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 .
The amendment filed on 07/06/2026 have been entered. Applicant amended claims 1, 4, and 8 in the amendment. Claims 7 and 9 are canceled.
Claims 1-6, 8, and 10-11 remain pending.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to claims 1-6, 8, and 10-11 filed on 07/06/2026 have been considered but they are deemed to be moot in view of new grounds of rejection.
Examiner’s Note
Examiner attempted to reach Applicant’s Attorney to forward prosecution. Applicant’s Attorney is encouraged to contact the Examiner.
Claim Objections
Claim 8 are objected to because of the following informalities:
Claim 8, lines 8-9, “second threshold confidence score” should read “the second threshold confidence score”;
Appropriate correction is required.
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.
Claims 1-6, 8, and 10-11 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor (or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the applicant), regards as the invention.
Claim 1 recites the limitation "the user" in line 22. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
Claim 4 recites the limitation "the different threshold confidence score categories" in lines 6-7. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
Claim 4 recites the limitation "the confidence score threshold" in line 16. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
Claim 8 recites the limitation "the account corresponding to the retrieved record" in line 18. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
Claim 8 recites the limitation "the user" in line 25. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
All dependent claims are rejected as having the same deficiencies as the claims they depend from.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Douglas et al. (US 2016/0314456 A1). Determine whether the confidence level exceeds a threshold; if the confidence level associated with the token falls below the threshold, deny the request for financial account information and require additional authentication data (e.g., PIN, biometric data, etc.) before providing the requested financial account information ([0069]).
Bates et al. (US 6,873,982 B1). Increase the weights of entries in the search database based upon what documents are accessed last in response to a search request.
Mandel et al. (US 2015/0347596 A1). Upon determining that one or more prior search requests were received, weight the one or more records of the set of search results based on a weighting metric relative to the another set of one or more search terms.
Estes et al. (US 7,158,776 B1). Obtain a voice print of the user to ensure that the user of the mobile device is an authorized user.
Chi (US 2013/0018659 A1). Compare the generated voiceprint(s) with the stored voiceprint(s) of authorized user(s); if a match is found between a stored voiceprint and a generated voiceprint, then the user can be classified as authorized, and device can perform the instruction(s) in the speech input from the authorized user ([0125]).
Cheyer (US 2012/0245941 A1). The device can generate a voiceprint while the user speaks voice commands into the device; compare the voice characteristics of the voice in the speech input to voice characteristics of a voiceprint of an authorized user stored on device.
Mahajan (US 2010/0216429 A1). The generated voiceprint is compared to a database of voiceprints of known individuals to determine if there is a match ([0069]).
Grover (US 2008/0256613 A1). Receive a request for authentication of a client with an existing voice print identification; compare the received recordings to one or more stored voiceprints, and if a match is found, the client’s identity is verified ([0037]).
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 KAYLEE J HUANG whose telephone number is (571)272-0080. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 9AM-5PM.
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, Joon H Hwang can be reached on 571-272-4036. 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.
Kaylee Huang
08/18/2026
/KAYLEE J HUANG/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2447
