DETAILED ACTION
Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status
The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
Continued Examination Under 37 CFR 1.114
A request for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, including the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e), was filed in this application after final rejection. Since this application is eligible for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114. Applicant's submission filed on March 16th, 2026 has been entered.
Response to Remarks/Arguments
This Office Action is in response to the communications for the present US application number 18/043,231 last filed on March 16th, 2026.
Claims 1, 2, 4, and 15 were amended.
Claims 1-15 remain pending and have been examined, directed to A SYSTEM AND A METHOD FOR MANAGING USER IDENTITY DATA.
Upon further review of the latest claim amendments along with the applicant’s representative’s response, the examiner reviewed the applied reference and respectfully remains unpersuaded at this time.
With respect to the 35 U.S.C. § 102/103 rejection, using Chait, and using amended independent claim 1 for discussion purposes, the applicant’s representative primarily argued that Chait does not expressly disclose of the amended language directed towards getting alerts and notifications at user end devices, based upon authenticated and registered user activities, and presenting options for a user to select from within a GUI screen.
In response, the Examiner reviewed the amended language and re-focused on Chait’s teachings directed more specifically towards users and biometric data. The user end devices encompass devices like smartphones which have graphical user interfaces and can run applications and allow for various types of information to be presented, including alerts and notifications and/or be presented with user selectable options (e.g., Chait: ¶¶ 52, 72, 83 and 183). There were other terms to considers besides “reporting devices” that the representative focused on (i.e., smartphone, mobile, PDA, portable devices, etc.). Reporting devices 114a-c was also redefined to be consumer smartphones with downloaded applications, and enable a user to provide responses back to the system/servers (e.g., Chait; ¶ 72). Chait provided various examples that illustrate how in different scenarios, the registered user can be presented with real time alerts/notification and/or prompts or instructions (e.g., Chait: ¶¶ 41-43 and 48).
Overall, the current claim language is still too broad and generic, as the overall scope is directed to simply logging in, getting authenticated and getting a user notification. The presented notification or selectable options can be broadly interpreted to be as simple as an acknowledgement prompt or welcome message of having logged in, as it is still associated with information coming from the ID server and/or more broadly perhaps with some more generic next steps or quick links for one or more other tasks. However, without more claim language, the Examiner remains unpersuaded at this time.
The other independent claim 15 was similarly amended and argued following claim 1 and thus was similarly rejected under the same rationale.
The remaining dependent claims were not specifically argued at this time.
Applicant's arguments were considered but they were not found persuasive. See the following claim rejections for further clarifications with added emphasis on the points previously disclosed.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status.
The following is a quotation of the appropriate paragraphs of 35 U.S.C. 102 that form the basis for the rejections under this section made in this Office action:
A person shall be entitled to a patent unless –
(a)(1) the claimed invention was patented, described in a printed publication, or in public use, on sale or otherwise available to the public before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claims 1-3, 9-13, and 15 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by U.S. Patent Publication No. US 2014/0222522 A1 to Chait, Mitchell Barry (referred to hereafter as “Chait”).
As to claim 1, Chait further discloses a distributed system for managing identity, ID, data of registered users, the distributed system comprising:
a respective electronic device associated with each registered user (e.g., smartphone running applications, e.g., Chait: ¶¶ 71-72), each electronic device configured to:
(i) run a client application comprising a graphic user interface, GUI, for interacting with the corresponding registered user (User end devices like smartphones, have screens or display interfaces and allows users to provide input and/or feedback back to the systems, e.g., Chait: Figs. 1 and 2 and ¶¶ 71-72); and
(ii) store the ID data of the corresponding registered user (The user end devices can also include wristbands and other forms of smart ID badges besides just smartphones, all of which can serve to authenticate and validate a user’s identity that’s registered and stored within the system, and their identities can further include their policies and access permissions within the system, leading to real-time analysis and notifications, e.g., Chait: ¶¶ 35, 43, 52, 178, and 201);
a plurality of ID processing touchpoints each including scanning equipment (A distributed network of Touchpoints, where each allows for tracking of various endpoints, including the various user end devices, e.g., Chait: Figs 1, 2, and 15 and ¶¶ 162-167, 182-183, 201, and 449-452), each ID processing touchpoint configured to:
(i) capture and process biometric data for authentication of the users by matching the captured biometric data with the ID data (Chait discloses of different industry scenarios, such that the Touchpoint systems would capture and validate the users, based on biological data/biometrics, such as with staff or workers or patients (e.g., vitals after drugs are administered) in a medical field, e.g., Chait: ¶¶ 33, 48-49, 52, 54, 95, 107, 125), and
(ii) in response to authentication of one of the registered users by matching the captured biometric data with the ID data corresponding to the one of the registered users, issue a status notification associated with the one of the registered users (The system can authenticate users and separately issue alerts or notifications regarding various statuses can be sent to the user end devices, e.g., Chait: ¶¶ 371-374, 27, 39, 48, and 52);
an ID server (server with data store for storing human or biological related data, e.g., Chait: Figs. 1-3 and ¶¶ 57-58 and 91-95) including a processor configured to:
(i) receive the status notification issued by the ID touchpoints in response to authentication of one of the registered users (Similar to what was already established and mentioned, the ID server is on the backend working with the touchpoints and issuing any alerts/notifications back to the user endpoint devices, e.g., Chait: ¶¶ 372, 374, 27, 39, 48, 52 and 91-95); and
(ii) transmit the status notification to the one of the electronic devices associated with the registered users (alerts/notifications are sent to end user devices, e.g., Chait: ¶¶ 27, 39, 48, 52 and 91-95);
wherein the one of the electronic devices is configured, in response to receiving a status notification from the ID server, to issue a user alert on the graphic user interface to notify the one of the registered users, and to present a set of user selectable options on the graphic user interface for responding to the status notification (Depending on the settings or scenario environment, Chait’s system can still be providing the alerts or notifications back to the user end devices. For example, patient conditions or statuses in a medical setting can be alerted back to the user or to an appropriate staff. Additionally, user capable devices can allow for the users to provide feedback back to the server, regarding their status or anything else that needed reporting, e.g., Chait: ¶¶ 72-73, 48, 52, 83, 95, 107, 125, and 183).
As to claim 2, Chait further discloses the distributed system of claim 1, wherein the set of user-selectable options are for initiating one or more actions in response to the status notification received from the ID server (Following claim 1, the client application running on the client end devices/systems would have a display screen to allow for user inputs/selections, which would translate into actions and the notifications for this interaction or update would be sent back to the server/databases and propagated throughout the system, e.g., Chait: ¶¶ 71-72, 83-86, and 182-183).
As to claim 3, Chait further discloses the distributed system of claim 2, wherein the electronic device is configured, upon receiving a user response through the GUI, to issue counter-notification to the ID server and/or ID processing touchpoints (Following claims 1 and 2, information is routed back and forth between the client end devices and the server, which means in other words, any inputs or selections made at the users’ end applications on their devices/systems would be treated as a “counter notification” going back to the server, e.g., Chait: ¶¶ 58, 71-72, 83-86, and 182-183).
As to claim 9, Chait further discloses the distributed system of claim 1, wherein the electronic device is configured to display on the GUI a graphical representation of the status of the corresponding biometric data at different ID processing touchpoints (Following claim 1, the data that’s passing along the truck route would clearly identify the Touchpoints along the route, and further provide all the desired various statuses that someone may want to track, including biometric data that was already established in claim 1, e.g., Chait: ¶¶ 96, 107, 115, 125, 158, and 512-514 and Figs. 3, and 8-15).
As to claim 10, Chait further discloses the distributed system of claim 9, wherein the graphic representation is in the form of a route displaying the transfer of the biometric data between different ID processing touchpoints (Following claims 1 and 9, a delivery or travel route would have related data traveling throughout the Touchpoints along the route, e.g., Chait: Figs 8-15 and ¶¶ 512-514 further illustrates examples with biological data regarding the goods that’s traveling along the route).
As to claim 11, Chait further discloses the distributed system of claim 10, wherein, based on the status notification, the electronic device is configured to display on the route the current status of the biometric data at the different ID processing touchpoints (Following claims 1, 9, and 10, the delivery or travel route would have status information regarding each Touchpoint, in order to properly track the status of the goods, e.g., Chait: Figs 8-15 and ¶¶ 512-514 further illustrates with an example of the information that’s passed along).
As to claim 12, Chait further discloses the distributed system of claim 10, wherein the route is generated based on information obtained from a travel itinerary of the registered user (Following claims 1, 9, and 10, a user can be an entity or company, utilizing this system, and there were examples of a delivery or travel route that would include all the stops along the way, just like an itinerary, to ensure proper delivery of the goods, e.g., Chait: ¶¶ 432-436 and 502-505).
As to claim 13, Chait further discloses the distributed system according to any claim 1, wherein the ID processing touchpoints are connected to the ID server on the basis of membership (Following claim 1, due to the wide variety of possible embodiments that can utilize this system, users of this system can be members as part of an organization and receive information from various endpoints or Touchpoints. For example, a member of a hospital staff that’s tracking patients and their statuses, e.g., Chait: ¶ 52, 51, and 54).
As to claim 15, see the similar corresponding rejection of claim 1.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
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.
Claims 4-8 and 14 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over U.S. Patent Publication No. US 2014/0222522 A1 to Chait.
As to claim 4, Chait further discloses the distributed system of claim 2, wherein the set of user-selectable options comprise at least one of providing consent for the sharing of the corresponding biometric data to ID processing touchpoints, and issuing a breach notification indicating an unauthorised ID transaction at an ID processing touchpoint (Following claims 1 and 2, due to the variety of possible embodiments, as it relates to biological or biometric data (e.g., Chait: ¶¶ 49, 52, 54, 96, 107, 115, 125, and 158), on top of what was already established with users being able to provide input/selections, while Chait may not expressly use the term “consent” it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the present application that some form of consent is established in the very beginning when agreeing to the use of this system, such as with service level agreements (SLAs) and/or other rules and policies in place (e.g., Chait: ¶¶ 303 and 154-157).
Additionally, the system can also handle breaches, which can work alongside the way the system processes non-compliance and/or violations with any aspect of SLAs, policies, rules, etc. and notifying the relevant users/parties involved, e.g., Chait: ¶¶ 303, 286-287, and 442-447).
As to claim 5, Chait further discloses the distributed system of claim 4, wherein the electronic device is configured, in response to a user selecting to provide consent for the sharing of the corresponding biometric data, to communicate a consent notification comprising the requested biometric data of the user to the ID server, the ID server being configured to distribute the biometric data at a selected set of ID processing touchpoints (Following claims 1, 2, and 4, communicating consent and having the data tracked as it propagates through the system, would be most similar to a user providing any form of affirmation or feedback at their endpoint devices/systems and/or agreeing to any rules, permissions, policies, and/or SLAs to be set in place prior to utilizing the system, e.g., Chait: ¶¶ 180, 239, and 190-192 and as it relates specifically to biological data ¶¶ 49, 52, 54, 96, 107, 115, 125, and 158).
As to claim 6, Chait further discloses the distributed system of claim 4, wherein upon receiving a selection for issuing a breach notification, the electronic device is configured to issue a corresponding breach notification, which is communicated to a security server, where it is stored in a registry, the security server being part of the ID management system (Following claims 1, 2, and 4, for scenarios regarding any breaches or violations or non-compliance, any inputs/selections or communications are going to be passing along to the server and/or logged within a database. In one example, logged data can be used as a reference against captured or input data, for safety and/or compliance reasons, e.g., Chait: Figs. 1, 2, 6, and 15 and ¶¶ 99-100 and 124 along with references again to more specifically biological data ¶¶ 49, 52, 54, 96, 107, 115, 125, and 158).
As to claim 7, Chait further discloses the distributed system of claim 6, wherein the security server is configured upon receiving the breach notification to collect information from the one or more ID processing touchpoints associated with the unauthorised transaction and accordingly communicate a report to the client application of the registered user, the report comprising information associated with the breach (Following claims 1, 2, 4, and 6, various examples were mentioned throughout which illustrated how the system or server can notify the user(s) at the endpoints on what went wrong. An example with the airplane safety checks illustrates how the system can inform the user of what needs to be looked at again for safety before takeoff, e.g., Chait: ¶¶ 124, 303, 445, and 29-31).
As to claim 8, Chait further discloses the distributed system of claim 6, wherein the security server, upon receiving the breach notification is configured to initiate a set of breach control actions for assessing and managing the identified ID breach, the breach control actions comprising at least one of investigating the cause of the breach, notifying other ID processing touchpoints of the breach, and deleting the breached data from the ID management system and/or other ID processing touchpoints (Following claims 1, 2, 4, and 6, and based on the claimed language of meeting/address at least one of several options, similar to claim 7, the examples already address identifying the cause of the breach or non-compliance and if there are Touchpoints involved with the transaction, then those would be updated/synchronized with the latest information too such as with any removals or other changes, e.g., Chait: ¶¶ 124, 303, 29-31, 482, and 488).
As to claim 14, Chait further discloses the distributed system of claim 1, wherein the ID server is configured to include or exclude ID processing touchpoints from membership based on metrics indicative their ID security performance (The system/server can control the level of access based in part upon security and access and additionally there are procedures for non-compliance, which can lead to other consequences that can affect the other endpoints at various levels.
While Chait may not expressly use the term include or exclude, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the present application, that for any Touchpoint or endpoint that has security issues, those endpoint nodes can be removed and rechecked for proper usage, before being placed back into service, especially with security related sensitive contents. e.g., Chait: Figs 8-13 and 15 and ¶¶ 227-228, 287, and 488).
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
US 11,538,126 B2 to Vemury, Arun
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Xiang Yu whose telephone number is (571)270-5695. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 9:30-3:00 (PST/PDT).
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, Emmanuel Moise can be reached at (571)272-3865. 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.
/X.Y./Examiner, Art Unit 2455
/EMMANUEL L MOISE/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2455
Prosecution Insights