DETAILED ACTION
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 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.
Claim(s) 1-2, 4, 6-9, 11, 14, 16, and 18-20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over [Hill; Edward L. et al., US 20150221135 A1] in view of [Salter; Tom G. et al., US 20140368534 A1].
Regarding claim 1:
Hill discloses:
1. An apparatus for extended reality [Hill: Fig.1: tracking system 10 and base station 12 producing a VR/AR “digital world”; Abstract: “Systems and methods improve virtual reality and augmented reality functionality for mobile devices using radio frequency (RF) signals transmitted by a tracked device and received at four or more spatially separated antennae”], the apparatus comprising:
at least one memory (810) [Hill: ¶ 0030: tracked device 14 having “memory storing an interactive software program (VR or AR)”; ¶ 0040: base station 12 and computing device 15 “store a library of interactive programs”];
and at least one processor (802) [Hill: ¶ 0028: “The base station 12 includes a processor 17”; ¶ 0030: “the tracked device 14 is any mobile device ... a processor (not shown)”] coupled to the at least one memory (810) [Hill: ¶ 0030: tracked device 14 having “memory storing an interactive software program (VR or AR)”; ¶ 0040: base station 12 and computing device 15 “store a library of interactive programs”; ¶ 0041: “The processor running the interactive software program “] and configured to:
determine first relative-position information associated with a first device based on one or more measurements of a first radio frequency (RF) signal received at the apparatus from the first device [Hill: Fig.2: tracked device 14 transmits via TX/RX antenna 18. received by the four or more antennae 16 in communication with base station 12; ¶ 0008: base station uses received signal timing to “determine the physical position of each tracked device” using “time of arrival (TOA), time difference of arrival (TDOA), phase of arrival (POA), angle of arrival (AOA)”];
determine second relative-position information associated with a second device based on one or more measurements of a second RF signal received at the apparatus from the second device [Hill: ¶ 0041: “the tracking system 10 can track the position and orientation of multiple tracked devices simultaneously, using standard coding techniques to distinguish among the tracked devices”; Examiner: The ¶ 0008 RF-signal position determination is applied to the second of the plural simultaneously-tracked devices of ¶ 0041.];
However, Hill does not expressly disclose:
and provide common virtual content to the first device and the second device based on the first relative-position information and the second relative-position information.
Salter discloses:
and provide common virtual content to the first device and the second device based on the first relative-position information and the second relative-position information [Salter: Fig.11B: common virtual object 1125; ¶ 0110: “Two users 1162 and 1160 are viewing object 1125”; ¶ 0032: a hub computing system 12 and mobile processing units build a model of the environment including the “ x, y, z Cartesian positions of all users”; determining a common viewing position of the shared virtual object relative to the first user and the second user, each viewing via a see-through HMD device 2.].
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have included the concept above of Salter in the invention of Hill, that is, providing one common virtual object to both a first and second user’s HMD positioned by the tracked position of both users, because Hill already tracks multiple devices within a single digital world and contemplates AR glasses and HMD tracked devices with their own view screens (Hill ¶¶ 0030, 0031, 0041), and because Hill teaches that RF based positioning works “without lighting or line of sight limitations experienced by camera and other optical systems” (Hill: Abstract, ¶ 0009). This combination of known elements yields the predictable result of a shared extended reality scene in which each of two RF positioned devices display the common virtual content appropriate to its own relative position. Both references are analogous art.
Regarding claim 2:
Hill discloses:
2. The apparatus of claim 1,
wherein the at least one processor (802) [Hill: ¶ 0028: “The base station 12 includes a processor 17”; ¶ 0030: “the tracked device 14 is any mobile device ... a processor (not shown)”] is configured to:
determine [Hill: ¶ 0041: “the tracking system 10 can track the position and orientation of multiple tracked devices simultaneously, using standard coding techniques to distinguish among the tracked devices”; ¶ 0008: “The position of the tracked device can be obtained using one or more of various methods when using RF signals. Such methods include, but are not limited to, time of arrival (TOA), time difference of arrival (TDOA), phase of arrival (POA), angle of arrival (AOA)”];
However, Hill does not expressly disclose:
determine a number of a plurality of devices within a predetermined range of the apparatus based on respective RF signals received at the apparatus from the plurality of devices;
and provide the common virtual content to the plurality of devices based on the number of the plurality of devices within the predetermined range of the apparatus.
Salter discloses:
determine a number of a plurality of devices within a predetermined range of the apparatus based on respective RF signals received at the apparatus from the plurality of devices [Salter: ¶ 0108: “the exemplary methods determine position and orientation of the virtual object based on the number of users who are viewing the virtual object 1125”; ¶ 0109: “at step 1102, object data and user position data is retrieved. If, at step 1104, the number of users viewing the common virtual object is two, the method proceeds to step 1106. If a different number of users is determined, the method proceeds to that number of users at 1150”];
and provide the common virtual content to the plurality of devices based on the number of the plurality of devices within the predetermined range of the apparatus [Salter: ¶ 0108: “the exemplary methods determine position and orientation of the virtual object based on the number of users who are viewing the virtual object 1125”; ¶ 0109: “at step 1102, object data and user position data is retrieved. If, at step 1104, the number of users viewing the common virtual object is two, the method proceeds to step 1106. If a different number of users is determined, the method proceeds to that number of users at 1150”].
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have included the concept above of Salter in the invention of Hill, that is, counting the devices within the predetermined range and providing the common virtual content to those devices based on the number, because Hill already determines the RF based position and range of multiple tracked devices (Hill ¶¶ 0008, 0041) and Salter teaches adapting the common virtual object to the number of participating users (Salter ¶¶ 0108, 0109). This combination of known elements yields the predictable result of shared content provided to the counted set of nearby devices. Both references are analogous art.
Regarding claim 4:
Hill discloses:
4. The apparatus of claim 1,
wherein the at least one processor (802) [Hill: ¶ 0028: “The base station 12 includes a processor 17”; ¶ 0030: “the tracked device 14 is any mobile device ... a processor (not shown)”] is configured to:
determine [Hill: ¶ 0041: “the tracking system 10 can track the position and orientation of multiple tracked devices simultaneously, using standard coding techniques to distinguish among the tracked devices”; ¶ 0008: “The position of the tracked device can be obtained using one or more of various methods when using RF signals. Such methods include, but are not limited to, time of arrival (TOA), time difference of arrival (TDOA), phase of arrival (POA), angle of arrival (AOA)”];
However, Hill does not expressly disclose:
determine a number of a plurality of devices located in a predetermined area relative to the apparatus based on respective RF signals received at the apparatus from the plurality of devices;
and provide the common virtual content to the plurality of devices based on the number of the plurality of devices located in the predetermined area relative to the apparatus.
Salter discloses:
determine a number of a plurality of devices located in a predetermined area relative to the apparatus based on respective RF signals received at the apparatus from the plurality of devices [Salter: ¶ 0004: the common viewing location for “multiple users in a common environment” is determined from the definitions “as well as the number of users”; ¶ 0108: “the exemplary methods determine position and orientation of the virtual object based on the number of users who are viewing the virtual object 1125”; ¶ 0109: “at step 1104, the number of users viewing the common virtual object is two, the method proceeds to step 1106. If a different number of users is determined, the method proceeds to that number of users at 1150”];
and provide the common virtual content to the plurality of devices based on the number of the plurality of devices located in the predetermined area relative to the apparatus [Salter: ¶ 0004: the common viewing location for “multiple users in a common environment” is determined from the definitions “as well as the number of users”; ¶ 0108: “the exemplary methods determine position and orientation of the virtual object based on the number of users who are viewing the virtual object 1125”; ¶ 0109: “at step 1104, the number of users viewing the common virtual object is two, the method proceeds to step 1106. If a different number of users is determined, the method proceeds to that number of users at 1150”].
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have included the concept above of Salter in the invention of Hill, that is, counting the devices located in the predetermined area relative to the apparatus and providing the common virtual content to those devices based on the number, because Hill already determines the RF based position of each of multiple tracked devices within a bounded physical environment relative to base station 12 (Hill ¶¶ 0008, 0009, 0041) and Salter teaches setting and placing the common virtual object as a function of the number of participating users in the common environment (Salter ¶¶ 0004, 0108, 0109). This combination of known elements yields the predictable result of shared content provided to the counted set of devices in the area. Both references are analogous art.
Regarding claim 6:
Hill discloses:
6. The apparatus of claim 1,
wherein: the first relative-position information comprises a range between the first device and the apparatus [Hill: ¶ 0008: the position of each tracked device is determined from RF signal timing including “time of arrival (TOA),” and “time difference of arrival (TDOA),” which yields the range (distance) between the tracked device 14 and base station 12; Fig.1: signals transmitted from antenna 18 received by the four or more antennae 16];
the second relative-position information comprises a range between the second device and the apparatus [Hill: ¶ 0041: “the tracking system 10 can track the position and orientation of multiple tracked devices simultaneously”; ¶ 0008: “The position of the tracked device can be obtained using one or more of various methods when using RF signals. Such methods include, but are not limited to, time of arrival (TOA), time difference of arrival (TDOA), phase of arrival (POA), angle of arrival (AOA)”];
However, Hill does not expressly disclose:
and the at least one processor (802) is configured to provide the common virtual content to the first device and the second device based on the range between the first device and the apparatus and the range between the second device and the apparatus.
Salter discloses:
and the at least one processor (802) is configured to provide the common virtual content to the first device and the second device based on the range between the first device and the apparatus and the range between the second device and the apparatus [Salter: ¶ 0110: “At step 1106, an initial determination may be to calculate a midpoint 1127 between the first user and the second user,” the midpoint being derived from the ranges/positions of the two users, from which the common viewing position of the shared object is determined; ¶ 0032: “a model of the environment including the x, y, z Cartesian positions of all users” ].
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have included the concept above of Salter in the invention of Hill, that is, providing the common virtual content to both devices based on the range of each device to the apparatus, because Hill already determines the RF based range of each tracked device relative to base station 12 (Hill ¶ 0008) and Salter places the shared object as a function of the distances between the participating users (Salter ¶ 0110). This combination of known elements yields the predictable result of shared content positioned and delivered according to how far each device is from the apparatus. Both references or analogous art.
Regarding claim 7:
Hill discloses:
7. The apparatus of claim 1,
wherein: the first relative-position information comprises an angle of arrival of the first RF signal at the apparatus [Hill: ¶ 0008: the position of each tracked device is determined from RF signals using, among the enumerated methods, “angle of arrival (AOA)”; Fig.1: signals transmitted from antenna 18 received by the four or more antennae 16];
the second relative-position information comprises an angle of arrival of the second RF signal at the apparatus [Hill: ¶ 0041: “the tracking system 10 can track the position and orientation of multiple tracked devices simultaneously”; ¶ 0008: the same angle of arrival determination is applied to the second such device’s RF signal at base station 12];
However, Hill does not expressly disclose:
and the at least one processor (802) is configured to provide the common virtual content to the first device and the second device based on the angle of arrival of the first RF signal at the apparatus and the angle of arrival of the second RF signal at the apparatus.
Salter discloses:
and the at least one processor (802) is configured to provide the common virtual content to the first device and the second device based on the angle of arrival of the first RF signal at the apparatus and the angle of arrival of the second RF signal at the apparatus [Salter: ¶ 0110: “At step 1106, an initial determination may be to calculate a midpoint 1127 between the first user and the second user,” from which the common viewing position of the shared object is determined; ¶ 0032: “a model of the environment including the x, y, z Cartesian positions of all users”].
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have included the concept above of Salter in the invention of Hill, that is, providing the common virtual content to both devices based on the angle of arrival of each device’s RF signal at the apparatus, because Hill expressly determines the angle of arrival of each tracked device’s RF signal at base station 12 (Hill ¶ 0008) and Salter places the shared objects as a function of the positions of the participating users (Salter ¶ 0032, 0110). This combination of known elements yields the predictable result of shared content positioned and delivered according to the angular direction of each device relative to the apparatus. Both references are analogous art.
Regarding claim 8:
Hill discloses:
8. The apparatus of claim 1,
wherein: the first relative-position information comprises an orientation of the first device [Hill: ¶ 0041: the tracking system determines “the position and orientation” of each tracked device; controlled ; ¶ 0008: position and orientation derived from the RF and inertial sensing signals];
the second relative-position information comprises an orientation of the second device [Hill: ¶ 0041: “controlled ”; Fig.2: IMU 24; Examiner: The same orientation determination is applied to the second tracked device.];
However, Hill does not expressly disclose:
and the at least one processor (802) is configured to provide the common virtual content to the first device and the second device based on the orientation of the first device and the orientation of the second device.
Salter discloses:
and the at least one processor (802) is configured to provide the common virtual content to the first device and the second device based on the orientation of the first device and the orientation of the second device [Salter: ¶ 0110: after calculating the midpoint 1127 between the users, at step 1108, “the orientation, position, and size data” of the object are determined, including the optimal viewing perspective and orientation of the virtual object relative to the users; ¶ 0004: the position, orientation, and field of view of multiple users in a common environment are determined and used, with the object definitions, to set the common viewing location].
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have included the concept above of Salter in the invention of Hill, that is, providing the common virtual content to both devices based on the orientation of each device, because Hill already determines the orientation of each tracked device (Hill ¶ 0041; Fig.2) and Salter sets and places the shared object as a function of the orientation and field of view of each participating user (Salter ¶¶ 0004, 0110). This combination of known elements yields the predictable result of shared content positioned and delivered according to the orientation of each device. Both references are analogous art.
Regarding claim 9:
Hill discloses:
9. The apparatus of claim 1,
wherein the at least one processor (802) [Hill: ¶ 0028: “The base station 12 includes a processor 17”; ¶ 0030: “the tracked device 14 is any mobile device ... a processor (not shown)”] is configured to:
determine a position of the first device relative to the second device [Hill: Fig.1: base station 12; ¶ 0041: “ the tracking system 10 can track the position and orientation of multiple tracked devices simultaneously,” each registered in a common digital world; ¶ 0008: the position of each tracked device is determined from RF signals (TOA, TDOA, POA, AOA) relative to base station 12; Examiner: With the position of each of the first and second devices determined in the common coordinate frame of base station 12, the position of the first device relative to the second device is the difference of those two positions.],
However, Hill does not expressly disclose:
and provide the common virtual content to the first device and the second device based on position of the first device relative to the second device.
Salter discloses:
and provide the common virtual content to the first device and the second device based on position of the first device relative to the second device [Salter: ¶ 0110: “At step 1106, an initial determination may be to calculate a midpoint 1127 between the first user and the second user,” the midpoint being derived from the two users’ positions relative to each other, from which the common viewing position of the shared object is identified; ¶ 0032: model including the “x, y, x Cartesian positions of all users”].
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have included the concept above of Salter in the invention of Hill, that is, providing the common virtual content to both devices based on the position of the first device relative to the second device , because Hill determines the position of each tracked device in a common coordinate frame relative to base station 12 (Hill ¶¶ 0008, 0041), from which their relative position is obtained, and Salter places the shared object as a function of the relative positions of the two participating users, including by computing the midpoint between them (Salter ¶ 0110). This combination of known elements yields the predictable result of shared content positioned and delivered according to where the two devices are located relative to each other. Both references are analogous art.
Regarding claim 11:
Hill in view of Salter discloses:
11. The apparatus of claim 1,
wherein the apparatus comprises a display [Hill: Fig.1: monitor 19; ¶ 0039: “The processor of the computing device 15 registers this position and orientation with the interactive software program to update the display on a view screen (e.g., the monitor 19 or its own view screen)”], and
wherein the at least one processor (802) [Hill: ¶ 0028: “The base station 12 includes a processor 17”; ¶ 0030: “the tracked device 14 is any mobile device ... a processor (not shown)”] is configured to display image data at the display based on the first relative-position information and the second relative-position information [Hill: ¶ 0041: the tracking system tracks the position and orientation of multiple tracked devices simultaneously and updates the displayed digital world for each such device; ¶ 0039: the display on the view screen is updated from each tracked device’s registered position and orientation; Examiner: Both tracked devices being registered in the common digital world presented on the apparatus’s view screen, the displayed image data is a function of the first and second relative-position information.].
Regarding claim 14:
The limitations of claim 14 have been addressed in the discussion of claim 2 above.
Regarding claim 16:
The limitations of claim 16 have been addressed in the discussion of claim 4 above.
Regarding claim 18:
The limitations of claim 18 have been addressed in the discussion of claim 6 above.
Regarding claim 19:
The limitations of claim 19 have been addressed in the discussion of claim 7 above.
Regarding claim 20:
The limitations of claim 20 have been addressed in the discussion of claim 8 above.
Claim(s) 10 and 12-13 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over [Hill; Edward L. et al., US 20150221135 A1] in view of [Salter; Tom G. et al., US 20140368534 A1] and further in view of [Haapoja; Juho Mikko et al., US 20220027115 A1]
Regarding claim 10:
Hill in view of Salter discloses:
10. The apparatus of claim 1.
However, Hill in view of Salter does not expressly discloseL
wherein the at least one processor (802) is configured to generate the common virtual content based on the first relative-position information and the second relative-position information.
Haapoja discloses:
wherein the at least one processor (802) is configured to generate the common virtual content based on the first relative-position information and the second relative-position information [Haapoja: Fig.5: AR engine 502, processor 504, memory 506; Fig.6, method 600 (¶ 0153): step 606 determines the position, including location and orientation, of the first user within a virtual coordinate system (¶ 0162, 0166), and step 608 “includes the processor 504 determining a position of the second user within the virtual coordinate system” (¶ 0167); ¶ step 612 generates the AR content (¶ 0173), the render of the model generated from the first user’s position (¶ 0174), and “The representation of the second user and the render of the model in the AR content generated in step 612 may reflect the position of the second user relative to the … virtual coordinate system” (¶ 0176)].
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have included the concept above of Haapoja in the invention of Hill in view of Salter, that is, generating the common virtual content as a function of both device’s relative positions, because Hill already determines each device’s relative position from RF and produces a common digital world shared by the tracked devices (Hill ¶¶ 0008, 0041), and Haapoja generates the shared content of a common coordinate system from the positions of both participating users (Haapoja ¶¶ 0153, 0166, 0167, 0173, 0176). This combination of known elements yields the predictable result of shared content whose composition reflects where both devices are located. The references are analogous art.
Regarding claim 12:
Hill in view of Salter discloses:
12. The apparatus of claim 12.
However, Hill in view of Salter does not expressly disclose:
wherein the at least one processor (802) is configured to generate the image data based on the first relative-position information and the second relative-position information.
Haapoja discloses:
wherein the at least one processor (802) is configured to generate the image data based on the first relative-position information and the second relative-position information [Haapoja: Fig.5: AR engine 502, processor 504, memory 506; Fig. 6, method 600 (¶ 0153): step 606 determines the position including location and orientation, of the first user within virtual coordinate system (¶¶ 0162, 0166) and step 608 “includes the processor 504 determining a position of the second user within the virtual coordinate system” (¶ 0167); step 612 generates the AR content (¶ 0173), wherein the render of the model is generated based on the first user’s position (¶ 0174) and “The representation of the second user and the render of the model in the AR content generated in step 612 may reflect the position of the second user relative to the model in the virtual coordinate system” (¶ 0176), the generated image data thereby being a function of both the first user’s position and the second user’s position.].
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have included the concept above of Haapoja in the invention of Hill in view of Salter, that is, generating the displayed image data as a function of both devices’ relative positions, because Hill already determines each devices relative position from RF and displays the common digital world (Hill ¶ 0008, 0039, 0041) and Haapoja generates the displayed shared content from the positions of both participating users (Haapoja ¶ 0153, 0173, 0174, 0176). This combination of known elements yields the predictable result of the displayed image data whose composition reflects where both devices are located. The references are analogous art.
Regarding claim 13:
Hill discloses:
13. A method for extended reality [Hill: Fig.1: tracking system 10 and base station 12 producing a VR/AR “digital world”; Abstract: “Systems and methods improve virtual reality and augmented reality functionality for mobile devices using radio frequency (RF) signals transmitted by a tracked device and received at four or more spatially separated antennae”], the method comprising:
determining first relative-position information associated with a first device based on one or more measurements of a first radio frequency (RF) signal received at an apparatus from the first device [Hill: Fig.2: tracked device 14 transmits via TX/RX antenna 18. received by the four or more antennae 16 in communication with base station 12; ¶ 0008: base station uses received signal timing to “determine the physical position of each tracked device” using “time of arrival (TOA), time difference of arrival (TDOA), phase of arrival (POA), angle of arrival (AOA)”];
determining second relative-position information associated with a second device based on one or more measurements of a second RF signal received at the apparatus from the second device [Hill: ¶ 0041: “the tracking system 10 can track the position and orientation of multiple tracked devices simultaneously, using standard coding techniques to distinguish among the tracked devices”; Examiner: The ¶ 0008 RF-signal position determination is applied to the second of the plural simultaneously-tracked devices of ¶ 0041.];
However, Hill does not expressly disclose:
and providing common virtual content to the first device and the second device based on the first relative-position information and the second relative-position information.
Salter discloses:
and providing common virtual content to the first device and the second device based on the first relative-position information and the second relative-position information [Salter: Fig.11B: common virtual object 1125; ¶ 0110: “Two users 1162 and 1160 are viewing object 1125”; ¶ 0032: a hub computing system 12 and mobile processing units build a model of the environment including the “ x, y, z Cartesian positions of all users”; determining a common viewing position of the shared virtual object relative to the first user and the second user, each viewing via a see-through HMD device 2.].
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have included the concept above of Salter in the invention of Hill, that is, providing one common virtual object to both a first and second user’s HMD positioned by the tracked position of both users, because Hill already tracks multiple devices within a single digital world and contemplates AR glasses and HMD tracked devices with their own view screens (Hill ¶¶ 0030, 0031, 0041), and because Hill teaches that RF based positioning works “without lighting or line of sight limitations experienced by camera and other optical systems” (Hill: Abstract, ¶ 0009). This combination of known elements yields the predictable result of a shared extended reality scene in which each of two RF positioned devices display the common virtual content appropriate to its own relative position. Both references are analogous art.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 3, 5, 15, and 17 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:
Regarding claim 3:
The prior art does not teach or suggest either singularly or in combination the at least claimed “determine a number of a plurality of devices within a predetermined range of the apparatus having a predetermined orientation relative to the apparatus based on respective RF signals received at the apparatus from the plurality of devices; and provide the common virtual content to the plurality of devices based on the number of the plurality of devices within the predetermined range of the apparatus having the predetermined orientation relative to the apparatus”, in combination with the other recited claim features.
Regarding claim 5:
The prior art does not teach or suggest either singularly or in combination the at least claimed “determine a plurality of devices within a predetermined range of the apparatus based on respective RF signals received at the apparatus from the plurality of devices; identify a subset of devices that have a predetermined orientation relative to the apparatus from among the plurality of devices based on respective RF signals received at the apparatus from the subset of devices; and provide the common virtual content to the subset of devices”, in combination with the other recited claim features.
Regarding claim 15:
The limitations of claim 15 have been addressed in the discussion of claim 3 above.
Regarding claim 17:
The limitations of claim 17 have been addressed in the discussion of claim 5 above.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
[Duca; Anthony et al., US 20190130648 A1] discloses:
“Systems, methods, and computer readable media for displaying an augmented reality environment are disclosed. The method can include generating a geospatial map of a physical environment indicating a relative position of the one or more physical objects to a position of a first device of a first user, determining one or more candidate locations within the physical environment for projecting an avatar of a second user based on the geospatial map of the physical environment, and causing the first device to display the avatar of the second user at a selected candidate location of the one or more candidate locations,” as recited in the abstract.
Inquiry
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Koosha Sharifi-Tafreshi whose telephone number is (571)270-5897. The examiner can normally be reached Mon - Fri 8AM to 5PM EST.
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, Nitin Patel can be reached at (571) 272-7677. 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.
/KOOSHA SHARIFI-TAFRESHI/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2628
Prosecution Insights