DETAILED ACTION
Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status
The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
Response to Amendment
Amendments change scope of previous claims, thereby necessitating a new grounds thereof.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to below claims have been considered but are moot because the new ground of rejection does not rely on any reference applied in the prior rejection of record for any teaching or matter specifically challenged in the argument.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status.
The following is a quotation of 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 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- 5 & 11- 14 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kim (U.S. 2012/0083312 A1) in view of Meek (U.S. 2023/0128749 A1).
In regards to claim 1, Kim discloses: a device (Kim, figs. 1-3, 6, & 8: mobile terminal device 100; disclosed in ¶ [0020]- ¶ [0022], ¶ [0025], ¶ [0027], & ¶ [0030]) comprising:
a display (Kim, figs. 1-3, 6, & 8: mobile terminal device 100 includes a display; disclosed in ¶ [0020]- ¶ [0022], ¶ [0025], ¶ [0027], ¶ [0030], ¶ [0037], ¶ [0040], & ¶ [0047]- ¶ [0048]);
a sensor (Kim, figs. 1-3, 6, & 8: mobile terminal device 100 including gaze camera sensor 121; disclosed in ¶ [0014], ¶ [0020]- ¶ [0022], ¶ [0025], ¶ [0027], ¶ [0030], & ¶ [0095]- ¶ [0098]);
memory comprising one or more storage media storing instructions; and at least one processor comprising processing circuitry (Kim, figs. 1-3, 6, & 8: mobile terminal device 100 including memory 160 & processor controller 180; disclosed in ¶ [0020]- ¶ [0022], ¶ [0025], ¶ [0027], ¶ [0030], ¶ [0056]- ¶ [0057], & ¶ [0060]),
wherein the instructions, when executed by the at least one processor individually or collectively, cause the wearable device to: identify, using the sensor, a gaze of a user identify whether the gaze of the user is positioned within an execution screen of an application being displayed via the display; based on the gaze being identified as positioned within the execution screen of the application, display, via the display, the execution screen by performing three-dimensional (3D) rendering of one or more of objects included in the execution screen; and based on the gaze being identified as positioned out of the execution screen of the application, display, via the display, the execution screen by performing two-dimensional (2D) rendering of the objects included in the execution screen (Kim, figs. 1-3, 6, & 8a-8b: mobile terminal device 100 including gaze camera sensor 121, memory 160 & processor controller 180; disclosed in ¶ [0014], ¶ [0020]- ¶ [0022], ¶ [0025], ¶ [0027], ¶ [0030], ¶ [0056]- ¶ [0057], ¶ [0060], ¶ [0095]- ¶ [0100], & ¶ [0117]- ¶ [0118]; the office relies on the operation concept described with respect to figs. 6 & 8, where the user’s gaze may input a 3D emphasized image input {e.g., illustration of element 410 in fig. 8b} with respect to being fixed in an image window execution screen {illustrated in fig. 8a}, and if not, end operation {e.g., fig. 6, S340} and reverting {e.g., fig. 6 reverting line} to 2D display images of fig. 8a {i.e., gaze is outside of image window execution screen}).
Kim fails to explicitly disclose: the device includes the utility of being wearable.
However, Meek discloses: the device includes the utility of being wearable (Meek, fig. 1: phone + holder = claimed wearable device; disclosed in ¶ [0008] & abstract).
Meek and Kim are considered to be analogous art because both are in the same field of endeavor related to headset phone display devices (Kim, figs. 1-3 & ¶ [0058]; Meek, fig. 1 & abstract). Therefore, it would have been obvious to someone having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was filed to modify the device of Kim to include: the utility of being wearable, as taught by Meek, in order to give users the ability to multitask and perform other tasks hands-free (Meek, abstract).
In regards to claim 2, Kim in combination above discloses: the wearable device of claim 1, wherein the instructions, when executed by the at least one processor individually or collectively, cause the wearable device to: based on the gaze of the user being identified as moved to out of the execution screen of the application while the execution screen of the application is displayed by performing the 3D rendering of the one or more of the objects, display, via the display, the execution screen of the application by performing the 2D rendering of the objects; and based on the gaze being identified as positioned moved to within the execution screen of the application while the execution screen of the application is displayed by performing the 2D rendering of the objects, display, via the display, the execution screen of the application by performing the 3D rendering of the one or more of the objects (Kim, figs. 1-3, 6, & 8a-8b: mobile terminal device 100 including gaze camera sensor 121, memory 160 & processor controller 180; disclosed in ¶ [0014], ¶ [0020]- ¶ [0022], ¶ [0025], ¶ [0027], ¶ [0030], ¶ [0056]- ¶ [0057], ¶ [0060], ¶ [0095]- ¶ [0100], & ¶ [0117]- ¶ [0118]; the office relies on the operation concept described with respect to figs. 6 & 8, where the user’s gaze may input a 3D emphasized image input {e.g., illustration of element 410 in fig. 8b} with respect to being fixed in an image window execution screen {illustrated in fig. 8a}, and if not, end operation {e.g., fig. 6, S340} and reverting {e.g., fig. 6 reverting line} to 2D display images of fig. 8a {i.e., gaze is outside of image window execution screen}; in addition, please note, elapsed time {fig. 6, S320}; Meek, fig. 1: phone + holder = claimed wearable device; disclosed in ¶ [0008] & abstract).
In regards to claim 3, Kim in combination above discloses: the wearable device of claim 1, wherein the instructions, when executed by the at least one processor individually or collectively, cause the wearable device to: based on the gaze being identified as positioned within the execution screen of the application, display, via the display, the execution screen of the application in which at least one function of the execution screen of the application to interact with the user is permitted (Kim, figs. 1-3, 6, & 8a-8b: mobile terminal device 100 including gaze camera sensor 121, memory 160 & processor controller 180; disclosed in ¶ [0014], ¶ [0020]- ¶ [0022], ¶ [0025], ¶ [0027], ¶ [0030], ¶ [0056]- ¶ [0057], ¶ [0060], ¶ [0095]- ¶ [0100], & ¶ [0117]- ¶ [0118]; the office relies on the operation concept described with respect to figs. 6 & 8, where the user’s gaze may input a 3D emphasized image input {e.g., illustration of element 410 in fig. 8b} with respect to being fixed in an image window execution screen {illustrated in fig. 8a}, and if not, end operation {e.g., fig. 6, S340} and reverting {e.g., fig. 6 reverting line} to 2D display images of fig. 8a {i.e., gaze is outside of image window execution screen}; Meek, fig. 1: phone + holder = claimed wearable device; disclosed in ¶ [0008] & abstract).
In regards to claim 4, Kim in combination above discloses: the wearable device of claim 3, wherein the instructions, when executed by the at least one processor individually or collectively, cause the wearable device to: based on the gaze being identified as positioned out of the execution screen of the application, display, via the display, the execution screen of the application in which the at least one function is ceased (Kim, figs. 1-3, 6, & 8a-8b: mobile terminal device 100 including gaze camera sensor 121, memory 160 & processor controller 180; disclosed in ¶ [0014], ¶ [0020]- ¶ [0022], ¶ [0025], ¶ [0027], ¶ [0030], ¶ [0056]- ¶ [0057], ¶ [0060], ¶ [0095]- ¶ [0100], & ¶ [0117]- ¶ [0118]; the office relies on the operation concept described with respect to figs. 6 & 8, where the user’s gaze may input a 3D emphasized image input {e.g., illustration of element 410 in fig. 8b} with respect to being fixed in an image window execution screen {illustrated in fig. 8a}, and if not, end operation {e.g., fig. 6, S340} and reverting {e.g., fig. 6 reverting line} to 2D display images of fig. 8a {i.e., gaze is outside of image window execution screen}; Meek, fig. 1: phone + holder = claimed wearable device; disclosed in ¶ [0008] & abstract).
In regards to claim 5, Kim in combination above discloses: the wearable device of claim 1, wherein the instructions, when executed by the at least one processor individually or collectively, cause the wearable device to: identify whether a reference time is elapsed from a time point at which the execution screen of the application is displayed by performing 2D rendering of the objects; and based on identifying that the reference time is elapsed from the time point, display, via the display, an image representing the execution screen of the application (Kim, figs. 1-3, 6, & 8a-8b: mobile terminal device 100 including gaze camera sensor 121, memory 160 & processor controller 180; disclosed in ¶ [0014], ¶ [0020]- ¶ [0022], ¶ [0025], ¶ [0027], ¶ [0030], ¶ [0056]- ¶ [0057], ¶ [0060], ¶ [0095]- ¶ [0100], & ¶ [0117]- ¶ [0118]; the office relies on the operation concept described with respect to figs. 6 & 8, where the user’s gaze may input a 3D emphasized image input {e.g., illustration of element 410 in fig. 8b} with respect to being fixed in an image window execution screen {illustrated in fig. 8a}, and if not, end operation {e.g., fig. 6, S340} and reverting {e.g., fig. 6 reverting line} to 2D display images of fig. 8a {i.e., gaze is outside of image window execution screen}; in addition, please note, elapsed time {fig. 6, S320}; Meek, fig. 1: phone + holder = claimed wearable device; disclosed in ¶ [0008] & abstract).
In regards to claim 11, Kim discloses: a method of a device (Kim, figs. 1-3, 6, & 8: mobile terminal device 100; disclosed in ¶ [0020]- ¶ [0022], ¶ [0025], ¶ [0027], & ¶ [0030]), the method comprising:
identifying, using a sensor of the wearable device, a gaze of a user; identifying whether the gaze of the user is positioned within an execution screen of an application being displayed via a display of the wearable device; based on the gaze being identified as positioned within the execution screen of the application, displaying, via the display, the execution screen by performing three-dimensional (3D) rendering of one or more of objects included in the execution screen; and based on the gaze being identified as positioned out of the execution screen of the application, displaying, via the display, the execution screen by performing two-dimensional (2D) rendering of the objects included in the execution screen (Kim, figs. 1-3, 6, & 8a-8b: mobile terminal device 100 including gaze camera sensor 121, memory 160 & processor controller 180; disclosed in ¶ [0014], ¶ [0020]- ¶ [0022], ¶ [0025], ¶ [0027], ¶ [0030], ¶ [0056]- ¶ [0057], ¶ [0060], ¶ [0095]- ¶ [0100], & ¶ [0117]- ¶ [0118]; the office relies on the operation concept described with respect to figs. 6 & 8, where the user’s gaze may input a 3D emphasized image input {e.g., illustration of element 410 in fig. 8b} with respect to being fixed in an image window execution screen {illustrated in fig. 8a}, and if not, end operation {e.g., fig. 6, S340} and reverting {e.g., fig. 6 reverting line} to 2D display images of fig. 8a {i.e., gaze is outside of image window execution screen}).
Kim fails to explicitly disclose: the device includes the utility of being wearable.
However, Meek discloses: the device includes the utility of being wearable (Meek, fig. 1: phone + holder = claimed wearable device; disclosed in ¶ [0008] & abstract).
Meek and Kim are considered to be analogous art because both are in the same field of endeavor related to headset phone display devices (Kim, figs. 1-3 & ¶ [0058]; Meek, fig. 1 & abstract). Therefore, it would have been obvious to someone having ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was filed to modify the device of Kim to include: the utility of being wearable, as taught by Meek, in order to give users the ability to multitask and perform other tasks hands-free (Meek, abstract).
In regards to claim 12, Kim in combination above discloses: the method of claim 11, further comprising: based on the gaze of the user being identified as moved to out of the execution screen of the application while the execution screen of the application is displayed by performing the 3D rendering of the one or more of the objects, displaying, via the display, the execution screen of the application by performing the 2D rendering of the objects; and based on the gaze being identified as positioned moved to within the execution screen of the application while the execution screen of the application is displayed by performing the 2D rendering of the objects, displaying, via the display, the execution screen of the application by performing the 3D rendering of the one or more of the objects (Kim, figs. 1-3, 6, & 8a-8b: mobile terminal device 100 including gaze camera sensor 121, memory 160 & processor controller 180; disclosed in ¶ [0014], ¶ [0020]- ¶ [0022], ¶ [0025], ¶ [0027], ¶ [0030], ¶ [0056]- ¶ [0057], ¶ [0060], ¶ [0095]- ¶ [0100], & ¶ [0117]- ¶ [0118]; the office relies on the operation concept described with respect to figs. 6 & 8, where the user’s gaze may input a 3D emphasized image input {e.g., illustration of element 410 in fig. 8b} with respect to being fixed in an image window execution screen {illustrated in fig. 8a}, and if not, end operation {e.g., fig. 6, S340} and reverting {e.g., fig. 6 reverting line} to 2D display images of fig. 8a {i.e., gaze is outside of image window execution screen}; in addition, please note, elapsed time {fig. 6, S320}; Meek, fig. 1: phone + holder = claimed wearable device; disclosed in ¶ [0008] & abstract).
In regards to claim 13, Kim in combination above discloses: the method of claim 11, further comprising: based on the gaze being identified as positioned within the execution screen of the application, displaying, via the display, the execution screen of the application in which at least one function of the execution screen of the application to interact with the user is permitted (Kim, figs. 1-3, 6, & 8a-8b: mobile terminal device 100 including gaze camera sensor 121, memory 160 & processor controller 180; disclosed in ¶ [0014], ¶ [0020]- ¶ [0022], ¶ [0025], ¶ [0027], ¶ [0030], ¶ [0056]- ¶ [0057], ¶ [0060], ¶ [0095]- ¶ [0100], & ¶ [0117]- ¶ [0118]; the office relies on the operation concept described with respect to figs. 6 & 8, where the user’s gaze may input a 3D emphasized image input {e.g., illustration of element 410 in fig. 8b} with respect to being fixed in an image window execution screen {illustrated in fig. 8a}, and if not, end operation {e.g., fig. 6, S340} and reverting {e.g., fig. 6 reverting line} to 2D display images of fig. 8a {i.e., gaze is outside of image window execution screen}; Meek, fig. 1: phone + holder = claimed wearable device; disclosed in ¶ [0008] & abstract).
In regards to claim 14, Kim in combination above discloses: the method of claim 13, further comprising: based on the gaze being identified as positioned out of the execution screen of the application, displaying, via the display, the execution screen of the application in which the at least one function is ceased (Kim, figs. 1-3, 6, & 8a-8b: mobile terminal device 100 including gaze camera sensor 121, memory 160 & processor controller 180; disclosed in ¶ [0014], ¶ [0020]- ¶ [0022], ¶ [0025], ¶ [0027], ¶ [0030], ¶ [0056]- ¶ [0057], ¶ [0060], ¶ [0095]- ¶ [0100], & ¶ [0117]- ¶ [0118]; the office relies on the operation concept described with respect to figs. 6 & 8, where the user’s gaze may input a 3D emphasized image input {e.g., illustration of element 410 in fig. 8b} with respect to being fixed in an image window execution screen {illustrated in fig. 8a}, and if not, end operation {e.g., fig. 6, S340} and reverting {e.g., fig. 6 reverting line} to 2D display images of fig. 8a {i.e., gaze is outside of image window execution screen}; Meek, fig. 1: phone + holder = claimed wearable device; disclosed in ¶ [0008] & abstract).
In regards to claim 15, Kim in combination above discloses: the method of claim 11, further comprising: identifying whether a reference time is elapsed from a time point at which the execution screen of the application is displayed by performing 2D rendering of the objects; and based on identifying that the reference time is elapsed from the time point, displaying, via the display, an image representing the execution screen of the application (Kim, figs. 1-3, 6, & 8a-8b: mobile terminal device 100 including gaze camera sensor 121, memory 160 & processor controller 180; disclosed in ¶ [0014], ¶ [0020]- ¶ [0022], ¶ [0025], ¶ [0027], ¶ [0030], ¶ [0056]- ¶ [0057], ¶ [0060], ¶ [0095]- ¶ [0100], & ¶ [0117]- ¶ [0118]; the office relies on the operation concept described with respect to figs. 6 & 8, where the user’s gaze may input a 3D emphasized image input {e.g., illustration of element 410 in fig. 8b} with respect to being fixed in an image window execution screen {illustrated in fig. 8a}, and if not, end operation {e.g., fig. 6, S340} and reverting {e.g., fig. 6 reverting line} to 2D display images of fig. 8a {i.e., gaze is outside of image window execution screen}; in addition, please note, elapsed time {fig. 6, S320}; Meek, fig. 1: phone + holder = claimed wearable device; disclosed in ¶ [0008] & abstract).
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 6-10 & 15-20 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
Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP § 706.07(a). Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a).
A shortened statutory period for reply to this final action is set to expire THREE MONTHS from the mailing date of this action. In the event a first reply is filed within TWO MONTHS of the mailing date of this final action and the advisory action is not mailed until after the end of the THREE-MONTH shortened statutory period, then the shortened statutory period will expire on the date the advisory action is mailed, and any nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) pursuant to 37 CFR 1.136(a) will be calculated from the mailing date of the advisory action. In no event, however, will the statutory period for reply expire later than SIX MONTHS from the mailing date of this final action.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Duane N. Taylor Jr. whose telephone number is (571) 272-4703. The examiner can normally be reached Monday- Saturday [5:30am- 10pm].
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.
Duane N. Taylor Jr.
Primary Patent Examiner
Art Unit 2626
/DUANE N TAYLOR JR/Primary Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2626
Prosecution Insights