Obviousness

Obviousness Analysis under 35 U.S.C. § 103 for US Patent 10,528,129

The claims of US Patent 10,528,129 generally describe a method, a computer-readable medium, and an immersive display apparatus for presenting virtual or augmented reality content. The inventive core revolves around:

1. Obtaining image information for displaying distinct images to each of a user's eyes in an immersive display.
2. Identifying specific "first" and "second" areas within these images that correspond to the natural occlusion points of a user's own facial features (such as the nose or cheeks).
3. Replacing the dynamic information intended for these identified areas with static images (or no image).
4. Displaying the adjusted images, wherein the static images remain constant, providing a stable visual reference while the remainder of the displayed content changes. This aims to reduce motion sickness and enhance realism.

For a combination of prior art references to render a claim obvious under 35 U.S.C. § 103, there must be a teaching, suggestion, or motivation in the prior art that would have led a person having ordinary skill in the art (PHOSITA) to combine the references to achieve the claimed invention. The motivation can stem from the references themselves, from common knowledge, or from the nature of the problem to be solved.

The priority date for US 10,528,129 is September 19, 2014. References must predate this to qualify as prior art for an obviousness analysis.

Most Relevant Prior Art for Obviousness

Based on the provided prior art analysis, the most thematically relevant references with priority dates preceding US 10,528,129 are:

• US20130141419A1 (Mount): "Augmented reality with realistic occlusion." (Priority: December 1, 2011). This patent directly addresses "realistic occlusion" in augmented reality environments. The concept of creating a believable visual experience by managing how virtual objects interact with real-world visibility is highly pertinent.
• US20150294504A1 (Navigate Surgical Technologies, Inc.): "Marker-based pixel replacement." (Priority: April 15, 2014). This reference provides a technical mechanism for modifying displayed images by replacing pixels, albeit in a "marker-based" context.

Obviousness Argument

A person having ordinary skill in the art (PHOSITA) in the field of immersive display technology (e.g., VR/AR headset development) would have been motivated to combine the teachings of the identified prior art with common knowledge to arrive at the invention of US 10,528,129.

Core Problem Recognized by the Patent:
The specification of US 10,528,129 explicitly states that typical immersive displays can cause motion sickness and disorientation. This is attributed to two main factors:

1. Presenting stereoscopic 3D imagery in areas of the eye that normally receive static non-stereoscopic imagery (e.g., the area occluded by a user's nose).
2. The "lack of the point of reference, which is removed when the nose and other normally static imagery that a person is accustomed to seeing in each separate eye is replaced with imagery from an immersive display."

The patent also notes that "replacing parts of the images with static images to simulate a nose reduces the number of pixels for which information is processed for display, thus reducing one or more of processing requirements, memory requirements, and bandwidth utilized to transfer information to the immersive display."

Combination 1: Mount (Realistic Occlusion) + General Knowledge of Immersive Display Challenges

• Mount's Teaching: US20130141419A1 teaches "augmented reality with realistic occlusion." A PHOSITA would understand that "realistic occlusion" is crucial for believable augmented and virtual reality experiences. The concept inherently requires accounting for how various objects (real or virtual) block the view of others.
• Motivation to Combine: A PHOSITA, aiming to achieve a "realistic" immersive display experience (as motivated by Mount) and addressing the well-known problems of motion sickness and disorientation in VR/AR (as acknowledged by US 10,528,129 itself), would recognize that the user's own facial features, particularly the nose, provide a constant, static point of reference in real-world vision. The absence of this natural and static occlusion in an immersive display environment creates an unnatural visual experience that contributes to disorientation. It would have been obvious for a PHOSITA to extend the concept of "realistic occlusion" to include the user's own physiology. To simulate the naturally static visual presence of the nose or cheeks, the most straightforward approach would be to replace dynamic content in the corresponding peripheral areas of the displayed images with a static image (or simply no image, which the patent also discusses as an option). This would provide the missing stable reference, thereby mitigating motion sickness and enhancing the perceived realism.
• Obviousness: The problem of motion sickness/disorientation due to the absence of the natural nose reference was a known challenge in immersive displays. Mount's focus on "realistic occlusion" would naturally lead a PHOSITA to consider all aspects of natural visual occlusion, including self-occlusion by facial features. Implementing this by using static imagery (or no imagery) in the relevant display areas is an obvious design choice, given that the real-world nose is a static visual element relative to the eyes.

Combination 2: Navigate Surgical (Pixel Replacement) + Mount (Realistic Occlusion) + General Knowledge

• Navigate Surgical's Teaching: US20150294504A1 discloses "marker-based pixel replacement." This reference teaches a technical method for altering specific pixels within a displayed image.
• Motivation to Combine: If a PHOSITA were to pursue the goal of "realistic occlusion" (Mount) to simulate facial features in an immersive display, they would seek practical methods for implementing this. "Pixel replacement" (Navigate Surgical) offers a direct technical solution for modifying image data in specific regions. While Navigate Surgical's method is "marker-based," a PHOSITA would readily understand that the principle of pixel replacement could be applied to any identified area, including those predetermined to correspond to a user's nose or cheeks. The motivation to combine these would be to use a known image manipulation technique to achieve the desired realistic physiological occlusion for improved user experience and reduced motion sickness, as previously discussed.
• Obviousness: Given the motivation to achieve realistic occlusion by simulating physiological features like the nose with static elements, applying a known technique for manipulating pixels (such as "pixel replacement" from Navigate Surgical) to the specific areas corresponding to the nose or cheeks would be a straightforward implementation. The selection of static images for these areas is an obvious choice because the actual nose is a static visual element in a user's field of view. Furthermore, the additional benefit of reducing processing requirements (as described in US 10,528,129) would provide an independent motivation for a PHOSITA to implement such a pixel replacement strategy for non-essential peripheral areas.

In summary, the specific solution of replacing dynamic content with static images corresponding to a user's nose or cheeks in an immersive display would have been obvious to a PHOSITA. This is due to the clear motivation to enhance realism and reduce motion sickness (a known problem in the field), combined with the general teaching of realistic occlusion and known techniques for image manipulation like pixel replacement.