DETAILED ACTION
The applicant’s amendment filed on December 31, 2025 has been acknowledged. Claims 12-19 and 22-29 have been canceled. Claims 31-32 have been added. Claims 1-11, 20-21 and 30-32, as amended, are currently pending and have been considered below.
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 .
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.
Claim(s) 1, 6, 9-11, 20, 21 and 30-32 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Taira et al. (US 2016/0189162 A1) hereafter Taira, in view of Musgrave et al. (US 6,202,151 B1) hereafter Musgrave, further in view of Stevens, III (US 2004/0122754 A1) hereafter Stevens, further in view of Shepherd et al. (WO 2009/126736 A1) hereafter Shepherd, further in view of Moeller (US 2020/0184757 A1) hereafter Moeller.
As per claim 1, Taira discloses a customer authentication apparatus (Abstract), comprising:
at least one memory storing instructions; and at least one processor configured to execute the instructions (Page 2, paragraph [0034]; discloses that the server includes at least one processor and memory which stores instructions which are executed by the processor. Page 2, paragraph [0036]; discloses that the store server includes both a processor and memory for executing the functions) to:
acquire master information generated, in a registration process of registering customer information performed by operation of a customer, from an image captured by a camera, the master information including at least one piece of face information and iris information about a customer, acquire information, the information include a same kind as that of at least a part of the master information, and personal information about the customer, from registered customer information (Page 4, paragraph [0054]-[0055]; discloses that the registered face information is acquired from the center server and the face information from the face extraction module which is the master information which includes at least face information about the customer. Page 7, paragraphs [0083]-[0085]; discloses that along with the registered face information personal information regarding the customer is identified and acquired. Page 3, paragraph [0048]; discloses that the personal information can include member’s name, gender, age, address, telephone number, mail address, membership ID and settlement information, which includes membership point information. Page 10, paragraphs [0123]-[0124]; discloses that the biometric information include both face information and iris information and can be on the first information input device and the second input device. Paragraph [0123] establishes the face information is gathered using a camera);
store the master information and the personal information in association with each other in a first storage unit when the at least a part of the master information and the information of the same kind acquired from the registered user coincide with each other (Page 4, paragraph [0059]; discloses that the registered face information is compared to the face information from the store which is the master information. When a match is determined the values along with the member information is stored in the visiting customer database); and
while the customer is visiting the store, acquire authentication information from a capturing unit installed in the store (Page 2, paragraph [0030]; discloses that the first camera is installed at entrance of the store and captures the face of a person (visitor) coming from the entrance. Paragraph [0032]; discloses a second camera capturing the face of the person at the settlement terminal), and acquire the personal information associated with the master information when information included in any piece of the master information coincides with the authentication information (Page 8, paragraph [0095]; discloses that the registration information which is associated with the master information is retrieved upon authenticating the facial data), and
cause an in-store apparatus installed in the store to execute predetermined processing using the acquired personal information (Page 8, paragraphs [0095]-[0096]; discloses that the visiting customer information acquired by the facial recognition of the customer is used to execute predetermined processing in this case pulling up membership points and using them to automatically complete the settlement of the purchase).
While Taira discloses acquiring biometric information provided from the customer records and the customer information it is not explicit that the customer information was from a certificate possessed by the customer. Additionally Taira fails to establish the acquired information is generated in the registration process from an image of a certificate possessed by the customer captured by the camera. Taira additionally fails to disclose the information generated from an image of a certificate possessed by the customer captured by the camera is generated by performing character recognition processing on the image of the certificate. While Taira establishes registering the customer it is not explicit that this occurs prior to visiting a store.
Musgrave, which like Taira talks about authenticating user’s using biometric information, teaches it is known that the customer information was generated in the registration process from a certificate possessed by the customer (Col. 4, line 53-65; teaches that the system utilizes biometric certificates. Col. 6, lines 41-59; teaches that prior to use of the authentication system the user pre-registers like Taira to create the biometric certificates. From this the certificate is possessed by the customer as it is theirs and used to authenticate them. Col. 5, lines 45-59; teaches that the biometric certificate is received and used to extract the biometric data. This data is compared to the secondary biometric data specifically biometric information about a customer. Col. 7, lines 40-54; teaches that the information about the customer can include iris images and images of the user’s face. Col. 6, lines 5-11; teaches that the system includes instructions indicating the verification of the biometric information which is obtained. Col. 6, lines 25-36; teaches that the use of the biometric certificates allows the transactions to be processed either centrally or remotely and ensures the security of the transactions. Col. 6, lines 41-59; teaches that registration includes identification information which includes birth certificate, a driver’s license, current bank account data and credit card amount data. This information is used to authenticate the individuals).
The primary reference Taira teaches a customer authentication apparatus which has both a processor and memory for carrying out the instructions. Taira acquires both registered and current biometric information to determine if there is a match. When a match occurs the system stores the match in the visiting customer database at the store location. The authentication information is acquired by the store location and includes both biometric data as well as customer information. The customer information is used to pre-process the transaction for the customer. Specifically it calls up the customer data to apply membership points.
The sole difference between the primary reference Taira and the claimed subject matter is that the Taira reference does not explicitly disclose that the registered customer data is stored as a biometric certificate possessed by the customer.
The Musgrave reference establishes that the registered customer data shown in Taira can be stored as a biometric certificate possessed by the customer. Musgrave establishes this type of certificate usage was known in the prior art the time of the invention.
Since each individual element and its functions are shown in the prior art, albeit shown in separate references, the difference between the claimed subject matter and the prior art rests not on any individual element or function but in the very combination itself- that is in the substitution of the registration techniques shown in Taira with the registration data being stored as biometric certificates as taught by Musgrave.
Thus, the simple substitution of one known element for another producing a predictable result renders the claim obvious.
Therefore, from this teaching of Musgrave, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the customer authentication apparatus provided by Taira, with the registration data being stored as biometric certificates as taught by Musgrave, for the purposes of allowing the transaction to be processed either remotely or centrally and to increase security.
The combination however fails to explicitly disclose that information acquired from the certificate is generated from an image of a certificate possessed by the customer and captured by the camera. Additionally the combination fails to establish the acquired information is generated in the registration process from an image of a certificate possessed by the customer captured by the camera. The combination additionally fails to disclose the information generated from an image of a certificate possessed by the customer captured by the camera is generated by performing character recognition processing on the image of the certificate. While the combination establishes registering the customer it is not explicit that this occurs prior to visiting a store.
Stevens, which like the combination talks about customer checkout and authenticating the individual, teaches it is known to acquire information from the certificate which is generated in the registration process from an image of the certificate possessed by the customer and captured by the camera (Page 4, paragraph [0032]; teaches it is known check the identification of the customer or individual. In doing so the camera either of the terminal or other security cameras acquires information from the certificate based on the image which is captured. Stevens establishes that the individual possesses the certificate and this can be in the form of a driver’s license as shown in paragraph [0037]. This is consistent with what is shown in Musgrave which establishes the user registering using their driver’s license as discussed above. Additionally this is consistent with the applicant’s originally filed specification paragraph [0015] which establishes that example of the certificate can be a driver’s license. Since the combination already establishes authenticating the individual using the certification information specifically the driver’s license it would have been obvious to capture that driver’s license using the cameras which already present in the system. As established in Stevens this is a known method of collecting the certificate information).
The primary reference Taira teaches a customer authentication apparatus which has both a processor and memory for carrying out the instructions. Taira acquires both registered and current biometric information to determine if there is a match. When a match occurs the system stores the match in the visiting customer database at the store location. The authentication information is acquired by the store location and includes both biometric data as well as customer information. The customer information is used to pre-process the transaction for the customer. Specifically it calls up the customer data to apply membership points. The Musgrave reference establishes that the registered customer data shown in Taira can be stored as a biometric certificate possessed by the customer. The combination however fails to disclose that information acquired from the certificate is generated from an image of a certificate possessed by the customer and captured by the camera.
Stevens teaches it is known to acquire information from the certificate which is generated from an image of the certificate possessed by the customer and captured by the camera. Stevens establishes that this form of certificate information collection was known in the prior art at the time of the invention.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to include in the customer authentication apparatus provided by Taira and Musgrave the ability to capture images of the customer possessed certificate and acquire information from that image as taught by Stevens since the claimed invention is merely a combination of old elements, and in the combination each element merely would have performed the same function as it did separately, and one of ordinary skill in the art would have recognized that the results of the combination were predictable.
Therefore, from this teaching of Stevens, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the customer authentication apparatus provided by Taira and Musgrave, with the ability to capture images of the customer possessed certificate and acquire information from that image as taught by Stevens, for the purposes of capturing data using known techniques. Since the combination already establishes authenticating the individual using the certification information specifically the driver’s license it would have been obvious to capture that driver’s license using the cameras which already present in the system. As established in Stevens this is a known method of collecting the certificate information.
Additionally the combination fails to the information generated from an image of a certificate possessed by the customer captured by the camera is generated in the registration process by performing character recognition processing on the image of the certificate. While the combination establishes registering the customer it is not explicit that this occurs prior to visiting a store.
Shepherd, which like the combination talks about capturing images of certificates using a camera, teaches it is known establish the acquired information is generated in the registration process from an image of a certificate possessed by the customer captured by the camera. Taira additionally fails to disclose the information generated from an image of a certificate possessed by the customer captured by the camera is generated by performing character recognition processing on the image of the certificate (Page 16, paragraphs [0070]-[0072]; teaches that it is known to capture images of certificates using a camera in this case a driver’s license. The information from the driver’s license can be captured by the camera and processed using optical character recognition. As stated in Shepherd this is done to quickly and accurately read the information from the driver’s license, medical insurance cards or other IDs).
The primary reference Taira teaches a customer authentication apparatus which has both a processor and memory for carrying out the instructions. Taira acquires both registered and current biometric information to determine if there is a match. When a match occurs the system stores the match in the visiting customer database at the store location. The authentication information is acquired by the store location and includes both biometric data as well as customer information. The customer information is used to pre-process the transaction for the customer. Specifically it calls up the customer data to apply membership points. The Musgrave reference establishes that the registered customer data shown in Taira can be stored as a biometric certificate possessed by the customer. Stevens teaches it is known to acquire information from the certificate which is generated from an image of the certificate possessed by the customer and captured by the camera. The combination however fails to disclose that the information generated from an image of is generated by performing character recognition processing on the image of the certificate.
Shepherd teaches it is known to generate information from an image of is generated by performing character recognition processing on the image of the certificate. Shepherd establishes that this form of information processing was known in the prior art at the time of the invention.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to include in the customer authentication apparatus provided by Taira, Musgrave and Stevens the ability to generate information from an image of is generated by performing character recognition processing on the image of the certificate as taught by Shepherd since the claimed invention is merely a combination of old elements, and in the combination each element merely would have performed the same function as it did separately, and one of ordinary skill in the art would have recognized that the results of the combination were predictable.
Therefore, from this teaching of Shepherd, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the customer authentication apparatus provided by Taira, Musgrave and Stevens, with the ability to generate information from an image of is generated by performing character recognition processing on the image of the certificate as taught by Shepherd, for the purposes of generating image information quickly and accurately.
While the combination establishes registering the customer it is not explicit that this occurs prior to visiting a store.
Moeller, which like the combination talks about registering the user, teaches it is known to perform the registration prior to visiting the store (Moeller paragraph [0036]; teaches that prior to going to the physical location it is known to register. Part of registering process includes driver’s license information as well as other information about the user. This can be used to allow for faster and more efficient reception and guest management. Paragraphs [0193]-[0194]; teaches that as part of the user registration the user uses their device which uses an application installed on the user device to register the user with the platform. Paragraph [0254]; teaches that the user registers with the system using their mobile device and this is done prior to the visit to the facility. Since the combination already collects the user data and registers the user it would have been obvious as shown in Moeller to do with using a mobile application and this would make processing the user faster and more efficient).
The primary reference Taira teaches a customer authentication apparatus which has both a processor and memory for carrying out the instructions. Taira acquires both registered and current biometric information to determine if there is a match. When a match occurs the system stores the match in the visiting customer database at the store location. The authentication information is acquired by the store location and includes both biometric data as well as customer information. The customer information is used to pre-process the transaction for the customer. Specifically it calls up the customer data to apply membership points. The Musgrave reference establishes that the registered customer data shown in Taira can be stored as a biometric certificate possessed by the customer. Stevens teaches it is known to acquire information from the certificate which is generated from an image of the certificate possessed by the customer and captured by the camera. Shepherd teaches it is known to generate information from an image of is generated by performing character recognition processing on the image of the certificate. The combination however fails to disclose that the customer registration occurs prior to visiting the store.
Moeller teaches it is known to register customer prior to those customers visiting the store. Moeller establishes that this form of registration was known in the prior art at the time of the invention.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to include in the customer authentication apparatus provided by Taira, Musgrave, Stevens and Shepherd the ability to register customers prior to the customer visiting the store as taught by Moeller since the claimed invention is merely a combination of old elements, and in the combination each element merely would have performed the same function as it did separately, and one of ordinary skill in the art would have recognized that the results of the combination were predictable.
Therefore, from this teaching of Moeller, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the customer authentication apparatus provided by Taira, Musgrave, Stevens and Shepherd the ability to register customers prior to the customer visiting the store as taught by Moeller, for the purposes of efficiently and quickly processing visitors. Since the combination already collects the user data and registers the user it would have been obvious as shown in Moeller to do with using a mobile application and this would make processing the user faster and more efficient.
As per claim 6, the combination of Taira, Musgrave, Stevens, Shepherd and Moeller teaches the customer authentication apparatus according to claim 1; Taira further discloses wherein the personal information is related to an address of the customer (Page 3, paragraph [0048]; discloses that the personal information can include member’s name, gender, age, address, telephone number, mail address, membership ID and settlement information, which includes membership point information).
As per claim 9, the combination of Taira, Musgrave, Stevens, Shepherd and Moeller teaches the customer authentication apparatus according to claim 1; Taira further discloses wherein the at least one processor is further configured to execute the instructions to acquire the master information, the information of the same kind, and the personal information from a terminal of the customer (Page 9, paragraph [0113]; discloses that the information can be acquired from an input device such as mobile terminal which the customer possesses).
As per claim 10, the combination of Taira, Musgrave, Stevens, Shepherd and Moeller teaches the customer authentication apparatus according to claim 1; Taira further discloses wherein the at least one processor is further configured to execute the instructions to acquire the master information, the information of the same kind, and the personal information from an input apparatus installed at an entrance of the or in the store (Page 2, paragraph [0030]; discloses that the first camera is installed at entrance of the store and captures the face of a person (visitor) coming from the entrance).
As per claim 11, Taira discloses a customer authentication method (Abstract), comprising:
by a computer (Page 2, paragraph [0034]; discloses that the server includes at least one processor and memory which stores instructions which are executed by the processor. Page 2, paragraph [0036]; discloses that the store server includes both a processor and memory for executing the functions);
acquiring master information generated, in a registration process of registering customer information performed by operation of a customer, from an image captured by a camera, the master information including at least one piece of face information and iris information about the customer, acquiring information, the information include a same kind as that of at least a part of the master information, and personal information about the customer, from registered customer information (Page 4, paragraph [0054]-[0055]; discloses that the registered face information is acquired from the center server and the face information from the face extraction module which is the master information which includes at least face information about the customer. Page 7, paragraphs [0083]-[0085]; discloses that along with the registered face information personal information regarding the customer is identified and acquired. Page 3, paragraph [0048]; discloses that the personal information can include member’s name, gender, age, address, telephone number, mail address, membership ID and settlement information, which includes membership point information. Page 10, paragraphs [0123]-[0124]; discloses that the biometric information include both face information and iris information and can be on the first information input device and the second input device. Paragraph [0123] establishes the face information is gathered using a camera);
storing the master information and the personal information in association with each other in a first storage unit when the at least a part of the master information and the information of the same kind acquired from the registered user coincide with each other (Page 4, paragraph [0059]; discloses that the registered face information is compared to the face information from the store which is the master information. When a match is determined the values along with the member information is stored in the visiting customer database); and
while the customer is visiting the store, acquiring authentication information from a capturing unit installed in the store (Page 2, paragraph [0030]; discloses that the first camera is installed at entrance of the store and captures the face of a person (visitor) coming from the entrance. Paragraph [0032]; discloses a second camera capturing the face of the person at the settlement terminal), and acquiring the personal information associated with the master information when information included in any piece of the master information coincides with the authentication information (Page 8, paragraph [0095]; discloses that the registration information which is associated with the master information is retrieved upon authenticating the facial data); and
causing an in-store apparatus installed in the store to execute predetermined processing using the acquired personal information (Page 8, paragraphs [0095]-[0096]; discloses that the visiting customer information acquired by the facial recognition of the customer is used to execute predetermined processing in this case pulling up membership points and using them to automatically complete the settlement of the purchase).
While Taira discloses acquiring biometric information provided from the customer records and the customer information it is not explicit that the customer information was from a certificate possessed by the customer. Additionally Taira fails to establish the acquired information is generated in the registration process from an image of a certificate possessed by the customer captured by the camera. Additionally Taira fails to the information generated in the registration process from an image of a certificate possessed by the customer captured by the camera is generated by performing character recognition processing on the image of the certificate. While Taira establishes registering the customer it is not explicit that this occurs prior to visiting a store.
Musgrave, which like Taira talks about authenticating user’s using biometric information, teaches it is known that the customer information was generated in the registration process from a certificate possessed by the customer (Col. 4, line 53-65; teaches that the system utilizes biometric certificates. Col. 6, lines 41-59; teaches that prior to use of the authentication system the user pre-registers like Taira to create the biometric certificates. From this the certificate is possessed by the customer as it is theirs and used to authenticate them. Col. 5, lines 45-59; teaches that the biometric certificate is received and used to extract the biometric data. This data is compared to the secondary biometric data specifically biometric information about a customer. Col. 7, lines 40-54; teaches that the information about the customer can include iris images and images of the user’s face. Col. 6, lines 5-11; teaches that the system includes instructions indicating the verification of the biometric information which is obtained. Col. 6, lines 25-36; teaches that the use of the biometric certificates allows the transactions to be processed either centrally or remotely and ensures the security of the transactions. Col. 6, lines 41-59; teaches that registration includes identification information which includes birth certificate, a driver’s license, current bank account data and credit card amount data. This information is used to authenticate the individuals).
The primary reference Taira teaches a customer authentication apparatus which has both a processor and memory for carrying out the instructions. Taira acquires both registered and current biometric information to determine if there is a match. When a match occurs the system stores the match in the visiting customer database at the store location. The authentication information is acquired by the store location and includes both biometric data as well as customer information. The customer information is used to pre-process the transaction for the customer. Specifically it calls up the customer data to apply membership points.
The sole difference between the primary reference Taira and the claimed subject matter is that the Taira reference does not explicitly disclose that the registered customer data is stored as a biometric certificate possessed by the customer.
The Musgrave reference establishes that the registered customer data shown in Taira can be stored as a biometric certificate possessed by the customer. Musgrave establishes this type of certificate usage was known in the prior art the time of the invention.
Since each individual element and its functions are shown in the prior art, albeit shown in separate references, the difference between the claimed subject matter and the prior art rests not on any individual element or function but in the very combination itself- that is in the substitution of the registration techniques shown in Taira with the registration data being stored as biometric certificates as taught by Musgrave.
Thus, the simple substitution of one known element for another producing a predictable result renders the claim obvious.
Therefore, from this teaching of Musgrave, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the customer authentication method provided by Taira, with the registration data being stored as biometric certificates as taught by Musgrave, for the purposes of allowing the transaction to be processed either remotely or centrally and to increase security.
The combination however fails to explicitly disclose that information acquired from the certificate is generated in the registration process from an image of a certificate possessed by the customer and captured by the camera. Additionally the combination fails to the information generated in the registration process from an image of a certificate possessed by the customer captured by the camera is generated in the registration process by performing character recognition processing on the image of the certificate. While the combination establishes registering the customer it is not explicit that this occurs prior to visiting a store.
Stevens, which like the combination talks about customer checkout and authenticating the individual, teaches it is known to acquire information from the certificate which is generated in the registration process from an image of the certificate possessed by the customer and captured by the camera (Page 4, paragraph [0032]; teaches it is known check the identification of the customer or individual. In doing so the camera either of the terminal or other security cameras acquires information from the certificate based on the image which is captured. Stevens establishes that the individual possesses the certificate and this can be in the form of a driver’s license as shown in paragraph [0037]. This is consistent with what is shown in Musgrave which establishes the user registering using their driver’s license as discussed above. Additionally this is consistent with the applicant’s originally filed specification paragraph [0015] which establishes that example of the certificate can be a driver’s license. Since the combination already establishes authenticating the individual using the certification information specifically the driver’s license it would have been obvious to capture that driver’s license using the cameras which already present in the system. As established in Stevens this is a known method of collecting the certificate information).
The primary reference Taira teaches a customer authentication apparatus which has both a processor and memory for carrying out the instructions. Taira acquires both registered and current biometric information to determine if there is a match. When a match occurs the system stores the match in the visiting customer database at the store location. The authentication information is acquired by the store location and includes both biometric data as well as customer information. The customer information is used to pre-process the transaction for the customer. Specifically it calls up the customer data to apply membership points. The Musgrave reference establishes that the registered customer data shown in Taira can be stored as a biometric certificate possessed by the customer. The combination however fails to disclose that information acquired from the certificate is generated from an image of a certificate possessed by the customer and captured by the camera.
Stevens teaches it is known to acquire information from the certificate which is generated from an image of the certificate possessed by the customer and captured by the camera. Stevens establishes that this form of certificate information collection was known in the prior art at the time of the invention.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to include in the customer authentication apparatus provided by Taira and Musgrave the ability to capture images of the customer possessed certificate and acquire information from that image as taught by Stevens since the claimed invention is merely a combination of old elements, and in the combination each element merely would have performed the same function as it did separately, and one of ordinary skill in the art would have recognized that the results of the combination were predictable.
Therefore, from this teaching of Stevens, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the customer authentication apparatus provided by Taira and Musgrave, with the ability to capture images of the customer possessed certificate and acquire information from that image as taught by Stevens, for the purposes of capturing data using known techniques. Since the combination already establishes authenticating the individual using the certification information specifically the driver’s license it would have been obvious to capture that driver’s license using the cameras which already present in the system. As established in Stevens this is a known method of collecting the certificate information.
Additionally the combination fails to the information generated from an image of a certificate possessed by the customer captured by the camera is generated in the registration process by performing character recognition processing on the image of the certificate. While the combination establishes registering the customer it is not explicit that this occurs prior to visiting a store.
Shepherd, which like the combination talks about capturing images of certificates using a camera, teaches it is known establish the acquired information is generated from an image of a certificate possessed by the customer captured by the camera. Taira additionally fails to disclose the information generated from an image of a certificate possessed by the customer captured by the camera is generated by performing character recognition processing on the image of the certificate (Page 16, paragraphs [0070]-[0072]; teaches that it is known to capture images of certificates using a camera in this case a driver’s license. The information from the driver’s license can be captured by the camera and processed using optical character recognition. As stated in Shepherd this is done to quickly and accurately read the information from the driver’s license, medical insurance cards or other IDs).
The primary reference Taira teaches a customer authentication apparatus which has both a processor and memory for carrying out the instructions. Taira acquires both registered and current biometric information to determine if there is a match. When a match occurs the system stores the match in the visiting customer database at the store location. The authentication information is acquired by the store location and includes both biometric data as well as customer information. The customer information is used to pre-process the transaction for the customer. Specifically it calls up the customer data to apply membership points. The Musgrave reference establishes that the registered customer data shown in Taira can be stored as a biometric certificate possessed by the customer. Stevens teaches it is known to acquire information from the certificate which is generated from an image of the certificate possessed by the customer and captured by the camera. The combination however fails to disclose that the information generated from an image of is generated by performing character recognition processing on the image of the certificate.
Shepherd teaches it is known to generate information from an image of is generated by performing character recognition processing on the image of the certificate. Shepherd establishes that this form of information processing was known in the prior art at the time of the invention.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to include in the customer authentication apparatus provided by Taira, Musgrave and Stevens the ability to generate information from an image of is generated by performing character recognition processing on the image of the certificate as taught by Shepherd since the claimed invention is merely a combination of old elements, and in the combination each element merely would have performed the same function as it did separately, and one of ordinary skill in the art would have recognized that the results of the combination were predictable.
Therefore, from this teaching of Shepherd, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the customer authentication apparatus provided by Taira, Musgrave and Stevens, with the ability to generate information from an image of is generated by performing character recognition processing on the image of the certificate as taught by Shepherd, for the purposes of generating image information quickly and accurately.
While the combination establishes registering the customer it is not explicit that this occurs prior to visiting a store.
Moeller, which like the combination talks about registering the user, teaches it is known to perform the registration prior to visiting the store (Moeller paragraph [0036]; teaches that prior to going to the physical location it is known to register. Part of registering process includes driver’s license information as well as other information about the user. This can be used to allow for faster and more efficient reception and guest management. Paragraphs [0193]-[0194]; teaches that as part of the user registration the user uses their device which uses an application installed on the user device to register the user with the platform. Paragraph [0254]; teaches that the user registers with the system using their mobile device and this is done prior to the visit to the facility. Since the combination already collects the user data and registers the user it would have been obvious as shown in Moeller to do with using a mobile application and this would make processing the user faster and more efficient).
The primary reference Taira teaches a customer authentication apparatus which has both a processor and memory for carrying out the instructions. Taira acquires both registered and current biometric information to determine if there is a match. When a match occurs the system stores the match in the visiting customer database at the store location. The authentication information is acquired by the store location and includes both biometric data as well as customer information. The customer information is used to pre-process the transaction for the customer. Specifically it calls up the customer data to apply membership points. The Musgrave reference establishes that the registered customer data shown in Taira can be stored as a biometric certificate possessed by the customer. Stevens teaches it is known to acquire information from the certificate which is generated from an image of the certificate possessed by the customer and captured by the camera. Shepherd teaches it is known to generate information from an image of is generated by performing character recognition processing on the image of the certificate. The combination however fails to disclose that the customer registration occurs prior to visiting the store.
Moeller teaches it is known to register customer prior to those customers visiting the store. Moeller establishes that this form of registration was known in the prior art at the time of the invention.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to include in the customer authentication apparatus provided by Taira, Musgrave, Stevens and Shepherd the ability to register customers prior to the customer visiting the store as taught by Moeller since the claimed invention is merely a combination of old elements, and in the combination each element merely would have performed the same function as it did separately, and one of ordinary skill in the art would have recognized that the results of the combination were predictable.
Therefore, from this teaching of Moeller, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the customer authentication apparatus provided by Taira, Musgrave, Stevens and Shepherd the ability to register customers prior to the customer visiting the store as taught by Moeller, for the purposes of efficiently and quickly processing visitors. Since the combination already collects the user data and registers the user it would have been obvious as shown in Moeller to do with using a mobile application and this would make processing the user faster and more efficient.
As per claim 20, the combination of Taira, Musgrave, Stevens, Shepherd and Moeller teaches the customer authentication method according to claim 11; Taira further discloses further comprising: by the computer, acquiring the master information, the information of the same kind, and the personal information from an input apparatus installed at an entrance of the store or in the store (Page 2, paragraph [0030]; discloses that the first camera is installed at entrance of the store and captures the face of a person (visitor) coming from the entrance).
As per claim 21, Taira discloses a non-transitory computer-readable storage medium storing a program causing a computer to execute (Page 17, paragraph [0217]; discloses that the system includes a non-transitory computer-readable storage medium storing the program causing it to execute the functions):
a first acquisition process comprising: acquiring master information generated, in a registration process of registering customer information performed by operation of a customer, from an image captured by a camera, the master information including at least one piece of face information and iris information about the customer, and acquiring information, the information include a same kind as that of at least a part of the master information, and personal information about the customer, from registered customer information (Page 4, paragraph [0054]-[0055]; discloses that the registered face information is acquired from the center server and the face information from the face extraction module which is the master information which includes at least face information about the customer. Page 7, paragraphs [0083]-[0085]; discloses that along with the registered face information personal information regarding the customer is identified and acquired. Page 3, paragraph [0048]; discloses that the personal information can include member’s name, gender, age, address, telephone number, mail address, membership ID and settlement information, which includes membership point information. Page 10, paragraphs [0123]-[0124]; discloses that the biometric information include both face information and iris information and can be on the first information input device and the second input device. Paragraph [0123] establishes the face information is gathered using a camera);
a storage processing process of storing the master information and the personal information in association with each other in a first storage unit when the at least a part of the master information and the information of the same kind acquired from the registered user coincide with each other (Page 4, paragraph [0059]; discloses that the registered face information is compared to the face information from the store which is the master information. When a match is determined the values along with the member information is stored in the visiting customer database); and
while the customer is visiting the store, a second acquisition process of acquiring authentication information from capturing unit installed in the store (Page 2, paragraph [0030]; discloses that the first camera is installed at entrance of the store and captures the face of a person (visitor) coming from the entrance. Paragraph [0032]; discloses a second camera capturing the face of the person at the settlement terminal), and acquiring the personal information associated with the master information when information included in any piece of the master information coincides with the authentication information (Page 8, paragraph [0095]; discloses that the registration information which is associated with the master information is retrieved upon authenticating the facial data); and
an execution process of causing an in-store apparatus installed in the store to execute predetermined processing using the personal information acquired by the second acquisition function process (Page 8, paragraphs [0095]-[0096]; discloses that the visiting customer information acquired by the facial recognition of the customer is used to execute predetermined processing in this case pulling up membership points and using them to automatically complete the settlement of the purchase).
While Taira discloses acquiring biometric information provided from the customer records and the customer information it is not explicit that the customer information was from a certificate possessed by the customer. Additionally Taira fails to establish the acquired information is generated in the registration process from an image of a certificate possessed by the customer captured by the camera. Additionally Taira fails to the information generated from an image of a certificate possessed by the customer captured by the camera is generated by performing character recognition processing on the image of the certificate.
Musgrave, which like Taira talks about authenticating user’s using biometric information, teaches it is known that the customer information was generated in the registration process from a certificate possessed by the customer (Col. 4, line 53-65; teaches that the system utilizes biometric certificates. Col. 6, lines 41-59; teaches that prior to use of the authentication system the user pre-registers like Taira to create the biometric certificates. From this the certificate is possessed by the customer as it is theirs and used to authenticate them. Col. 5, lines 45-59; teaches that the biometric certificate is received and used to extract the biometric data. This data is compared to the secondary biometric data specifically biometric information about a customer. Col. 7, lines 40-54; teaches that the information about the customer can include iris images and images of the user’s face. Col. 6, lines 5-11; teaches that the system includes instructions indicating the verification of the biometric information which is obtained. Col. 6, lines 25-36; teaches that the use of the biometric certificates allows the transactions to be processed either centrally or remotely and ensures the security of the transactions. Col. 6, lines 41-59; teaches that registration includes identification information which includes birth certificate, a driver’s license, current bank account data and credit card amount data. This information is used to authenticate the individuals).
The primary reference Taira teaches a customer authentication apparatus which has both a processor and memory for carrying out the instructions. Taira acquires both registered and current biometric information to determine if there is a match. When a match occurs the system stores the match in the visiting customer database at the store location. The authentication information is acquired by the store location and includes both biometric data as well as customer information. The customer information is used to pre-process the transaction for the customer. Specifically it calls up the customer data to apply membership points.
The sole difference between the primary reference Taira and the claimed subject matter is that the Taira reference does not explicitly disclose that the registered customer data is stored as a biometric certificate possessed by the customer.
The Musgrave reference establishes that the registered customer data shown in Taira can be stored as a biometric certificate possessed by the customer. Musgrave establishes this type of certificate usage was known in the prior art the time of the invention.
Since each individual element and its functions are shown in the prior art, albeit shown in separate references, the difference between the claimed subject matter and the prior art rests not on any individual element or function but in the very combination itself- that is in the substitution of the registration techniques shown in Taira with the registration data being stored as biometric certificates as taught by Musgrave.
Thus, the simple substitution of one known element for another producing a predictable result renders the claim obvious.
Therefore, from this teaching of Musgrave, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the customer authentication apparatus provided by Taira, with the registration data being stored as biometric certificates as taught by Musgrave, for the purposes of allowing the transaction to be processed either remotely or centrally and to increase security.
The combination however fails to explicitly disclose that information acquired from the certificate is generated from an image of a certificate possessed by the customer and captured by the camera. Additionally the combination fails to the information generated in the registration process from an image of a certificate possessed by the customer captured by the camera is generated by performing character recognition processing on the image of the certificate.
Stevens, which like the combination talks about customer checkout and authenticating the individual, teaches it is known to acquire information from the certificate which is generated in the registration process from an image of the certificate possessed by the customer and captured by the camera (Page 4, paragraph [0032]; teaches it is known check the identification of the customer or individual. In doing so the camera either of the terminal or other security cameras acquires information from the certificate based on the image which is captured. Stevens establishes that the individual possesses the certificate and this can be in the form of a driver’s license as shown in paragraph [0037]. This is consistent with what is shown in Musgrave which establishes the user registering using their driver’s license as discussed above. Additionally this is consistent with the applicant’s originally filed specification paragraph [0015] which establishes that example of the certificate can be a driver’s license. Since the combination already establishes authenticating the individual using the certification information specifically the driver’s license it would have been obvious to capture that driver’s license using the cameras which already present in the system. As established in Stevens this is a known method of collecting the certificate information).
The primary reference Taira teaches a customer authentication apparatus which has both a processor and memory for carrying out the instructions. Taira acquires both registered and current biometric information to determine if there is a match. When a match occurs the system stores the match in the visiting customer database at the store location. The authentication information is acquired by the store location and includes both biometric data as well as customer information. The customer information is used to pre-process the transaction for the customer. Specifically it calls up the customer data to apply membership points. The Musgrave reference establishes that the registered customer data shown in Taira can be stored as a biometric certificate possessed by the customer. The combination however fails to disclose that information acquired from the certificate is generated from an image of a certificate possessed by the customer and captured by the camera.
Stevens teaches it is known to acquire information from the certificate which is generated from an image of the certificate possessed by the customer and captured by the camera. Stevens establishes that this form of certificate information collection was known in the prior art at the time of the invention.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to include in the customer authentication apparatus provided by Taira and Musgrave the ability to capture images of the customer possessed certificate and acquire information from that image as taught by Stevens since the claimed invention is merely a combination of old elements, and in the combination each element merely would have performed the same function as it did separately, and one of ordinary skill in the art would have recognized that the results of the combination were predictable.
Therefore, from this teaching of Stevens, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the customer authentication apparatus provided by Taira and Musgrave, with the ability to capture images of the customer possessed certificate and acquire information from that image as taught by Stevens, for the purposes of capturing data using known techniques. Since the combination already establishes authenticating the individual using the certification information specifically the driver’s license it would have been obvious to capture that driver’s license using the cameras which already present in the system. As established in Stevens this is a known method of collecting the certificate information.
Additionally the combination fails to the information generated from an image of a certificate possessed by the customer captured by the camera is generated by performing character recognition processing on the image of the certificate.
Shepherd, which like the combination talks about capturing images of certificates using a camera, teaches it is known establish the acquired information is generated from an image of a certificate possessed by the customer captured by the camera. Taira additionally fails to disclose the information generated from an image of a certificate possessed by the customer captured by the camera is generated by performing character recognition processing on the image of the certificate (Page 16, paragraphs [0070]-[0072]; teaches that it is known to capture images of certificates using a camera in this case a driver’s license. The information from the driver’s license can be captured by the camera and processed using optical character recognition. As stated in Shepherd this is done to quickly and accurately read the information from the driver’s license, medical insurance cards or other IDs).
The primary reference Taira teaches a customer authentication apparatus which has both a processor and memory for carrying out the instructions. Taira acquires both registered and current biometric information to determine if there is a match. When a match occurs the system stores the match in the visiting customer database at the store location. The authentication information is acquired by the store location and includes both biometric data as well as customer information. The customer information is used to pre-process the transaction for the customer. Specifically it calls up the customer data to apply membership points. The Musgrave reference establishes that the registered customer data shown in Taira can be stored as a biometric certificate possessed by the customer. Stevens teaches it is known to acquire information from the certificate which is generated from an image of the certificate possessed by the customer and captured by the camera. The combination however fails to disclose that the information generated from an image of is generated by performing character recognition processing on the image of the certificate.
Shepherd teaches it is known to generate information from an image of is generated by performing character recognition processing on the image of the certificate. Shepherd establishes that this form of information processing was known in the prior art at the time of the invention.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to include in the customer authentication apparatus provided by Taira, Musgrave and Stevens the ability to generate information from an image of is generated by performing character recognition processing on the image of the certificate as taught by Shepherd since the claimed invention is merely a combination of old elements, and in the combination each element merely would have performed the same function as it did separately, and one of ordinary skill in the art would have recognized that the results of the combination were predictable.
Therefore, from this teaching of Shepherd, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the customer authentication apparatus provided by Taira, Musgrave and Stevens, with the ability to generate information from an image of is generated by performing character recognition processing on the image of the certificate as taught by Shepherd, for the purposes of generating image information quickly and accurately.
While the combination establishes registering the customer it is not explicit that this occurs prior to visiting a store.
Moeller, which like the combination talks about registering the user, teaches it is known to perform the registration prior to visiting the store (Moeller paragraph [0036]; teaches that prior to going to the physical location it is known to register. Part of registering process includes driver’s license information as well as other information about the user. This can be used to allow for faster and more efficient reception and guest management. Paragraphs [0193]-[0194]; teaches that as part of the user registration the user uses their device which uses an application installed on the user device to register the user with the platform. Paragraph [0254]; teaches that the user registers with the system using their mobile device and this is done prior to the visit to the facility. Since the combination already collects the user data and registers the user it would have been obvious as shown in Moeller to do with using a mobile application and this would make processing the user faster and more efficient).
The primary reference Taira teaches a customer authentication apparatus which has both a processor and memory for carrying out the instructions. Taira acquires both registered and current biometric information to determine if there is a match. When a match occurs the system stores the match in the visiting customer database at the store location. The authentication information is acquired by the store location and includes both biometric data as well as customer information. The customer information is used to pre-process the transaction for the customer. Specifically it calls up the customer data to apply membership points. The Musgrave reference establishes that the registered customer data shown in Taira can be stored as a biometric certificate possessed by the customer. Stevens teaches it is known to acquire information from the certificate which is generated from an image of the certificate possessed by the customer and captured by the camera. Shepherd teaches it is known to generate information from an image of is generated by performing character recognition processing on the image of the certificate. The combination however fails to disclose that the customer registration occurs prior to visiting the store.
Moeller teaches it is known to register customer prior to those customers visiting the store. Moeller establishes that this form of registration was known in the prior art at the time of the invention.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to include in the customer authentication apparatus provided by Taira, Musgrave, Stevens and Shepherd the ability to register customers prior to the customer visiting the store as taught by Moeller since the claimed invention is merely a combination of old elements, and in the combination each element merely would have performed the same function as it did separately, and one of ordinary skill in the art would have recognized that the results of the combination were predictable.
Therefore, from this teaching of Moeller, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the customer authentication apparatus provided by Taira, Musgrave, Stevens and Shepherd the ability to register customers prior to the customer visiting the store as taught by Moeller, for the purposes of efficiently and quickly processing visitors. Since the combination already collects the user data and registers the user it would have been obvious as shown in Moeller to do with using a mobile application and this would make processing the user faster and more efficient.
As per claim 30, the combination of Taira, Musgrave, Stevens, Shepherd and Moeller teaches the non-transitory computer-readable storage medium program according to claim 21; Taira further discloses wherein the program causes the computer to execute the first acquisition process of acquiring the master information, the information of the same kind, and the personal information from an input apparatus installed at an entrance of the store or in the store (Page 2, paragraph [0030]; discloses that the first camera is installed at entrance of the store and captures the face of a person (visitor) coming from the entrance).
As per claim 31, the combination of Taira, Musgrave, Stevens, Shepherd and Moeller teaches the customer authentication apparatus according to claim 1, Moeller further teaches wherein the registration process is performed using a registration apparatus operated by the customer; and the registration apparatus is an apparatus which is different from the in-store apparatus (Paragraphs [0193]-[0194]; teaches that as part of the user registration the user uses their device which uses an application installed on the user device to register the user with the platform. Paragraph [0254]; teaches that the user registers with the system using their mobile device and this is done prior to the visit to the facility. From this Moeller establishes registering by the customer prior to visiting the facility. This is done by a mobile device of the customer through an application installed on that device. As this is the user device this is different from the in-store apparatus).
As per claim 32, the combination of Taira, Musgrave, Stevens, Shepherd and Moeller teaches the customer authentication apparatus according to claim 31, Moeller further teaches wherein the registration apparatus is a portable terminal possessed by the customer (Paragraphs [0193]-[0194]; teaches that as part of the user registration the user uses their device which uses an application installed on the user device to register the user with the platform. Paragraph [0254]; teaches that the user registers with the system using their mobile device and this is done prior to the visit to the facility. From this Moeller establishes registering by the customer prior to visiting the facility. This is done by a mobile device of the customer through an application installed on that device. As this is the user device this is different from the in-store apparatus).
Claim(s) 2 and 3 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Taira et al. (US 2016/0189162 A1) hereafter Taira, in view of Musgrave et al. (US 6,202,151 B1) hereafter Musgrave, further in view of Stevens, III (US 2004/0122754 A1) hereafter Stevens, further in view of Shepherd et al. (WO 2009/126736 A1) hereafter Shepherd, further in view of Moeller (US 2020/0184757 A1) hereafter Moeller, further in view of Chandrasekaran et al. (US 2016/0321633 A1) hereafter Chandrasekaran.
As per claim 2, the combination of Taira, Musgrave, Stevens, Shepherd and Moeller teaches the customer authentication apparatus according to claim 1; Taira further discloses wherein the personal information is related to an age of the customer (Page 3, paragraph [0048]; discloses that the personal information can include member’s name, gender, age, address, telephone number, mail address, membership ID and settlement information, which includes membership point information)
The combination however fails to explicitly disclose the at least one processor is further configured to execute the instructions to cause the in-store apparatus to execute the predetermined processing when the age satisfies a reference.
Chandrasekaran, which like the combination uses biometrics to recognize customers and provide services, teaches it is known for the at least one processor is further configured to execute the instructions to cause the in-store apparatus to execute the predetermined processing when the age satisfies a reference (Page 4, paragraph [0040]; teaches that like Taira the reference identifies the user using biometrics specifically facial images. Page 5, paragraph [0043]; teaches that it is known once the user is identified to identify the user’s age and for the processor to execute predetermined processing about the age of the customer. Specifically whether the user is permitted to purchase the specific product or not. That is it states “the merchant point of sale device operator determines whether the requested good or service corresponds to an allowed or prohibited item listed in the information associated with the identified user account”. Since the combination already tracks the customer’s age it would have been obvious to restrict the user’s transactions based on this information as shown in Chandrasekaran to ensure compliance with legal obligations).
The primary reference Taira teaches a customer authentication apparatus which has both a processor and memory for carrying out the instructions. Taira acquires both registered and current biometric information to determine if there is a match. When a match occurs the system stores the match in the visiting customer database at the store location. The authentication information is acquired by the store location and includes both biometric data as well as customer information. The customer information is used to pre-process the transaction for the customer. Specifically it calls up the customer data to apply membership points. The Musgrave teaches that it is known for the biometric data to include both the facial data shown in Taira but additionally or alternatively iris information. Musgrave additional establishes that the registered customer data shown in Taira can be stored as a biometric certificate possessed by the customer. Stevens teaches it is known to acquire information from the certificate which is generated from an image of the certificate possessed by the customer and captured by the camera. Shepherd teaches it is known to generate information from an image of is generated by performing character recognition processing on the image of the certificate. Moeller teaches it is known to register customer prior to those customers visiting the store. However, while Taira establishes it is known to record the customer age it fails to explicitly disclose the at least one processor is further configured to execute the instructions to cause the in-store apparatus to execute the predetermined processing when the age satisfies a reference.
Chandrasekaran teaches a similar customer identification system to the combination of Taira and Musgrave. Chandrasekaran teaches it is known once the user is identified to use the identification information and the customer’s age to utilize at least one processor is further configured to execute the instructions to cause the in-store apparatus to execute the predetermined processing when the age satisfies a reference. Chandrasekaran establishes that the use of age to predetermine processing was known in the prior art at the time of the invention.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to include in the customer authentication apparatus if Taira, Musgrave, Stevens, Shepherd and Moeller the ability to execute the predetermined processing when the age satisfies a reference as taught by Chandrasekaran since the claimed invention is merely a combination of old elements, and in the combination each element merely would have performed the same function as it did separately, and one of ordinary skill in the art would have recognized that the results of the combination were predictable.
Therefore, from this teaching of Chandrasekaran, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the customer authentication apparatus provided by Taira, Musgrave, Stevens, Shepherd and Moeller, with the ability to execute the predetermined processing when the age satisfies a reference as taught by Chandrasekaran, for the purposes of ensuring the transactions complies with the rules regarding the user’s age. Since the combination already tracks the customer’s age it would have been obvious to restrict the user’s transactions based on this information as shown in Chandrasekaran to ensure compliance with legal obligations.
As per claim 3, the combination of Taira, Musgrave, Stevens, Shepherd, Moeller and Chandrasekaran teaches the customer authentication apparatus according to claim 2; Tiara further discloses wherein the in-store apparatus is a product registration apparatus or a settlement apparatus (Paragraph [0032]; discloses a second camera capturing the face of the person at the settlement terminal), and
Chandrasekaran further teaches the predetermined processing is processing related to sales of a specific product (Page 5, paragraph [0043]; teaches that it is known once the user is identified to identify the user’s age and for the processor to execute predetermined processing about the age of the customer. Specifically whether the user is permitted to purchase the specific product or not. That is it states “the merchant point of sale device operator determines whether the requested good or service corresponds to an allowed or prohibited item listed in the information associated with the identified user account”. Which establishes that the good is requested and as such a specific product).
Claim(s) 4 and 5 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Taira et al. (US 2016/0189162 A1) hereafter Taira, in view of Musgrave et al. (US 6,202,151 B1) hereafter Musgrave, further in view of Stevens, III (US 2004/0122754 A1) hereafter Stevens, further in view of Shepherd et al. (WO 2009/126736 A1) hereafter Shepherd, further in view of Moeller (US 2020/0184757 A1) hereafter Moeller, further in view of Chandrasekaran et al. (US 2016/0321633 A1) hereafter Chandrasekaran, further in view of Natarajan et al. (US 2017/0124547 A1) hereafter Natarajan.
As per claim 4, the combination of Taira, Musgrave, Stevens, Shepherd, Moeller and Chandrasekaran teaches the customer authentication apparatus according to claim 2; the combination however fails to further discloses wherein a first of the in-store apparatus controls whether the customer can take out or cannot take out a specific product from a placement region in which the product is placed, and a first of the predetermined processing by the first in-store apparatus is processing of allowing the product to be taken out from the placement region.
Natarajan, which like the combination talks about utilizing facial recognition to identify customers, teaches that it is known wherein a first of the in-store apparatus controls whether the customer can take out or cannot take out a specific product from a placement region in which the product is placed, and a first of the predetermined processing by the first in-store apparatus is processing of allowing the product to be taken out from the placement region (Page 3, paragraph [0021]; teach that the customer can be identified using facial recognition. Natarajan states “Having identified a customer, the system can access customer information (e.g., customer profile, purchase history, pending product orders, etc.). Similarly, the customer identification may be confirmed prior to allowing a customer to acquire a prescription that was pre-ordered”. Page 3, paragraph [0024]; teaches that the system includes self-service product storage units including lockers which restrict access to products. Paragraph [0026]; teaches that facial recognition can be used to indicate that the customer is at the sales location. The in-store apparatus controls the locker ensuring that a customer cannot take out a specific product from the placement region in this case the lock unless they are the correct customer which is identified. The predetermined process by the apparatus identifies the user and once validated the system allows the product to be taken from the placement region or unlocks the locker. Since the combination already pre-processes information such as member information and validates that the correct user is purchasing the product, it would have been obvious to allow for self-service as shown in Natarajan by implementing lockers to allow the user pickup items they have already pre-ordered. This would expedite the checkout process while ensuring the correct customer receives the specific product such as a prescription).
The primary reference Taira teaches a customer authentication apparatus which has both a processor and memory for carrying out the instructions. Taira acquires both registered and current biometric information to determine if there is a match. When a match occurs the system stores the match in the visiting customer database at the store location. The authentication information is acquired by the store location and includes both biometric data as well as customer information. The customer information is used to pre-process the transaction for the customer. Specifically it calls up the customer data to apply membership points. The Musgrave teaches that it is known for the biometric data to include both the facial data shown in Taira but additionally or alternatively iris information. Musgrave additional establishes that the registered customer data shown in Taira can be stored as a biometric certificate possessed by the customer. Chandrasekaran teaches it is known once the user is identified to use the identification information and the customer’s age to utilize at least one processor is further configured to execute the instructions to cause the in-store apparatus to execute the predetermined processing when the age satisfies a reference. Stevens teaches it is known to acquire information from the certificate which is generated from an image of the certificate possessed by the customer and captured by the camera. Shepherd teaches it is known to generate information from an image of is generated by performing character recognition processing on the image of the certificate. Moeller teaches it is known to register customer prior to those customers visiting the store. However, while Taira establishes it is known to process customer transactions, the combination fails to disclose wherein a first of the in-store apparatus controls whether a customer can take out or cannot take out a specific product from a placement region in which the product is placed, and a first of the predetermined processing by the first in-store apparatus is processing of allowing the product to be taken out from the placement region.
Natarajan teaches a similar customer identification system to the combination of Taira and Musgrave. Natarajan teaches it is known wherein a first of the in-store apparatus controls whether a customer can take out or cannot take out a specific product from a placement region in which the product is placed, and a first of the predetermined processing by the first in-store apparatus is processing of allowing the product to be taken out from the placement region. Natarajan establishes that it is known to restrict access to products using placement regions or lockers in art at the time of the invention.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to include in the customer authentication apparatus if Taira, Musgrave, Stevens, Shepherd, Moeller and Chandrasekaran the ability to restrict access to products using placement regions or lockers as taught by Natarajan since the claimed invention is merely a combination of old elements, and in the combination each element merely would have performed the same function as it did separately, and one of ordinary skill in the art would have recognized that the results of the combination were predictable.
Therefore, from this teaching of Natarajan, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the customer authentication apparatus provided by Taira, Musgrave, Stevens, Shepherd, Moeller and Chandrasekaran, with the ability to restrict access to products using placement regions or lockers in art at the time of the invention as taught by Natarajan, for the purposes of allowing self-checkout. Since the combination already pre-processes information such as member information and validates that the correct user is purchasing the product, it would have been obvious to allow for self-service as shown in Natarajan by implementing lockers to allow the user pickup items they have already pre-ordered. This would expedite the checkout process while ensuring the correct customer receives the specific product such as a prescription.
As per claim 5, the combination of Taira, Musgrave, Stevens, Shepherd, Moeller, Chandrasekaran and Natarajan teaches the customer authentication apparatus according to claim 4; Taira further discloses wherein the master information includes both pieces of the face information and the iris information (Page 10, paragraph [0124]; discloses that the biometric information include both face information and iris information and can be on the first information input device and the second input device),
there is further a product registration apparatus or a settlement apparatus as a second of the in-store apparatus (Paragraph [0032]; discloses a second camera capturing the face of the person at the settlement terminal),
a first of the capturing unit for the first in-store apparatus and a second of the capturing unit for the second in-store apparatus are provided in the store (Page 2, paragraph [0030]; discloses that the first camera is installed at entrance of the store and captures the face of a person (visitor) coming from the entrance. Paragraph [0032]; discloses a second camera capturing the face of the person at the settlement terminal), and
the first capturing unit generates face information (Page 2, paragraph [0030]; discloses that the first camera is installed at entrance of the store and captures the face of a person (visitor) coming from the entrance), and the second capturing unit generates at least iris information (Page 10, paragraph [0124]; discloses that the biometric information include both face information and iris information and can be on the first information input device and the second input device).
Natarajan further teaches a second of the predetermined processing by the second in-store apparatus is processing related to sales of the specific product (Page 3, paragraph [0021]; teach that the customer can be identified using facial recognition. Natarajan states “Having identified a customer, the system can access customer information (e.g., customer profile, purchase history, pending product orders, etc.). Similarly, the customer identification may be confirmed prior to allowing a customer to acquire a prescription that was pre-ordered”. Page 3, paragraph [0024]; teaches that the system includes self-service product storage units including lockers which restrict access to products. Paragraph [0026]; teaches that facial recognition can be used to indicate that the customer is at the sales location. This is the second predetermined processing as the customer is at the settlement location. The in-store apparatus controls the locker ensuring that a customer cannot take out a specific product from the placement region in this case the lock unless they are the correct customer which is identified. The predetermined process by the apparatus identifies the user and once validated the system allows the product to be taken from the placement region or unlocks the locker).
Claim(s) 7 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Taira et al. (US 2016/0189162 A1) hereafter Taira, in view of Musgrave et al. (US 6,202,151 B1) hereafter Musgrave, further in view of Stevens, III (US 2004/0122754 A1) hereafter Stevens, further in view of Shepherd et al. (WO 2009/126736 A1) hereafter Shepherd, further in view of Moeller (US 2020/0184757 A1) hereafter Moeller, further in view of Vormair et al. (WO 03009244 A2) hereafter Vormair.
As per claim 7, the combination of Taira, Musgrave, Stevens, Shepherd and Moeller teaches the customer authentication apparatus according to claim 6; the combination fails to explicitly disclose wherein the predetermined processing is printing of an address of the customer.
Vormair, which like the combination talks about processing transactions for customers, teaches it is known wherein the predetermined processing is printing of an address of the customer (Page 2, line 48 through Page 3, line 21; teaches that when processing an order for a customer it is known to use their address and to print that address on the item they are to have delivered. Since the combination already collects address information along with other member information it would have been obvious to print that data so the item can be picked up later. Specifically as shown in Vormair this can be used so that the user can enter their address and pick up their ordered product remotely. As shown in Vormair this is beneficial if the user wants to forward the item to a different location to be picked up later).
The primary reference Taira teaches a customer authentication apparatus which has both a processor and memory for carrying out the instructions. Taira acquires both registered and current biometric information to determine if there is a match. When a match occurs the system stores the match in the visiting customer database at the store location. The authentication information is acquired by the store location and includes both biometric data as well as customer information. The customer information is used to pre-process the transaction for the customer. Specifically it calls up the customer data to apply membership points. The Musgrave teaches that it is known for the biometric data to include both the facial data shown in Taira but additionally or alternatively iris information. Musgrave additional establishes that the registered customer data shown in Taira can be stored as a biometric certificate possessed by the customer. Stevens teaches it is known to acquire information from the certificate which is generated from an image of the certificate possessed by the customer and captured by the camera. Shepherd teaches it is known to generate information from an image of is generated by performing character recognition processing on the image of the certificate. Moeller teaches it is known to register customer prior to those customers visiting the store. However, while Taira establishes it is known for the data to include address information it is not explicit that the processor is used to print an address of the customer.
Vormair teaches it is known to process the order by printing the address of the customer on the item which they have ordered. Vormair establishes that printing the address on the item was known in the art at the time of the invention
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to include in the customer authentication apparatus if Taira, Musgrave, Stevens, Shepherd and Moeller the ability to print an address of the customer as taught by Vormair since the claimed invention is merely a combination of old elements, and in the combination each element merely would have performed the same function as it did separately, and one of ordinary skill in the art would have recognized that the results of the combination were predictable.
Therefore, from this teaching of Vormair, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the customer authentication apparatus provided by Taira, Musgrave, Stevens, Shepherd and Moeller, with the ability to print an address of the customer as taught by Vormair, for the purposes of allowing the user to pick up their items through a locker location. Since the combination already collects address information along with other member information it would have been obvious to print that data so the item can be picked up later. Specifically as shown in Vormair this can be used so that the user can enter their address and pick up their ordered product remotely. As shown in Vormair this is beneficial if the user wants to forward the item to a different location to be picked up later.
Claim(s) 8 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Taira et al. (US 2016/0189162 A1) hereafter Taira, in view of Musgrave et al. (US 6,202,151 B1) hereafter Musgrave, further in view of Stevens, III (US 2004/0122754 A1) hereafter Stevens, further in view of Shepherd et al. (WO 2009/126736 A1) hereafter Shepherd, further in view of Moeller (US 2020/0184757 A1) hereafter Moeller, further in view of Vormair et al. (WO 03009244 A2) hereafter Vormair, further in view Fee et al. (US 2019/0114585 A1) hereafter Fee.
As per claim 8, the combination of Taira, Musgrave, Stevens, Shepherd and Moeller teaches the customer authentication apparatus according to claim 6; the combination fails to explicitly disclose wherein the in-store apparatus is a locker, the address of the customer is stored in association with the locker in second storage unit when a door of the locker is closed, and the at least one processor is further configured to execute the instructions to perform, as the predetermined processing, processing of opening the door of the locker when the address as the personal information being acquired and the address stored in the second storage unit coincide with each other.
Vormair, which like the combination talks about processing transactions for customers, teaches it is known wherein the apparatus is a locker (Page 2, line 48 through Page 3, line 21; teaches that the apparatus which the items are stored is a locker),
Vormair further teaches the address of the customer is stored in association with the locker in second storage unit when a door of the locker is closed (Page 2, line 48 through Page 3, line 21; teaches that the address of the customer is stored in association with the locker and used to open the locker door when the door is closed), and
Vormair further teaches the at least one processor is further configured to execute the instructions to perform, as the predetermined processing, processing of opening the door of the locker when the address as the personal information being acquired and the address stored in the second storage unit coincide with each other (Page 2, line 48 through Page 3, line 21; teaches that the address of the customer is stored in association with the locker and used to open the locker door when the door is closed).
The primary reference Taira teaches a customer authentication apparatus which has both a processor and memory for carrying out the instructions. Taira acquires both registered and current biometric information to determine if there is a match. When a match occurs the system stores the match in the visiting customer database at the store location. The authentication information is acquired by the store location and includes both biometric data as well as customer information. The customer information is used to pre-process the transaction for the customer. Specifically it calls up the customer data to apply membership points. The Musgrave teaches that it is known for the biometric data to include both the facial data shown in Taira but additionally or alternatively iris information. Musgrave additional establishes that the registered customer data shown in Taira can be stored as a biometric certificate possessed by the customer. Stevens teaches it is known to acquire information from the certificate which is generated from an image of the certificate possessed by the customer and captured by the camera. Stevens teaches it is known to acquire information from the certificate which is generated from an image of the certificate possessed by the customer and captured by the camera. Moeller teaches it is known to register customer prior to those customers visiting the store. However, while Taira establishes it is known for the data to include address information it is not explicit that the processor is used to print an address of the customer and to use this address to store the customers items in lockers.
Vormair teaches it is known to process the order by printing the address of the customer on the item which they have ordered and to use this address to store the customers items in lockers. Vormair establishes that printing the address on the item and storing the items in a locker was known in the art at the time of the invention
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to include in the customer authentication apparatus if Taira, Musgrave, Stevens, Shepherd and Moeller the ability to print an address of the customer and storing the items in a locker as taught by Vormair since the claimed invention is merely a combination of old elements, and in the combination each element merely would have performed the same function as it did separately, and one of ordinary skill in the art would have recognized that the results of the combination were predictable.
Therefore, from this teaching of Vormair, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the customer authentication apparatus provided by Taira, Musgrave, Stevens, Shepherd and Moeller, with the ability to print an address of the customer and storing the items in a locker as taught by Vormair, for the purposes of allowing the user to pick up their items through a locker location. Since the combination already collects address information along with other member information it would have been obvious to print that data so the item can be picked up later. Specifically as shown in Vormair this can be used so that the user can enter their address and pick up their ordered product remotely. As shown in Vormair this is beneficial if the user wants to forward the item to a different location to be picked up later.
While Vormair establishes that it is known for lockers to hold the items for pickup it is not explicit that the lockers are in-store.
Fee, which like the combination talks about customer transactions and picking up items, teaches it is known for the lockers which store pre-ordered products to be located in-store (Page 1, paragraph [0002]; teaches that it is known for brick-and-mortar retailers to provider locker systems at or near their storefronts to allow customers to pick up purchases for which they have paid on-line so as not to wait at checkout lines. Since the combination already establishes the customer address and using this to store items for pickup later, it would have been obvious to locate these lockers in known locations such as in stores to help reduce customer wait times).
The primary reference Taira teaches a customer authentication apparatus which has both a processor and memory for carrying out the instructions. Taira acquires both registered and current biometric information to determine if there is a match. When a match occurs the system stores the match in the visiting customer database at the store location. The authentication information is acquired by the store location and includes both biometric data as well as customer information. The customer information is used to pre-process the transaction for the customer. Specifically it calls up the customer data to apply membership points. The Musgrave teaches that it is known for the biometric data to include both the facial data shown in Taira but additionally or alternatively iris information. Musgrave additional establishes that the registered customer data shown in Taira can be stored as a biometric certificate possessed by the customer. Stevens teaches it is known to acquire information from the certificate which is generated from an image of the certificate possessed by the customer and captured by the camera. Stevens teaches it is known to acquire information from the certificate which is generated from an image of the certificate possessed by the customer and captured by the camera. Vormair teaches it is known to process the order by printing the address of the customer on the item which they have ordered. Moeller teaches it is known to register customer prior to those customers visiting the store. However, while Vormair establishes it is known for the system to make items available for pick up in lockers, it is not explicit that the lockers are in the store.
Fee teaches it is known to for the lockers used to pick up items to be located in stores. Fee establishes providing lockers in stores was known in the art at the time of the invention
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to include in the customer authentication apparatus if Taira, Musgrave, Stevens, Shepherd, Moeller and Vormair the ability to provide the lockers in store as taught by Fee since the claimed invention is merely a combination of old elements, and in the combination each element merely would have performed the same function as it did separately, and one of ordinary skill in the art would have recognized that the results of the combination were predictable.
Therefore, from this teaching of Fee, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the customer authentication apparatus provided by Taira, Musgrave, Stevens, Shepherd, Moeller and Vormair, with the ability to provide the lockers in store as taught by Fee, for the purposes of allowing the user to pick up their items through a locker located in a store. Since the combination already establishes the customer address and using this to store items for pickup later, it would have been obvious to locate these lockers in known locations such as in stores to help reduce customer wait times.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed December 31, 2025 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
In response to the applicant’s arguments on pages 9-12, regarding the art rejections specifically that, “First, the cited references fail to disclose or suggest "acquire master information generated, in a registration process of registering customer information performed by operation of a customer prior to visiting a store, from an image captured by a camera, the master information including at least one piece of face information and iris information about the customer; acquire information generated in the registration process from an image of a certificate possessed by the customer captured by the camera, the information including a same kind as that of at least a part of the master information, and personal information about the customer generated by performing character recognition processing on the image of the certificate; and store the master information and the personal information in association with each other in a first storage unit when the at least a part of the master information and the information of the same kind acquired from the certificate coincide with each other," when considered with the other elements of claim 1.”
“Taira discloses acquiring registered face information from a center server. See Taira at [0027]-[0028]. However, Taira fails to disclose or suggest the registration process "performed by operation of a customer prior to visiting a store," as recited in claim 1. Furthermore, Taira fails to disclose or suggest "acquire information generated in the registration process from an image of a certificate possessed by the customer captured by the camera," as recited in claim 1.”
“Second, the cited references fail to disclose or suggest "while the customer is visiting the store," "acquire authentication information from a capturing unit installed in the store, and acquire the personal information associated with the master information when information included in any piece of the master information coincides with the authentication information," when considered with the other elements of claim 1.”
“That is, Taira fails to distinguish between the registration process "performed by operation of a customer prior to visiting a store" from a subsequent acquisition of authentication information "while the customer is visiting the store.”
“The additionally cited references are deficient for at least the same reasons as Taira discussed above. Therefore, the cited references, taken individually or in any combination thereof, fail to disclose or suggest each and every element of claim 1.”
“For at least these reasons, claim I is patentable over the cited art of record.”
“Claims 11 and 21 recite features similar to those of claim 1. Therefore, claims 11 and 21 are patentable over the cited art of record for at least the same reasons applied to claim 1 discussed above.”
“The remaining claims are patentable based on their respective dependencies.”
The Examiner respectfully disagrees.
As an initial matter the Examiner notes that the rejection has been updated to reflect the applicant’s amendments. Specifically the Examiner has cited the Moeller reference to establish that it is known to register the customer using their own mobile device prior to the customer visiting the store. Further as shown in the above rejection Stevens establishes it is known to acquire information generated in the registration process from an image of a certificate possessed by the customer captured by the camera. Specifically Stevens Page 4, paragraph [0032]; teaches it is known check the identification of the customer or individual. In doing so the camera either of the terminal or other security cameras acquires information from the certificate based on the image which is captured. Stevens establishes that the individual possesses the certificate and this can be in the form of a driver’s license as shown in paragraph [0037]. This is consistent with the Moeller reference as well as the Moeller reference it is known to collect driver’s license information prior to visiting the facility.
As for the amended language of “while the customer is visiting the store” as shown in Taira Page 2, paragraph [0030]; discloses that the first camera is installed at entrance of the store and captures the face of a person (visitor) coming from the entrance. Paragraph [0032]; discloses a second camera capturing the face of the person at the settlement terminal. This establishes that the actions are being carried out while the customer is visiting the store as they capturing is done at the store. As such the Examiner asserts that the references when combined read over the claims as amended. Lacking any additional arguments the Examiner has not been persuaded and the rejections have been maintained.
All rejections made towards the dependent claims are maintained due to the lack of a reply by the applicant in regards to distinctly and specifically point out the supposed errors in the Examiner’s action in the prior Office Action (37 CFR 1.111). The Examiner asserts that the applicant only argues that the dependent claims should be allowable because the independent claims are unobvious and patentable over Taira, in view of Musgrave, further in view of Stevens, further in view of Shepherd, and, where appropriate, in further view of Chandrasekaran, Natarajan, Vormair and Fee.
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 PAUL R FISHER whose telephone number is (571)270-5097. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday 9 am to 5:30 pm.
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, Yin-Chen Shaw can be reached at (571)272-8878. 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.
PAUL R. FISHER
Primary Examiner
Art Unit 2498
/PAUL R FISHER/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2498 4/30/2026
Prosecution Insights