Office Action 5: Final Rejection (2024-07-29)
Rejection types: 103 - Obviousness

CLAIMS:
1\. (currently amended) A device, comprising:
at least one processor;
a camera accessible to the at least one processor; and
storage accessible to the at least one processor and comprising instructions executable by the at least one processor to:
responsive to a trigger, receive input from the camera.
based on the input, recognize one or more aspects related to a geographic location that have been preregistered, wherein the one or more aspects that are preregistered comprise one or more of: a registered object associated with the geographic location, geometry of the geographic location;
based on the recognition of the one or more aspects related to the geographic location that have been preregistered, permit use of the device; and
based on failure to recognize the one or more aspects related to the geographic location that have been preregistered, deny use of the device .

2-11. (canceled).310

12\. (currently amended) A method, comprising:

responsive to a trigger, receiving, at a device, input from a camera.
based on the input, using the device to recognize one or more elements related to a particular location that have been preregistered;
based on the recognition of the one or more elements related to the particular location that have been preregistered, permitting use of the device; and
based on failure to recognize the one or more elements related to the particular location that have been preregistered, deny use of the device .

13-17. (canceled).1416

18\. (currently amended) An apparatus, comprising:
at least one computer readable storage medium (CRSM) that is not a transitory signal, the computer readable storage medium comprising instructions executable by at least one processor to:
receive input from a camera;
based on the input, recognize one or more aspects related to a particular location that have been preregistered, the one or more aspects comprising one or more of: geometry of the particular location, a registered object located at the particular location;

based on the recognition of the one or more aspects related to the particular location that have been preregistered, permit use of a device; and
based on failure to recognize the one or more aspects related to the particular location that have been preregistered, deny use of the device .

19-27. (canceled).2026

28\. (previously presented)The device of Claim 1, wherein the trigger comprises receipt of a power on signal, the power on signal generated responsive to a press of a power button on the device.

29-34 (cancelled).3033

35\. (previously presented)The method of Claim 12, wherein the trigger comprises receipt of a power on signal, the power on signal generated responsive to a press of a power button on the device.

36-37. (canceled).

38\. (previously presented)The device of Claim 1, wherein the instructions are executable to:

present a first graphical user interface (GUI) on a display, the first GUI comprising a prompt instructing a user to point at one or more real-world objects to register for subsequent recognition by the device to permit use of the device;
execute gesture recognition to identify the user as pointing with a finger at the one or more real-world objects to register the one or more real-world objects; and
subsequent to identification of the user as pointing with the finger at the one or more real- world objects to register the one or more real-world objects, present a second GUI on the display, the second GUI being different from the first GUI, the second GUI indicating that the one or more real- world objects have been registered.

39\. (previously presented)The method of Claim 12, comprising:
as part of a registration process, presenting a first graphical user interface (GUI) on a display, the first GUI comprising a prompt instructing a user to point at one or more real-world objects to register for subsequent recognition by the device to permit use of the device;
executing gesture recognition to identify the user as pointing with a finger at the one or more real-world objects to register the one or more real-world objects; and
subsequent to identification of the user as pointing with the finger at the one or more real- world objects to register the one or more real-world objects, presenting a second GUI on the display, the second GUI being different from the first GUI, the second GUI indicating that the one or more real-world objects have been registered.

40\. (previously presented)The apparatus of Claim 18, wherein the instructions are executable to:
present a first graphical user interface (GUI) on a display, the first GUI comprising a prompt instructing a user to point at one or more real-world objects to register for subsequent recognition by the at least one processor to permit use of the device;
identify the user as pointing with a finger at the one or more real-world objects to register the one or more real-world objects; and
subsequent to identification of the user as pointing with the finger at the one or more real- world objects to register the one or more real-world objects, present a second GUI on the display, the second GUI being different from the first GUI, the second GUI indicating that the one or more real- world objects have been registered.

41\. (previously presented)The device of Claim 1, wherein the instructions are executable to:
present a graphical user interface (GUI) on a display, the GUI comprising a prompt instructing a user to turn in a circle for the device to map the geographic location and/or recognize individual objects to register for subsequent recognition by the device to permit use of the device.

42-43. (canceled).

44\. (currently amended) The device of Claim 1, wherein the instructions are executable to:
based on the recognition of the one or more aspects related to the geographic location, present a first graphical object on a display, the first graphical object indicating a first aspect of the geographic location that has been recognized: and based on identification, using the input from the camera, of a real-world object that has not been matched to a registered object, present a second graphical object on the display, the second graphical object being different from the first graphical object.

45-50. (canceled).4649

51\. (currently amended) The device of Claim 1, wherein the instructions are executable to:
prior to the trigger, receiving the input, and recognizing the one or more aspects, present a settings graphical user interface (GUI) on a display, the settings GUI comprising an option that is selectable to enable the device to, in the future, perform the recognition of the one or more aspects.

52\. (new) The device of Claim 1, wherein the trigger comprises receipt of a power on signal.

53\. (new) The method of Claim 12, wherein the trigger comprises receipt of a power on signal.

54\. (new) The method of Claim 12, comprising:
presenting a graphical user interface (GUI) on a display, the GUI comprising a prompt instructing a user to turn in a circle for the device to map the particular location and/or recognize individual objects to register for subsequent recognition to permit use of the device.

55\. (new) The method of Claim 12, comprising:
based on the recognition of the one or more elements related to the particular location that have been preregistered, presenting a first graphical object on a display, the first graphical object indicating a first element of the particular location that has been recognized; and
based on identification, using the input from the camera, of a real-world object that has not been matched to a registered object, presenting a second graphical object on the display, the second graphical object being different from the first graphical object.

56\. (new) The method of Claim 1, comprising:
presenting a settings graphical user interface (GUI) on a display, the settings GUI comprising an option that is selectable to enable the device to, in the future, perform the recognition of the one or more elements.

57\. (new) The apparatus of Claim 18, wherein the instructions are executable to:
responsive to receipt of a power on signal, attempt to recognize the one or more aspects related to the particular location that have been preregistered.

58\. (new) The apparatus of Claim 18, wherein the instructions are executable to:
present a graphical user interface (GUI) on a display, the GUI comprising a prompt instructing a user to turn in a circle for the device to map the particular location and/or recognize individual objects to register for subsequent recognition to permit use of the device.

59\. (new) The apparatus of Claim 18, wherein the instructions are executable to:
based on the recognition of the one or more aspects related to the particular location, present a first graphical object on a display, the first graphical object indicating a first aspect of the particular location that has been recognized; and
based on identification, using the input from the camera, of a real-world object that has not been matched to a registered object, present a second graphical object on the display, the second graphical object being different from the first graphical object.

60\. (new) The apparatus of Claim 18, wherein the instructions are executable to:
present a settings graphical user interface (GUI) on a display, the settings GUI comprising an option that is selectable to enable the at least one processor to, in the future, perform the recognition of the one or more aspects.

OFFICE ACTION:
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 Amendments
This communication is in response to the amendments filed on 16 April 2024:
Claims 1, 12, 18, 44 and 51 are amended.
Claims 2-11, 13-17, 19-27, 29-34, 36-37, 42-43 and 45-50 are canceled.
Claims 52-60 are added.
Claims 1, 12, 18, 28, 35, 38-41, 44 and 51-60 are pending.
Response to Arguments
In response to Applicant’s remarks filed on 16 April 2024:
a.	Applicant’s arguments that Howarter fails to teach or suggest the limitation of “denying use of a device based on failure to recognize the one or more aspects related to the geographic location” has been fully considered but is deemed not-persuasive. Applicant’s attention is directed to Howarter, Paragraph [0005], see “…The set of instructions may be executed by the processor to determine a geographic location of a vehicle, determine a position of the mobile communication devices within the vehicle, determine conditional parameters of the mobile communication device, access database records correlating the geographic location with restrictions, determine whether use of the mobile communications device should be restricted within the vehicle in response to the geographic location…and configure the capabilities of the mobile communications device that are available in response to the restriction determination”, where “access database records correlating the geographic location with restrictions” is analogous to recognizing whether one or more aspects related to the geographic location have been preregistered and where “determine whether use of the mobile communications device should be restricted within the vehicle in response to the geographic location…and configure the capabilities of the mobile communications device that are available in response to the restriction determination” is analogous to denying use of the device (restricting) and taking one or more actions (configuring) based on the recognition of one or more aspects related to the geographic location that have been preregistered. Although Howarter does not specifically go into detail about the restriction and configuration happening based on failure to recognize, one of ordinary skill in the art would come to a conclusion that Howarters’ disclosure of restricting (or denying) use of a device based on geographic location can be construed to be of similar nature.
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 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, 12, 18 and 57 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Wright, JR. et al. (U.S. PGPub. 2020/0394012), hereinafter Wright, in view of Cudak et al. (U.S. PGPub. 2015/0358769), hereinafter Cudak, in further view of Howarter et al. (U.S. PGPub. 2013/0237207), hereinafter Howarter.
Regarding claim 1, Wright teaches A device (Wright, Paragraph [0163], see “…the AR or VR system may include a device for each user (e.g. a mobile device like a tablet or mobile phone, a head worn device like Google Glass or any other head mounted device, desktop PC, or laptop)”, where “head worn device like Google Glass or any other head mounted device” is being read as the device), comprising:
at least one processor (Wright, Paragraph [0163], see “…The user device may comprise a camera that allows the user to capture a stream of images from the user’s environment and a processing unit that analyzes images captured by the camera and determines relative position of the device within the environment (e.g., performs device tracking)”, where “processing unit” is being read as comprising at least one processor);
a camera accessible to the at least one processor (Wright, Paragraph [0163], see “…The user device may comprise a camera that allows the user to capture a stream of images from the user’s environment and a processing unit that analyzes images captured by the camera…”, where the camera is accessible to the at least one processor); and
storage accessible to the at least one processor and comprising instructions executable by the at least one processor to (Wright, Paragraph [0026], see “…One example computing device in the form of a computer 120 may include a processing unit 202, memory 204, removable storage 212, and non-removable storage 214…the computing device may instead be a smartphone, a tablet, smartwatch, another wearable computing device type, or other computing device including the same, similar, fewer, or more elements than illustrated and described with regard to FIG. 2”) (Wright, Paragraph [0029], see “Computer-readable instructions stored on a computer-readable medium are executable by the processing unit 202 of the computer 120”, where “computer-readable medium” is being read as storage accessible to the at least one processor and comprising instructions executable by the at least one processor):
responsive to a trigger, receive input from the camera (Wright, Paragraph [0037], see “…At block 405, one or more image(s) including at least a portion of an object are captured using a camera”, where “one or more image(s) including at least a portion of an object are captured using a camera” is being read as receiving input from the camera and where the one or more images including at least a portion of an object are captured using a camera responsive to a trigger, where the Examiner relied on BRI of how input is received from a camera, whether it’s a button being pressed or the camera focusing on an object before receiving input from the camera. It is safe to assume the camera is not just capturing images 24/7, and that there needs to be some sort of trigger that initiates the input received from the camera);
based on the input, recognize one or more aspects related to a geographic location that have been preregistered (Wright, Paragraph [0037], see “…At block 410, the processor recognizes the object from the captured image(s)…”) (Wright, Paragraph [0039], see “…the processor may extract visual features from the identified object. The visual features may be any aspect of the object that can be extracted based on the information in the image(s) captured by the camera. This may include…geo-location data (e.g., when the object is located at a unique location), etc.”, where “The visual features may be any aspect of the object that can be extracted based on the information in the image(s) captured by the camera. This may include…geo-location data” is being read as recognizing one or more aspects related to a geographic location) (Wright, Paragraph [0179], see “…the database may store environment maps and may be filtered or searched by the geolocation to retrieve an environment map of the particular geolocation. Once the environment map is retrieved, it is loaded the user device compares features of objects identified in an image captured by the camera of the user device with information from the environment map. When there is a match of objects in the image to information in the environment map, find the geometric relationship of the device relative to the environment…”, where “database may store environment maps…” is being read as preregistering aspects related to a geographic location), wherein the one or more aspects that are preregistered comprise one or more of: a registered object associated with the geographic location, geometry of the geographic location (Wright, Paragraph [0039], see “…the processor may extract visual features from the identified object. The visual features may be any aspect of the object that can be extracted based on the information in the image(s) captured by the camera. This may include…geo-location data (e.g., when the object is located at a unique location), etc.”, where “identified object” is being read as a registered object and where “The visual features may be any aspect of the object that can be extracted based on the information…This may include…geo-location data (e.g., when the object is located at a unique location)” is analogous to the registered object being associated with a geographic location) (Wright, Paragraph [0179], see “…the database may store environment maps and may be filtered or searched by the geolocation to retrieve an environment map of the particular geolocation. Once the environment map is retrieved, it is loaded the user device compares features of objects identified in an image captured by the camera of the user device with information from the environment map. When there is a match of objects in the image to information in the environment map, find the geometric relationship of the device relative to the environment…”, where “the geometric relationship of the device relative to the environment” is being read as the one or more aspects that are recognized comprising of geometry of the geographic location);
Wright does not teach the following limitation(s) as taught by Cudak: based on the recognition of the one or more aspects related to the geographic location that have been preregistered, permit use of the device (Cudak, Paragraph [0015], see “…Where the use of the electronic device has been restricted by preventing login attempts, the method may later allow login attempts on the electronic device in response to the location of the electronic device matching a predetermined home location”, where “the method may later allow login attempts on the electronic device in response to the location of the electronic device matching a predetermined home location” is analogous to permitting use of the device (i.e., through logging the user into the electronic device) based on the recognition of the one or more aspects related to the geographic location, where the one or more aspects are defined by the users’ home).
Therefore, it would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the techniques for use of coordinated local user devices during a shared augmented reality session, disclosed of Wright, by implementing techniques for securing a mobile device, comprising of permitting use of the device based on the recognition of the one or more aspects related to the geographic location, disclosed of Cudak.
One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to make this modification in order to implement techniques for permitting device use based on location recognized from camera input, comprising of permitting use of the device based on the recognition of the one or more aspects related to the geographic location. This allows for better security management by comparing a registered aspect of a respective geographic location with the input provided by the camera in order to deem that use of the device is permitted in the requested geographic location. This allows for the use of the device to only be permitted when in specific areas (e.g., at home, at the office, etc.). Cudak is deemed as analogous art due to the art disclosing techniques of permitting use of the device based on the recognition of the one or more aspects related to the geographic location (Cudak, Paragraph [0015]).
Wright as modified by Cudak do not teach the following limitation(s) as taught by Howarter: based on failure to recognize the one or more aspects related to the geographic location that have been preregistered, deny use of the device (Howarter, Paragraph [0005], see “…The set of instructions may be executed by the processor to determine a geographic location of a vehicle, determine a position of the mobile communication devices within the vehicle, determine conditional parameters of the mobile communication device, access database records correlating the geographic location with restrictions, determine whether use of the mobile communications device should be restricted within the vehicle in response to the geographic location…and configure the capabilities of the mobile communications device that are available in response to the restriction determination”, where “access database records correlating the geographic location with restrictions” is analogous to recognizing whether one or more aspects related to the geographic location have been preregistered and where “determine whether use of the mobile communications device should be restricted within the vehicle in response to the geographic location…and configure the capabilities of the mobile communications device that are available in response to the restriction determination” is analogous to denying use of the device (restricting) and taking one or more actions (configuring) based on the recognition of one or more aspects related to the geographic location that have been preregistered. Although Howarter does not specifically go into detail about the restriction and configuration happening based on failure to recognize, one of ordinary skill in the art would come to a conclusion that Howarters’ disclosure of restricting (or denying) use of a device based on geographic location can be construed to be of similar nature).
Therefore, it would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the techniques for use of coordinated local user devices during a shared augmented reality session, disclosed of Wright, and techniques disclosed of Cudak, by implementing techniques of denying use of the device and taking one or more actions based on failure to recognize one or more aspects related to the geographic location that have been preregistered, disclosed of Howarter.
One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to make this modification in order to implement techniques for permitting device use based on location recognized from camera input, comprising of denying use of the device and taking one or more actions based on failure to recognize one or more aspects related to the geographic location that have been preregistered. This allows for better security management by utilizing a database of preregistered data corresponding to a geographic location in order to determine whether the device is permitted to be used in a specific geographic location. Howarter is deemed as analogous art due to the art disclosing techniques of denying use of the device and taking one or more actions based on failure to recognize one or more aspects related to the geographic location that have been preregistered (Howarter, Paragraph [0005]).
Regarding claim 12, Wright teaches A method, comprising:
responsive to a trigger, receiving, at a device, input from a camera (Wright, Paragraph [0037], see “…At block 405, one or more image(s) including at least a portion of an object are captured using a camera”, where “one or more image(s) including at least a portion of an object are captured using a camera” is being read as receiving input from the camera and where the one or more images including at least a portion of an object are captured using a camera responsive to a trigger, where the Examiner relied on BRI of how input is received from a camera, whether it’s a button being pressed or the camera focusing on an object before receiving input from the camera. It is safe to assume the camera is not just capturing images 24/7, and that there needs to be some sort of trigger that initiates the input received from the camera);
based on the input, using the device to recognize one or more elements related to a particular location that have been preregistered (Wright, Paragraph [0037], see “…At block 410, the processor recognizes the object from the captured image(s)…”) (Wright, Paragraph [0039], see “…the processor may extract visual features from the identified object. The visual features may be any aspect of the object that can be extracted based on the information in the image(s) captured by the camera. This may include…geo-location data (e.g., when the object is located at a unique location), etc.”, where “The visual features may be any aspect of the object that can be extracted based on the information in the image(s) captured by the camera. This may include…geo-location data” is being read as recognizing one or more elements related to a particular location) (Wright, Paragraph [0179], see “…the database may store environment maps and may be filtered or searched by the geolocation to retrieve an environment map of the particular geolocation. Once the environment map is retrieved, it is loaded the user device compares features of objects identified in an image captured by the camera of the user device with information from the environment map. When there is a match of objects in the image to information in the environment map, find the geometric relationship of the device relative to the environment…”, where “database may store environment maps…” is being read as preregistering elements related to a particular location);
Wright does not teach the following limitation(s) as taught by Cudak: based on the recognition of the one or more elements related to the particular location that have been preregistered, permitting use of the device (Cudak, Paragraph [0015], see “…Where the use of the electronic device has been restricted by preventing login attempts, the method may later allow login attempts on the electronic device in response to the location of the electronic device matching a predetermined home location”, where “the method may later allow login attempts on the electronic device in response to the location of the electronic device matching a predetermined home location” is analogous to permitting use of the device (i.e., through logging the user into the electronic device) based on the recognition of the one or more elements related to the particular location, where the one or more aspects are defined by the users’ home).
Therefore, it would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the techniques for use of coordinated local user devices during a shared augmented reality session, disclosed of Wright, by implementing techniques for securing a mobile device, comprising of permitting use of the device based on the recognition of the one or more elements related to the particular location, disclosed of Cudak.
One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to make this modification in order to implement techniques for permitting device use based on location recognized from camera input, comprising of permitting use of the device based on the recognition of the one or more elements related to the particular location. This allows for better security management by comparing a registered element of a respective particular location with the input provided by the camera in order to deem that use of the device is permitted in the requested particular location. This allows for the use of the device to only be permitted when in specific areas (e.g., at home, at the office, etc.). Cudak is deemed as analogous art due to the art disclosing techniques of permitting use of the device based on the recognition of the one or more element related to the particular location (Cudak, Paragraph [0015]).
Wright as modified by Cudak do not teach the following limitation(s) as taught by Howarter: based on failure to recognize the one or more elements related to the particular location that have been preregistered, deny use of the device (Howarter, Paragraph [0005], see “…The set of instructions may be executed by the processor to determine a geographic location of a vehicle, determine a position of the mobile communication devices within the vehicle, determine conditional parameters of the mobile communication device, access database records correlating the geographic location with restrictions, determine whether use of the mobile communications device should be restricted within the vehicle in response to the geographic location…and configure the capabilities of the mobile communications device that are available in response to the restriction determination”, where “access database records correlating the geographic location with restrictions” is analogous to recognizing whether one or more aspects related to the geographic location have been preregistered and where “determine whether use of the mobile communications device should be restricted within the vehicle in response to the geographic location…and configure the capabilities of the mobile communications device that are available in response to the restriction determination” is analogous to denying use of the device (restricting) and taking one or more actions (configuring) based on the recognition of one or more aspects related to the geographic location that have been preregistered. Although Howarter does not specifically go into detail about the restriction and configuration happening based on failure to recognize, one of ordinary skill in the art would come to a conclusion that Howarters’ disclosure of restricting (or denying) use of a device based on geographic location can be construed to be of similar nature).
Therefore, it would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the techniques for use of coordinated local user devices during a shared augmented reality session, disclosed of Wright, and techniques disclosed of Cudak, by implementing techniques of denying use of the device and taking one or more actions based on failure to recognize one or more aspects related to the geographic location that have been preregistered, disclosed of Howarter.
One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to make this modification in order to implement techniques for permitting device use based on location recognized from camera input, comprising of denying use of the device and taking one or more actions based on failure to recognize one or more aspects related to the geographic location that have been preregistered. This allows for better security management by utilizing a database of preregistered data corresponding to a geographic location in order to determine whether the device is permitted to be used in a specific geographic location. Howarter is deemed as analogous art due to the art disclosing techniques of denying use of the device and taking one or more actions based on failure to recognize one or more aspects related to the geographic location that have been preregistered (Howarter, Paragraph [0005]).
Regarding claim 18, Wright teaches An apparatus (Wright, Paragraph [0163], see “…the AR or VR system may include a device for each user (e.g. a mobile device like a tablet or mobile phone, a head worn device like Google Glass or any other head mounted device, desktop PC, or laptop)”, where “head worn device like Google Glass or any other head mounted device” is being read as the device), comprising:
at least one computer readable storage medium (CSRM) that is not a transitory signal, the computer readable storage medium comprising instructions executed by at least one processor to (Wright, Paragraph [0026], see “…One example computing device in the form of a computer 120 may include a processing unit 202, memory 204, removable storage 212, and non-removable storage 214…the computing device may instead be a smartphone, a tablet, smartwatch, another wearable computing device type, or other computing device including the same, similar, fewer, or more elements than illustrated and described with regard to FIG. 2”) (Wright, Paragraph [0029], see “Computer-readable instructions stored on a computer-readable medium are executable by the processing unit 202 of the computer 120”, where “computer-readable medium” is being read as storage accessible to the at least one processor and comprising instructions executable by the at least one processor):
receive input from a camera (Wright, Paragraph [0037], see “…At block 405, one or more image(s) including at least a portion of an object are captured using a camera”, where “one or more image(s) including at least a portion of an object are captured using a camera” is being read as receiving input from the camera);
based on the input, recognize one or more aspects related to a particular location that have been preregistered (Wright, Paragraph [0037], see “…At block 410, the processor recognizes the object from the captured image(s)…”) (Wright, Paragraph [0039], see “…the processor may extract visual features from the identified object. The visual features may be any aspect of the object that can be extracted based on the information in the image(s) captured by the camera. This may include…geo-location data (e.g., when the object is located at a unique location), etc.”, where “The visual features may be any aspect of the object that can be extracted based on the information in the image(s) captured by the camera. This may include…geo-location data” is being read as recognizing one or more aspects related to a geographic location) (Wright, Paragraph [0179], see “…the database may store environment maps and may be filtered or searched by the geolocation to retrieve an environment map of the particular geolocation. Once the environment map is retrieved, it is loaded the user device compares features of objects identified in an image captured by the camera of the user device with information from the environment map. When there is a match of objects in the image to information in the environment map, find the geometric relationship of the device relative to the environment…”, where “database may store environment maps…” is being read as preregistering aspects related to a particular location), the one or more aspects comprising one or more of: geometry of the particular location, a registered object located at the particular location (Wright, Paragraph [0039], see “…the processor may extract visual features from the identified object. The visual features may be any aspect of the object that can be extracted based on the information in the image(s) captured by the camera. This may include…geo-location data (e.g., when the object is located at a unique location), etc.”, where “identified object” is being read as a registered object and where “The visual features may be any aspect of the object that can be extracted based on the information…This may include…geo-location data (e.g., when the object is located at a unique location)” is analogous to the registered object being associated with a geographic location) (Wright, Paragraph [0179], see “…the database may store environment maps and may be filtered or searched by the geolocation to retrieve an environment map of the particular geolocation. Once the environment map is retrieved, it is loaded the user device compares features of objects identified in an image captured by the camera of the user device with information from the environment map. When there is a match of objects in the image to information in the environment map, find the geometric relationship of the device relative to the environment…”, where “the geometric relationship of the device relative to the environment” is being read as the one or more aspects that are recognized comprising of geometry of the geographic location);
Wright does not teach the following limitation(s) as taught by Cudak: based on the recognition of the one or more aspects related to the particular location that have been preregistered, permit use of a device (Cudak, Paragraph [0015], see “…Where the use of the electronic device has been restricted by preventing login attempts, the method may later allow login attempts on the electronic device in response to the location of the electronic device matching a predetermined home location”, where “the method may later allow login attempts on the electronic device in response to the location of the electronic device matching a predetermined home location” is analogous to permitting use of the device (i.e., through logging the user into the electronic device) based on the recognition of the one or more elements related to the particular location, where the one or more aspects are defined by the users’ home).
Therefore, it would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the techniques for use of coordinated local user devices during a shared augmented reality session, disclosed of Wright, by implementing techniques for securing a mobile device, comprising of permitting use of the device based on the recognition of the one or more elements related to the particular location, disclosed of Cudak.
One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to make this modification in order to implement techniques for permitting device use based on location recognized from camera input, comprising of permitting use of the device based on the recognition of the one or more elements related to the particular location. This allows for better security management by comparing a registered element of a respective particular location with the input provided by the camera in order to deem that use of the device is permitted in the requested particular location. This allows for the use of the device to only be permitted when in specific areas (e.g., at home, at the office, etc.). Cudak is deemed as analogous art due to the art disclosing techniques of permitting use of the device based on the recognition of the one or more element related to the particular location (Cudak, Paragraph [0015]).
Wright as modified by Cudak do not teach the following limitation(s) as taught by Howarter: based on failure to recognize the one or more aspects related to the particular location that have been preregistered, deny use of the device (Howarter, Paragraph [0005], see “…The set of instructions may be executed by the processor to determine a geographic location of a vehicle, determine a position of the mobile communication devices within the vehicle, determine conditional parameters of the mobile communication device, access database records correlating the geographic location with restrictions, determine whether use of the mobile communications device should be restricted within the vehicle in response to the geographic location…and configure the capabilities of the mobile communications device that are available in response to the restriction determination”, where “access database records correlating the geographic location with restrictions” is analogous to recognizing whether one or more aspects related to the geographic location have been preregistered and where “determine whether use of the mobile communications device should be restricted within the vehicle in response to the geographic location…and configure the capabilities of the mobile communications device that are available in response to the restriction determination” is analogous to denying use of the device (restricting) and taking one or more actions (configuring) based on the recognition of one or more aspects related to the geographic location that have been preregistered. Although Howarter does not specifically go into detail about the restriction and configuration happening based on failure to recognize, one of ordinary skill in the art would come to a conclusion that Howarters’ disclosure of restricting (or denying) use of a device based on geographic location can be construed to be of similar nature).
Therefore, it would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the techniques for use of coordinated local user devices during a shared augmented reality session, disclosed of Wright, and techniques disclosed of Cudak, by implementing techniques of denying use of the device and taking one or more actions based on failure to recognize one or more aspects related to the geographic location that have been preregistered, disclosed of Howarter.
One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to make this modification in order to implement techniques for permitting device use based on location recognized from camera input, comprising of denying use of the device and taking one or more actions based on failure to recognize one or more aspects related to the geographic location that have been preregistered. This allows for better security management by utilizing a database of preregistered data corresponding to a geographic location in order to determine whether the device is permitted to be used in a specific geographic location. Howarter is deemed as analogous art due to the art disclosing techniques of denying use of the device and taking one or more actions based on failure to recognize one or more aspects related to the geographic location that have been preregistered (Howarter, Paragraph [0005]).
Regarding claim 57, Wright as modified by Cudak and further modified by Howarter teaches The apparatus of Claim 18, wherein the instructions are executable to:
responsive to receipt of a power on signal, attempt to recognize the one or more aspects related to the particular location that have been preregistered (Wright, Paragraph [0087], see “…if the electronic device is able to detect situations in which the user is not actively using the device for tracking and/or recognition of objects (e.g., viewing the environment through the electronic device), the computing resources, and thus battery power, of the electronic device can be conserved by turning these algorithms off. The electronic device may be able to detect these situations by analyzing the images received from the camera and an IMU to switch off camera input and computer vision tasks…”, where “The electronic device may be able to detect these situations by analyzing the images received from the camera and an IMU to switch off camera input…” is being read as utilizing a “switch off” and “switch on” for camera input, therefore, when the camera input is switched on (responsive to receipt of a power on signal), the camera attempts to recognize the one or more aspects related to the location).
Claims 28, 35 and 52-53 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Wright, in view of Cudak, in further view of Howarter, in further view of Vries et al. (U.S. PGPub. 2020/0379593), hereinafter Vries.
Regarding claim 28, Wright as modified by Cudak and further modified by Howarter do not teach the following limitation(s) as taught by Vries: The device of Claim 1, wherein the trigger comprises receipt of a power on signal, the power on signal generated responsive to a press of a power button on the device (Vries, Paragraph [0179], see “…Push button 206 is, optionally, used to turn the power on/off on the device by depressing the button and holding the button in the depressed state for a predefined time interval…”, which is analogous to a power on signal being generated responsive to a press of a power button on the device) (Vries, Paragraph [0221], see “…upon receipt of forcer sensor’s 717 signal, the processor may power up the electromagnet and/or alter the state of the electromagnet so as to ready electromagnet 770 to generate a magnetic field to actuate button 710…Upon receipt of the output signal from force sensor 717, the processor may control electromagnet 770 to move from stand-by status to a full power-on mode, thereby actuating button 710…”, wherein the trigger (of the electromagnet) comprises receipt of a power on signal (upon receipt of the output signal from force sensor)).
Therefore, it would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the techniques for use of coordinated local user devices during a shared augmented reality session, disclosed of Wright, techniques disclosed of Cudak, and techniques disclosed of Howarter, by implementing techniques of the trigger comprising receipt of a power on signal, the power on signal generated responsive to a press of a power button on the device, disclosed of Vries.
One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to make this modification in order to implement techniques for permitting device use based on location recognized from camera input, comprising of the trigger comprising receipt of a power on signal, the power on signal generated responsive to a press of a power button on the device. This allows for better security management and power-management by triggering the device to power-on when its time to authorize use of the device. Vries is deemed as analogous art due to the art disclosing techniques of the trigger comprising receipt of a power on signal, the power on signal generated responsive to a press of a power button on the device (Vries, Paragraph [0179]).
Regarding claim 35, Wright as modified by Cudak and further modified by Howarter do not teach the following limitation(s) as taught by Vries: The method of Claim 12, wherein the trigger comprises receipt of a power on signal, the power on signal generated responsive to a press of a power button on the device (Vries, Paragraph [0179], see “…Push button 206 is, optionally, used to turn the power on/off on the device by depressing the button and holding the button in the depressed state for a predefined time interval…”, which is analogous to a power on signal being generated responsive to a press of a power button on the device) (Vries, Paragraph [0221], see “…upon receipt of forcer sensor’s 717 signal, the processor may power up the electromagnet and/or alter the state of the electromagnet so as to ready electromagnet 770 to generate a magnetic field to actuate button 710…Upon receipt of the output signal from force sensor 717, the processor may control electromagnet 770 to move from stand-by status to a full power-on mode, thereby actuating button 710…”, wherein the trigger (of the electromagnet) comprises receipt of a power on signal (upon receipt of the output signal from force sensor)).
Therefore, it would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the techniques for use of coordinated local user devices during a shared augmented reality session, disclosed of Wright, techniques disclosed of Cudak, and techniques disclosed of Howarter, by implementing techniques of the trigger comprising receipt of a power on signal, the power on signal generated responsive to a press of a power button on the device, disclosed of Vries.
One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to make this modification in order to implement techniques for permitting device use based on location recognized from camera input, comprising of the trigger comprising receipt of a power on signal, the power on signal generated responsive to a press of a power button on the device. This allows for better security management and power-management by triggering the device to power-on when its time to authorize use of the device. Vries is deemed as analogous art due to the art disclosing techniques of the trigger comprising receipt of a power on signal, the power on signal generated responsive to a press of a power button on the device (Vries, Paragraph [0179]).
Regarding claim 52, Wright as modified by Cudak and further modified by Howarter do not teach the following limitation(s) as taught by Vries: The device of Claim 1, wherein the trigger comprises receipt of a power on signal (Vries, Paragraph [0179], see “…Push button 206 is, optionally, used to turn the power on/off on the device by depressing the button and holding the button in the depressed state for a predefined time interval…”) (Vries, Paragraph [0221], see “…upon receipt of forcer sensor’s 717 signal, the processor may power up the electromagnet and/or alter the state of the electromagnet so as to ready electromagnet 770 to generate a magnetic field to actuate button 710…Upon receipt of the output signal from force sensor 717, the processor may control electromagnet 770 to move from stand-by status to a full power-on mode, thereby actuating button 710…”, wherein the trigger (of the electromagnet) comprises receipt of a power on signal (upon receipt of the output signal from force sensor)).
Therefore, it would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the techniques for use of coordinated local user devices during a shared augmented reality session, disclosed of Wright, techniques disclosed of Cudak, and techniques disclosed of Howarter, by implementing techniques of the trigger comprising receipt of a power on signal, the power on signal generated responsive to a press of a power button on the device, disclosed of Vries.
One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to make this modification in order to implement techniques for permitting device use based on location recognized from camera input, comprising of the trigger comprising receipt of a power on signal, the power on signal generated responsive to a press of a power button on the device. This allows for better security management and power-management by triggering the device to power-on when its time to authorize use of the device. Vries is deemed as analogous art due to the art disclosing techniques of the trigger comprising receipt of a power on signal, the power on signal generated responsive to a press of a power button on the device (Vries, Paragraph [0179]).
Regarding claim 53, Wright as modified by Cudak and further modified by Howarter do not teach the following limitation(s) as taught by Vries: The method of Claim 12, wherein the trigger comprises receipt of a power on signal (Vries, Paragraph [0179], see “…Push button 206 is, optionally, used to turn the power on/off on the device by depressing the button and holding the button in the depressed state for a predefined time interval…”) (Vries, Paragraph [0221], see “…upon receipt of forcer sensor’s 717 signal, the processor may power up the electromagnet and/or alter the state of the electromagnet so as to ready electromagnet 770 to generate a magnetic field to actuate button 710…Upon receipt of the output signal from force sensor 717, the processor may control electromagnet 770 to move from stand-by status to a full power-on mode, thereby actuating button 710…”, wherein the trigger (of the electromagnet) comprises receipt of a power on signal (upon receipt of the output signal from force sensor)).
Therefore, it would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the techniques for use of coordinated local user devices during a shared augmented reality session, disclosed of Wright, techniques disclosed of Cudak, and techniques disclosed of Howarter, by implementing techniques of the trigger comprising receipt of a power on signal, the power on signal generated responsive to a press of a power button on the device, disclosed of Vries.
One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to make this modification in order to implement techniques for permitting device use based on location recognized from camera input, comprising of the trigger comprising receipt of a power on signal, the power on signal generated responsive to a press of a power button on the device. This allows for better security management and power-management by triggering the device to power-on when its time to authorize use of the device. Vries is deemed as analogous art due to the art disclosing techniques of the trigger comprising receipt of a power on signal, the power on signal generated responsive to a press of a power button on the device (Vries, Paragraph [0179]).
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 38-41, 44, 51, 54-56 and 58-60 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.
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 extension fee 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 date of this final action.

APPLICANT REBUTTAL: Remarks
Reconsideration of the above-captioned application is respectfully requested. The fact that Applicant has focused its comments distinguishing the present claims from the applied references and/or countering certain rejections must not be construed as acquiescence in other portions of rejections not specifically addressed.
The indicated allowability of Claims 38-41, 44, and 51 is gratefully acknowledged.
Existing claims and new claims have been variously amended in consonance with claims as previously presented.
All pending rejections are moot as they do not apply to any extant claim version.
Please also note that the objection to Claim 51 has been addressed above.
A.
Tele
p
hone Call - A
p
ril 15, 2024
Applicant telephoned the examiner on April 15, 2024. In accordance with that telephone call, Applicant welcomes a call back if the examiner has any suggestions for allowance.
B.
Allegations Concerning Howarter
Various rejections rely on Howarter's paragraph 5 as allegedly disclosing something akin to, taking Claim 1 as an example, denying use of a device based on failure to recognize the one or more aspects related to the geographic location. There are at least two shortcomings with the rejections' approach:
(1) First, it appears as though Howarter's paragraph 5 institutes is "restrictions" based on actual recognition of the allegedly analogous items from paragraph 5, not a failure to recognize those allegedly analogous items:
"On [sic] embodiment of the illustrative embodiments provides a method and database management system for controlling the operability of a mobile communications device. A geographic location of a vehicle
may be determined.
A position of the mobile communications device with in [sic] the vehicle
may be determined.
Conditional parameters of the mobile communications device
may be determined.
Database records correlating location information with restrictions may be accessed. A determination may be made whether use of the mobile communications device should be restricted within the vehicle in response to the geographical location, the position of the mobile communications device within the vehicle, the conditional parameters, and the database records. The capabilities of the mobile communications device may be configured in response to the restrictions [emphasis added]."
(2) The rejections appear to sense this, alleging at pages 8-9 of the February 1, 2024 Office Action that "[a]lthough Howarter does not specifically go into detail about the restriction and configuration happening based on failure to recognize, one of ordinary skill in the art would come to a conclusion that Howarters' disclosure of restricting (or denying) use of a device based on geographic location can be construed to be of similar nature."
First, this is apparently an explicit concession that the relied-upon portion of Howarter does not disclose anything that fairly approaches the limitations at issue. Therefore, the use of Howarter's paragraph 5 fails to establish a legitimate prima facie case using evidence against the limitations at
issue in clear violation of KSR Int'l Co. v. Teleflex, Inc., 550 U.S. 398, 420 (2007) and Federal Circuit precedent such as that set forth in In re Piasecki, 745 F.2d 1468 (Fed. Cir. 1984) that evidence be used in support of any prima facie case. Accordingly, Applicant traverses the allegations concerning Howarter's paragraph 5 as being entirely unsupported by evidence. Any allegations these rejections contain should therefore be given no weight since argumentation cannot supplant objective evidence, In re Geisler, 116 F.3d 1465 (Fed. Cir. 1997) at 1470-71.
Second, the way the rejections approach the lack of evidence - by relying on allegations of skill in the art in lieu of evidence - also violates Federal Circuit precedent. Specifically, in Al-Site Corp. v. VSIInt'l, Inc., 174 F.3d 1308 (Fed. Cir. 1999), the Federal Circuit explicitly indicated the following, with emphasis added: "[R]arely will the skill in the art component operate to supply missing knowledge or prior art to reach an obviousness judgment... Skill in the art does not act as a bridge over gaps in substantive presentation of an obviousness case, but instead supplies the primary guarantee of objectivity in the process [emphasis added]." Al-Site Corp., supra. at 1324. The Federal Circuit went on to note that, "To imbue one of ordinary skill in the art with knowledge of the invention, when no prior art reference or references of record convey or suggest that knowledge, is to fall victim to the insidious effect of a hindsight syndrome... [emphasis added]" Al-Site Corp, supra. at 1324 (citing W.L. Gore & Assocs., Inc. v. Garlock, Inc., 721 F.2d 1540, 1553 (Fed.Cir.1983)).
C.
Conclusion

NEXT OFFICE ACTION: 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 Amendments
This communication is in response to the amendments filed on 27 August 2024:
Claims 1, 12, 18, 38-39, 41, 44, 54, 56 and 58-60 are amended.
Claims 2-11, 13-17, 19-27, 29-34, 36-37, 40, 42-43, 45-51 and 55 are canceled.
Claims 1, 12, 18, 28, 35, 38-39, 41, 44, 52-54 and 56-60 are pending.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 1, 12, 18, 28, 35, 38-39, 41, 44, 52-54 and 56-60 are allowed. The following is an examiner’s statement of reasons for allowance:
The instant invention is directed towards techniques of permitting device use based on location recognized from camera input.
The closest prior art are as follows:
Wright et al. (U.S. PGPub. 2020/0394012) discloses techniques of use of coordinated local user devices during a shared augmented reality session. Wright further discloses “a camera accessible to the at least one processor; responsive to a trigger, receive input from the camera; based on the input, recognize one or more aspects related to a geographic location that have been preregistered; wherein the one or more aspects that are preregistered comprise one or more of: a registered object associated with the geographic location, geometry of the geographic location.” However, unlike the instant invention, Wright does not disclose “prior to the trigger, receiving the input, and recognizing the one or more aspects, present a settings graphical user interface (GUI) on a display, the settings GUI comprising an option that is selectable to enable the device to, in the future, perform the recognition of the one or more aspects; based on identification, using the input from the camera, of a real-world object that has not been matched to a registered object, presenting a second graphical object on the display, the second graphical object being different from the first graphical object; subsequent to identification of the user as pointing with the finger at the one or more real-world objects to register the one or more real-world objects, present a second GUI on the display, the second GUI being different from the first GUI, the second GUI indicating that the one or more real-world objects have been registered.”
Cudak et al. (U.S. PGPub. 2015/0358769) discloses techniques of securing a mobile device by binding to an itinerary. Cudak further discloses “based on the recognition of the one or more aspects related to the geographic location that have been preregistered, permit use of the device.” However, unlike the instant invention, Cudak does not disclose “prior to the trigger, receiving the input, and recognizing the one or more aspects, present a settings graphical user interface (GUI) on a display, the settings GUI comprising an option that is selectable to enable the device to, in the future, perform the recognition of the one or more aspects; based on identification, using the input from the camera, of a real-world object that has not been matched to a registered object, presenting a second graphical object on the display, the second graphical object being different from the first graphical object; subsequent to identification of the user as pointing with the finger at the one or more real-world objects to register the one or more real-world objects, present a second GUI on the display, the second GUI being different from the first GUI, the second GUI indicating that the one or more real-world objects have been registered.”
Howarter et al. (U.S. PGPub. 2013/0237207) discloses techniques of controlling wireless communications. Howarter further discloses “based on failure to recognize the one or more aspects related to the geographic location that have been preregistered, deny use of the device.” However, unlike the instant invention, Howarter does not disclose “prior to the trigger, receiving the input, and recognizing the one or more aspects, present a settings graphical user interface (GUI) on a display, the settings GUI comprising an option that is selectable to enable the device to, in the future, perform the recognition of the one or more aspects; based on identification, using the input from the camera, of a real-world object that has not been matched to a registered object, presenting a second graphical object on the display, the second graphical object being different from the first graphical object; subsequent to identification of the user as pointing with the finger at the one or more real-world objects to register the one or more real-world objects, present a second GUI on the display, the second GUI being different from the first GUI, the second GUI indicating that the one or more real-world objects have been registered.”
The prior art references above, individually or in combination, do not disclose all the claimed limitations. For at least these reasons, claims 1, 12, 18, 28, 35, 38-39, 41, 44, 52-54 and 56-60 are allowed.
Conclusion

CITED REFERENCE SUMMARIES: Ref US20200394012: Claims:
-20. (canceled) 21. A method of sharing a user interface between first and second mobile devices, the method comprising: receiving a selection of an instructional sequence from a user with the first mobile device; transmitting data indicative of the selected instructional sequence from the first mobile device to the second mobile device; in response to receiving the data indicative of the selected instructional sequence: capturing a first sequence of images with a camera of the second mobile device, detecting an object within the first sequence of images, the detected object being identified by the selected instructional sequence, tracking the object within the first sequence of images, and displaying the instructional sequence overlaid on the first sequence of images with a display of the second mobile device. 22. The method of claim 21, wherein the first mobile device comprises a handheld mobile device and the second mobile device comprises a head mounted display. 23. The method of claim 21, wherein the first mobile device comprises a touch screen configured to receive input from the user, and wherein the second mobile device comprises an auxiliary input device, different from the touch screen, configured to receive input from the user. 24. The method of claim 21, wherein the instructional sequence comprises a set of repair instructions for repairing the object. 25. The method of claim 21, further comprising receiving a voice command from the user to navigate the instructional sequence with a microphone of the second mobile device. 26. The method of claim 21, further comprising: transmitting data indicative of completion of the instructional sequence from the second mobile device to the first mobile device; and receiving user input related to the completed instructional sequence from the user with the first mobile device. 27. The method of claim 21, further comprising: capturing a second sequence of images with a camera of the first mobile device; detecting the object within the second sequence of images; and displaying a plurality of instructional sequences associated with the detected object with a display of the first mobile device, wherein the selection of the instructional sequence received from the user is in response to displaying the plurality of instructional sequences associated with the detected object. 28. The method of claim 21, wherein displaying the instructional sequence comprises: establishing a connection between the second mobile device and a remote individual; receiving, at the second mobile device, at least a portion of the instructional sequence via the connection with the remote individual; and displaying the received portion of the instructional sequence overlaid on the first sequence of images with the display of the second mobile device. 29. The method of claim 28, wherein the received portion of the instructional sequence comprises an annotation anchored to the tracked object. 30. The method of claim 21, further comprising: receiving administrative data from the user associated with the selected instructional sequence with the first mobile device prior to transmitting the data indicative of the selected instructional sequence to the second mobile device. 31. A head mounted display (HMD), comprising: a display configured to display images; a camera; a processor; and a memory in communication with the processor and having stored thereon computer-executable instructions to cause the processor to: receive data indicative of a selected instructional sequence from a mobile device, the instructional sequence being received at the mobile device based on a user selection, capture a first sequence of images with the camera in response to receiving the data indicative of the selected instructional sequence, detect an object within the first sequence of images, the detected object being identified by the selected instructional sequence, track the object within the first sequence of images, and display the instructional sequence overlaid on the first sequence of images with the display. 32. The HMD of claim 31, wherein the mobile device comprises a touch screen configured to receive input from the user, and wherein the HMD comprises an auxiliary input device, different from the touch screen, configured to receive input from the user. 33. The HMD of claim 31, wherein the display comprises a semi-transparent display screen configured to display the images in a semi-transparent manner. 34. The HMD of claim 31, further comprising a microphone, wherein the memory further has stored thereon computer-executable instructions to cause the processor to receive a voice command from the user to navigate the instructional sequence with the microphone. 35. The HMD of claim 31, wherein the memory further has stored thereon computer-executable instructions to cause the processor to: establish a connection with a remote individual, receive at least a portion of the instructional sequence via the connection with the remote individual, and display the received portion of the instructional sequence overlaid on the first sequence of images with the display. 36. A non-transitory computer readable storage medium having stored thereon instructions that, when executed by a processor, cause a head mounted display (HMD) to: receive data indicative of a selected instructional sequence from a mobile device, the instructional sequence being received at the mobile device based on a user selection; capture a first sequence of images with a camera of the HMD in response to receiving the data indicative of the selected instructional sequence; detect an object within the first sequence of images, the detected object being identified by the selected instructional sequence; track the object within the first sequence of images; and display the instructional sequence overlaid on the first sequence of images with a display of the HMD. 37. The non-transitory computer readable storage medium of claim 36, wherein the mobile device comprises a touch screen configured to receive input from the user and wherein the HMD comprises an auxiliary input device, different from the touch screen, configured to receive input from the user. 38. The non-transitory computer readable storage medium of claim 36, wherein the instructional sequence comprises a set of repair instructions for repairing the tracked object. 39. The non-transitory computer readable storage medium of claim 36, further having stored thereon instructions that, when executed by the processor, cause the HMD to: receive a voice command from the user to navigate the instructional sequence with a microphone of the HMD. 40. The non-transitory computer readable storage medium of claim 36, further having stored thereon instructions that, when executed by the processor, cause the HMD to: establish a connection with a remote individual; receive at least a portion of the instructional sequence via the connection with the remote individual; and display the received portion of the instructional sequence overlaid on the first sequence of images with the display. 41-60. (canceled)
-20. (canceled)
A method of sharing a user interface between first and second mobile devices, the method comprising: receiving a selection of an instructional sequence from a user with the first mobile device; transmitting data indicative of the selected instructional sequence from the first mobile device to the second mobile device; in response to receiving the data indicative of the selected instructional sequence: capturing a first sequence of images with a camera of the second mobile device, detecting an object within the first sequence of images, the detected object being identified by the selected instructional sequence, tracking the object within the first sequence of images, and displaying the instructional sequence overlaid on the first sequence of images with a display of the second mobile device.
The method of claim 21, wherein the first mobile device comprises a handheld mobile device and the second mobile device comprises a head mounted display.
The method of claim 21, wherein the first mobile device comprises a touch screen configured to receive input from the user, and wherein the second mobile device comprises an auxiliary input device, different from the touch screen, configured to receive input from the user.
The method of claim 21, wherein the instructional sequence comprises a set of repair instructions for repairing the object.
The method of claim 21, further comprising receiving a voice command from the user to navigate the instructional sequence with a microphone of the second mobile device.
The method of claim 21, further comprising: transmitting data indicative of completion of the instructional sequence from the second mobile device to the first mobile device; and receiving user input related to the completed instructional sequence from the user with the first mobile device.
The method of claim 21, further comprising: capturing a second sequence of images with a camera of the first mobile device; detecting the object within the second sequence of images; and displaying a plurality of instructional sequences associated with the detected object with a display of the first mobile device, wherein the selection of the instructional sequence received from the user is in response to displaying the plurality of instructional sequences associated with the detected object.
The method of claim 21, wherein displaying the instructional sequence comprises: establishing a connection between the second mobile device and a remote individual; receiving, at the second mobile device, at least a portion of the instructional sequence via the connection with the remote individual; and displaying the received portion of the instructional sequence overlaid on the first sequence of images with the display of the second mobile device.
The method of claim 28, wherein the received portion of the instructional sequence comprises an annotation anchored to the tracked object.
The method of claim 21, further comprising: receiving administrative data from the user associated with the selected instructional sequence with the first mobile device prior to transmitting the data indicative of the selected instructional sequence to the second mobile device.
A head mounted display (HMD), comprising: a display configured to display images; a camera; a processor; and a memory in communication with the processor and having stored thereon computer-executable instructions to cause the processor to: receive data indicative of a selected instructional sequence from a mobile device, the instructional sequence being received at the mobile device based on a user selection, capture a first sequence of images with the camera in response to receiving the data indicative of the selected instructional sequence, detect an object within the first sequence of images, the detected object being identified by the selected instructional sequence, track the object within the first sequence of images, and display the instructional sequence overlaid on the first sequence of images with the display.
The HMD of claim 31, wherein the mobile device comprises a touch screen configured to receive input from the user, and wherein the HMD comprises an auxiliary input device, different from the touch screen, configured to receive input from the user.
The HMD of claim 31, wherein the display comprises a semi-transparent display screen configured to display the images in a semi-transparent manner.
The HMD of claim 31, further comprising a microphone, wherein the memory further has stored thereon computer-executable instructions to cause the processor to receive a voice command from the user to navigate the instructional sequence with the microphone.
The HMD of claim 31, wherein the memory further has stored thereon computer-executable instructions to cause the processor to: establish a connection with a remote individual, receive at least a portion of the instructional sequence via the connection with the remote individual, and display the received portion of the instructional sequence overlaid on the first sequence of images with the display.
A non-transitory computer readable storage medium having stored thereon instructions that, when executed by a processor, cause a head mounted display (HMD) to: receive data indicative of a selected instructional sequence from a mobile device, the instructional sequence being received at the mobile device based on a user selection; capture a first sequence of images with a camera of the HMD in response to receiving the data indicative of the selected instructional sequence; detect an object within the first sequence of images, the detected object being identified by the selected instructional sequence; track the object within the first sequence of images; and display the instructional sequence overlaid on the first sequence of images with a display of the HMD.
The non-transitory computer readable storage medium of claim 36, wherein the mobile device comprises a touch screen configured to receive input from the user and wherein the HMD comprises an auxiliary input device, different from the touch screen, configured to receive input from the user.
The non-transitory computer readable storage medium of claim 36, wherein the instructional sequence comprises a set of repair instructions for repairing the tracked object.
The non-transitory computer readable storage medium of claim 36, further having stored thereon instructions that, when executed by the processor, cause the HMD to: receive a voice command from the user to navigate the instructional sequence with a microphone of the HMD.
The non-transitory computer readable storage medium of claim 36, further having stored thereon instructions that, when executed by the processor, cause the HMD to: establish a connection with a remote individual; receive at least a portion of the instructional sequence via the connection with the remote individual; and display the received portion of the instructional sequence overlaid on the first sequence of images with the display.
-60. (canceled)
Ref US20150358769: Claims:
What is claimed is: 1. A method, comprising: storing an itinerary in memory of an electronic device, wherein the itinerary includes a plurality of destinations and a time period associated with each destination; monitoring the location of the electronic device; comparing the location of the electronic device to the itinerary; and restricting use of the electronic device in response to determining that the location of the electronic device at the current time does not match the destination specified in the itinerary for the time period that includes the current time. 2. The method of claim 1, further comprising: receiving the itinerary through manual input from a user. 3. The method of claim 1, further comprising: accessing a calendar that maintains the itinerary. 4. The method of claim 1, wherein the time period associated with at least one of the destinations is specified by a length of time. 5. The method of claim 1, wherein the time period associated with at least one of the destinations is specified by a calendar date, start time and end time. 6. The method of claim 1, wherein monitoring the location of the electronic device includes receiving signals from a global positioning system. 7. The method of claim 1, wherein monitoring the location of the electronic device includes detecting wireless network access points. 8. The method of claim 1, wherein comparing the location of the electronic device to the itinerary includes comparing the location of the electronic device to the itinerary at regular intervals. 9. The method of claim 1, wherein comparing the location of the electronic device to the itinerary includes continuously comparing the location of the electronic device to the itinerary. 10. The method of claim 1, wherein the location of the electronic device is determined to match the destination specified in the itinerary for the time period that includes the current time if the location is within a range of distance from the specified destination. 11. The method of claim 1, wherein the location of the electronic device is determined to match the destination specified in the itinerary for the time period that includes the current time if the location matches one of the destinations specified in the itinerary within a range of time. 12. The method of claim 1, wherein restricting use of the electronic device includes powering off the electronic device. 13. The method of claim 1, wherein restricting use of the electronic device includes preventing login attempts. 14. The method of claim 13, further comprising: after preventing login attempts, allowing login attempts on the electronic device in response to the location of the electronic device matching a predetermined home location. 15. The method of claim 1, wherein restricting use of the electronic device includes preventing use of one or more applications or functions of the electronic device. 16. The method of claim 1, wherein restricting use of the electronic device includes preventing changes to settings. 17. The method of claim 1, further comprising: restoring normal use of the electronic device in response to the location of the electronic device matching a predetermined home location. 18. The method of claim 1, wherein restricting use of the electronic device includes requiring increased authentication in order to use one or more applications or functions of the electronic device. 19. The method of claim 1, further comprising: the electronic device automatically executing a predetermined task in response to determining that the location of the electronic device at the current time does not match the destination specified in the itinerary for the time period that includes the current time. 20. The method of claim 19, wherein the predetermined task is selected from sending a message identifying the location of the electronic device and wiping information from the electronic device.
A method, comprising: storing an itinerary in memory of an electronic device, wherein the itinerary includes a plurality of destinations and a time period associated with each destination; monitoring the location of the electronic device; comparing the location of the electronic device to the itinerary; and restricting use of the electronic device in response to determining that the location of the electronic device at the current time does not match the destination specified in the itinerary for the time period that includes the current time.
The method of claim 1, further comprising: receiving the itinerary through manual input from a user.
The method of claim 1, further comprising: accessing a calendar that maintains the itinerary.
The method of claim 1, wherein the time period associated with at least one of the destinations is specified by a length of time.
The method of claim 1, wherein the time period associated with at least one of the destinations is specified by a calendar date, start time and end time.
The method of claim 1, wherein monitoring the location of the electronic device includes receiving signals from a global positioning system.
The method of claim 1, wherein monitoring the location of the electronic device includes detecting wireless network access points.
The method of claim 1, wherein comparing the location of the electronic device to the itinerary includes comparing the location of the electronic device to the itinerary at regular intervals.
The method of claim 1, wherein comparing the location of the electronic device to the itinerary includes continuously comparing the location of the electronic device to the itinerary.
The method of claim 1, wherein the location of the electronic device is determined to match the destination specified in the itinerary for the time period that includes the 
[Truncated to input limit]