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 Arguments
Applicant’s arguments, see Remarks, filed 6-17-2026, with respect to the rejection(s) of claim(s) under 103 have been fully considered and are persuasive. Therefore, the previous rejection has been withdrawn. The attorney argues that “Chaum does not disclose or suggest using a convolutional neural network to generate encoded feature vectors from plaintext identifying information ... Felsher does not disclose or suggest using a convolutional neural network to generate encoded feature vectors. Neither Chaum nor Felsher discloses any neural network technology, and the combination does not disclosure a pre-trained embedding network comprising a convolutional neural network configured to generate encoded feature vectors from plaintext identifying information”. The arguments are based on the new claim amendment(s) per se. However, upon further consideration, a new ground(s) of rejection is made in view of Yi et al (US 20190205620).
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted is in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statement is being considered by the examiner.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(b):
(b) CONCLUSION.—The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph:
The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the applicant regards as his invention.
Claim 33 recites the limitation "instantiate at least one pre-trained embedding network, comprising at least one convolutional neural network ("CNN"), configured to generate encoded feature vectors from an input of plaintext identifying information; associate a unique identifier with a first and second encryption key; generate at a local device a label mappable to or encoded as the unique identifier in response, at least in part, to generating the encoded feature vectors produced from the plaintext biometric information at the local device … ". It is not clear if the plaintext identifying information is the same as the plaintext biometric information. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. Therefore, the corresponding dependent claim(s), if any, are also rejected for the same rationale.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 103 which forms the basis for all obviousness rejections set forth in this Office action:
A patent for a claimed invention may not be obtained, notwithstanding that the claimed invention is not identically disclosed as set forth in section 102, if the differences between the claimed invention and the prior art are such that the claimed invention as a whole would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which the claimed invention pertains. Patentability shall not be negated by the manner in which the invention was made.
The text of those sections of Title 35, U.S. Code not included in this action can be found in a prior Office action.
The factual inquiries for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized as follows:
1. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art.
2. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue.
3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art.
4. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness.
Claim(s) 33 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Yi et al (US 20190205620), Yi, Felsher et al (US 8316237), Fel and further in view of Chaum (US 10375042), Cha.
Claim 33: Yi teaches a private identity system, the system comprising: at least one processor operatively connected to a memory, the at least one processor configured to (Fig. 12): instantiate at least one pre-trained embedding network, comprising at least one convolutional neural network ("CNN"), configured to generate encoded feature vectors from an input of plaintext identifying information; ([08] the training dataset cleaning module is configured to perform Euclidean embedding (feature extraction) on each image in a group of identically-labeled face images using a deep neural network ([066] employs a convolutional neutral network (CNN)-based face detection framework), wherein the deep neural network is pre-trained so that a cross product between two embedded/extracted feature vectors directly corresponds to face similarity between the two corresponding face images ..., [0112] a JPEG compression process can be applied on a JPEG image to change some of the pixel values).
Yi is silent on communicate the unique identifier from the local device to a remote device; associate a unique identifier with a first and second encryption key; generate at a local device a label mappable to or encoded as the unique identifier in response, at least in part, to generating the encoded feature vectors produced from the plaintext biometric information at the local device;
But analogous art Fel teaches communicate the unique identifier from the local device to a remote device; associate a unique identifier with a first and second encryption key; generate at a local device a label mappable to or encoded as the unique identifier in response, at least in part, to generating the encoded feature vectors produced from the plaintext biometric information at the local device; (C5L59-60: an identifier of the information sought (or to be transmitted) is also communicated (C26L37-38: The key provided to the Remote Key Handler); C24L22-29, 58-63, C35L21-22: The Authentication Database, for example, provide a means for definitively identifying the User the identification is based on a Public Key Infrastructure, biometric identifiers... C42L25-35: automatically distributing secured versions of a file decryption key... and cryptographically generating key using biometric data... the file's security label, which is defined to contain a plurality of Access-Control Entries Records (ACER's)... each ACER includes respective other data such as: ACER-unique identifying data for uniquely identifying an associated user).
Therefore, it is prima facie obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the invention of Yi to include the idea of having identifier for encryption keys and a mappable label for vectors as taught by Fel so that the process employs secure cryptographic schemes, which reduce the risks and liability for unauthorized disclosure of private information, while maintaining efficient and robust transactions (C7L2-5).
The combination of Yi and Fel are silent on retrieve, at the local device, a respective key of the first and second encryption keys based on, at least in part, the unique identifier; retrieve, at the remote device, an associated key of the first and second encryption key based on, at least in part, the unique identifier; and employ the first and second encryption keys to authenticate a user of the local device.
But analogous art Cha teaches retrieve, at the local device, a respective key of the first and second encryption keys based on, at least in part, the unique identifier; retrieve, at the remote device, an associated key of the first and second encryption key based on, at least in part, the unique identifier; and employ the first and second encryption keys to authenticate a user of the local device. (C26L52-55,66-67, C271-5, C12L60-63: the user device sending a message to at least one desired recipient of the data item, the message including keying information; Fig. 37A: Box 3720 indicates that the user device supplies the sent selection string to be in effect a substitute for that server's first keystream; C42L29: the sender, chooses a key e… C4L41-43: keys known to pairs made up of a user and a node are referred to as "common" keys to the pair; C7L33-34: element can be cryptographically dependent on a secret key (i.e., associated key) common to the user and the node… C17L60: k(l, x) is the key held as a secret in common between subscriber one and node x; C13L16-25: at least a first mix receiving... and the at least first mix locating the mix-stage key received earlier by matching the fingerprint of the key with the associated key previously received and then using the located key to process... C30L7-10: if public keys are available related to these private keys, verification of the process is provided).
Therefore, it is prima facie obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the combined inventions of Yi and Fel to include the idea of using keys identified using a unique identifier and use the same for authentication of input as taught by Cha so that the cryptographic function includes keying material accessible to the respective nodes to produce a pseudonym that is at least very likely unique and believed ideally hard for other than the cooperation of nodes to recreate or check (C51L25-29).
Conclusion
Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP § 706.07(a). Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a).
A shortened statutory period for reply to this final action is set to expire THREE MONTHS from the mailing date of this action. In the event a first reply is filed within TWO MONTHS of the mailing date of this final action and the advisory action is not mailed until after the end of the THREE-MONTH shortened statutory period, then the shortened statutory period will expire on the date the advisory action is mailed, and any nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) pursuant to 37 CFR 1.136(a) will be calculated from the mailing date of the advisory action. In no event, however, will the statutory period for reply expire later than SIX MONTHS from the mailing date of this final action.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Badri Champakesan whose telephone number is (571)270-3867. The examiner can normally be reached M-F: 8.30am-4.30pm (EST).
Examiner interviews are available via telephone, in-person, and video conferencing using a USPTO supplied web-based collaboration tool. To schedule an interview, applicant is encouraged to use the USPTO Automated Interview Request (AIR) at http://www.uspto.gov/interviewpractice.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Jung Kim can be reached at (571) 272-3804. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300. Information regarding the status of published or unpublished applications may be obtained from Patent Center. Unpublished application information in Patent Center is available to registered users. To file and manage patent submissions in Patent Center, visit: https://patentcenter.uspto.gov. Visit https://www.uspto.gov/patents/apply/patent-center for more information about Patent Center and https://www.uspto.gov/patents/docx for information about filing in DOCX format. For additional questions, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000.
/BADRINARAYANAN /Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2494.
Prosecution Insights