graphical elements.
Harviainen discloses updating display of the one or more graphical elements to increase an information density of the visual indication of content in the computer-generated environment that is provided by the one or more graphical elements [Figs. 6A-6B, 7A-7C, 11-12, para 0123-0125, 0129, 0137, 0149-0152, transition display of chained display environment (read: graphical elements); also note one of ordinary skill in the art would recognize that the limitation "to increase an information density of the visual indication of content in the computer-generated environment" is an intended result of the "updating display" and is not relevant to patentability [see MPEP 2111.04], nevertheless Harviainen teaches transitioning the display from displaying one immersiveness level (read: information density) displaying summary information of content in primary display environment (read: computer-generated environment) to another immersiveness level displaying time-synchronized content in primary display environment when chained user moves closer to primary user, where an amount of displayed information falls under the broadest reasonable interpretation of information density as consistent with Applicant's specification (para 00242)].
Imoto and Harviainen are analogous art to the claimed invention being from a similar field of endeavor of computer-generated environments. Thus, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the graphical elements as disclosed by Imoto with updating display of the one or more graphical elements to increase an information density of the visual indication of content in the computer-generated environment as disclosed by Harviainen with a reasonable expectation of success.
One of ordinary skill in the art would be motivated to modify Imoto as described above to facilitate content monitoring [Harviainen, para 0124].
As to claim 20, Imoto discloses the method of claim 1, including:
while displaying the computer-generated environment via the first display generation component and displaying the status information corresponding to the computing system via the second display generation component, detecting a fifth respective event that is triggered by a third user who is in a position to view the status information displayed via the second display generation component [Figs. 3-4E, 14, para 0136, 0192, determine outside user (read: third user) approaching (read: fifth respective event) user who recognizes state information presented on outer display screen while inner display screen displays content image to device user].
Note one of ordinary skill in the art would recognize that the broadest reasonable interpretation of a method (or process) claim having contingent limitations requires only those steps that must be performed and does not include steps that are not required to be performed because the condition(s) precedent are not met, thus the claim scope does not require the contingent limitations "changing a level of immersion of the computer-generated environment displayed via the first display generation component from the third level of immersion to a second level of immersion, wherein the computer-generated environment displayed with the second level of immersion includes an increased amount of representation of a physical environment than the computer-generated environment displayed with the third level of immersion" to be performed if the precedent conditions "in accordance with a determination that the fifth respective event meets fourth criteria, wherein the fourth criteria require that a preset measure of interaction has increased from below a preset threshold to above the preset threshold as a result of the fifth respective event and that the computer-generated environment is displayed with a third level of immersion in order for the fourth criteria to be met" are not met, respectively [see MPEP 2111.04(II)].
Nevertheless, in an effort to advance compact prosecution, Imoto teaches in response to detecting the fifth respective event, in accordance with a determination that the fifth respective event meets fourth criteria, wherein the fourth criteria require that a preset measure of interaction has increased from below a preset threshold to above the preset threshold as a result of the fifth respective event and that the computer-generated environment is displayed with a third level of immersion in order for the fourth criteria to be met [Figs. 3-5, 14, para 0096-0098, 0110, 0136, 0191-0194, determine outside user approaching has high degree of necessity (read: fourth criteria) when possibility of communication changes from low (read: preset threshold) to high and inner display unit displays content image (read: third level)]:
changing a level of immersion of the computer-generated environment displayed via the first display generation component from the third level of immersion to a second level of immersion, wherein the computer-generated environment displayed with the second level of immersion includes an increased amount of representation of a physical environment than the computer-generated environment displayed with the third level of immersion [Figs. 3-5, 14, para 0110-0111, 0191-0194, inner display screen changes presentation state from displaying content image to content image superimposed with outside image (read: second level), note area (read: amount of representation) displaying image of outside situation has increased].
As to claim 21, Imoto discloses the method of claim 20.
Note one of ordinary skill in the art would recognize that the broadest reasonable interpretation of a method (or process) claim having contingent limitations requires only those steps that must be performed and does not include steps that are not required to be performed because the condition(s) precedent are not met, thus the claim scope does not require the contingent limitations "in conjunction with changing the level of immersion of the computer-generated environment displayed via the first display generation component from the third level of immersion to the second level of immersion, changing the status information that is displayed via the second display generation component, including increasing a visibility of the visual representation of the portion of the user of the computing system" to be performed if the precedent conditions "in accordance with a determination that the fifth respective event meets the fourth criteria" are not met, respectively [see MPEP 2111.04(II)].
Nevertheless, in an effort to advance compact prosecution, Imoto teaches in response to detecting the fifth respective event, in accordance with a determination that the fifth respective event meets the fourth criteria [Figs. 3-5, 14, para 0096-0098, 0110, 0136, 0191-0194, determine outside user approaching has high degree of necessity when possibility of communication changes from low to high]:
in conjunction with changing the level of immersion of the computer-generated environment displayed via the first display generation component from the third level of immersion to the second level of immersion [Figs. 3-5, 14, para 0110-0111, 0191-0194, inner display screen changes presentation state from displaying content image to content image superimposed with outside image], changing the status information that is displayed via the second display generation component, including increasing a visibility of the visual representation of the portion of the user of the computing system [Fig. 14 para 0191-0193, outer display screen changes from nothing displayed to displaying of pattern resembling eyes of device user].
As to claim 22, Imoto discloses the method of claim 21, wherein detecting the fifth respective event includes detecting entry of the third user into a predefined region surrounding the user of the computing system [Fig. 3, para 0079-0081, determine outside user has high degree of necessity when approaching device user within predetermined range].
As to claim 23, Imoto discloses the method of claim 21, wherein detecting the fifth respective event includes detecting the third user performing a predefined gesture toward the user of the computing system [Fig. 3, para 0079-0081, determine outside user has high degree of necessity when outside user performs specific gesture toward device user].
As to claim 24, Imoto and Harviainen, combined at least for the reasons above, Imoto discloses a computing system, including: one or more processors; a first display generation component; a second display generation component, wherein the first display generation component and the second display generation component are enclosed in a same housing; and memory storing one or more programs that are configured for execution by the one or more processors, the one or more programs including instructions [Fig. 16, para 0147-0148, 0207, 0211-0212, system includes processing unit, inner display screen (read: first display generation component), and outer display screen (read: second display generation component) in main body part (read: housing), and storage device storing programs executed by device] for: performing limitations substantially similar to those recited in claim 1 and is rejected under similar rationale
As to claim 25, Imoto and Harviainen, combined at least for the reasons above, Imoto discloses a computer readable storage medium storing one or more programs, the one or more programs including instructions, which when executed by a computer system that is in communication with a first display generation component and a second display generation component that are enclosed in a same housing, and one or more input devices, cause the computer system [Fig. 16, para 0147-0148, 0207, 0211-0212, storage device stores programs executed by device with sensor units (read: input devices), inner display screen (read: first display generation component), and outer display screen (read: second display generation component) in main body part (read: housing)] to: performing limitations substantially similar to those recited in claim 1 and is rejected under similar rationale
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 7-9 and 13 are 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.
The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter.
The closest prior art references of record are noted below.
Imoto et al. (US 20160018655 A1) generally discloses displaying a computer-generated environment via a first display generation component and displaying status information including a visual representation of a portion of a user and graphical elements via a second display generation component, wherein the first display generation component and the second display generation component are enclosed in a first housing; and a user setting prohibiting disturbances while at work with inner display screen displaying content image and outer display screen displaying information indicating user state, where displayed object text information does not display user attention.
Harviainen et al. (US 20210240279 A1) generally discloses parental control modes displaying chained display devices based on content displayed on primary display devices.
Ballagas et al. (US 20210042979 A1) and Chen (US 20180004478 A1) generally disclose an outer display screen of a head-mounted device concurrently displaying a visual representation of a portion of a user and graphical elements indicating content in a computer-generated environment.
Do et al. (US 12536740 B2), filed after the effective filing date of the instant application, generally discloses presenting a computer generated environment to a user wearing a head-mounted display and displaying graphical elements providing a visual indication of the computer-generated environment on an external display.
Applicant's claims have been considered in view of the cited art. After reviewing the art and performing a search, no combination of prior art reads on the claim. Specifically, the claims are as a whole novel and non-obvious over the prior art. In addition, no reference uncovered would have provided a basis of evidence for asserting a motivation, nor one of ordinary skilled in the art at the time the invention was made, knowing the teaching of the prior arts of record would have combined them to arrive at the present invention as recited in the context of the independent claims as a whole.
Regarding the dependent claims, the prior art of record broadly discloses head-mounted display systems displaying computer-generated environments and status information. Moreover, the prior art of record changing a level of immersion of the computer-generated environment displayed via the first display generation component; changing the status information that is displayed via the second display generation component including changing an appearance of the visual representation of the portion of the user of the computing system; and a privacy mode of the computing system, wherein the privacy mode requires that the one or more graphical elements displayed via the second display generation component have less than a first threshold visibility.
However, the prior art of record does not explicitly teach the more intertwined nature of the current claims after the most recent amendment. The graphical element visibility and parental control mode is specifically being claimed and how the visibility is changed during a privacy mode and how a level of immersion is changed during a parental control mode is not taught by the prior art, specifically, in accordance with a determination that the first user request is received while visibility of the one or more graphical elements that provide a visual indication of content in the computer-generated environment exceeds the first threshold visibility corresponding to the privacy mode, decreasing the visibility of the one or more graphical elements via the second display generation component below the first threshold visibility corresponding to the privacy mode; and in accordance with a determination that the first user request is received while the visibility of the one or more graphical elements that provide a visual indication of content in the computer-generated environment does not exceed the first threshold visibility corresponding to the privacy mode, maintaining the visibility of the one or more graphical elements below the first threshold visibility corresponding to the privacy mode; and in response to detecting the fourth respective event and the corresponding change in the level of immersion of the computer-generated environment displayed via the first display generation component, forgoing changing the status information that is displayed via the second display generation component.
Allowing such visibility changes of one or more graphical elements via the second display generation component and forgoing changing the status information that is displayed via the second display generation component during an active parental control mode changing a level of immersion of the computer-generated environment displayed via the first display generation component is not taught by the previously cited art. Moreover, the visibility control and forgone status information change as well as the active privacy mode and parental control mode associated therewith fully integrate any type of high level data display and data output into a practical application. Therefore, it is for at least these reasons that the claim language, in the specific order recited, defines patentability over the prior art of record.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Ballagas et al. (US 20210042979 A1) and Chen (US 20180004478 A1) generally disclose an outer display screen of a head-mounted device concurrently displaying a visual representation of a portion of a user and graphical elements indicating content in a computer-generated environment.
Do et al. (US 12536740 B2), filed after the effective filing date of the instant application, generally discloses presenting a computer generated environment to a user wearing a head-mounted display and displaying graphical elements providing a visual indication of the computer-generated environment on an external display.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to LINDA HUYNH whose telephone number is (571)272-5240 and email is linda.huynh@uspto.gov. The examiner can normally be reached M-F between 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, Adam Queler can be reached at (571) 272-4140. 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.
/LINDA HUYNH/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2172
Prosecution Insights