Remarks
Claims 1-20 are pending.
Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status
The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to claims 1-20 have been considered but are moot in view of the new ground(s) of rejection provided below.
It is noted that the 101 rejection is withdrawn based on the Examiner’s Supervisor’s interview summary in this application, regarding the interview held while the Examiner was out of the office.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(b):
(b) CONCLUSION.—The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph:
The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the applicant regards as his invention.
Claims 1-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor (or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the applicant), regards as the invention.
Claim 1 recites the limitation "the particular biometric indicator embedded into the avatar" in the determine limitation. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. Claims 10 and 19 have the same issue and are rejected for the same reasons. Claims 2-9, 11-18, and 20 are rejected at least based on their dependencies.
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 1-3, 7-12, and 16-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Hodge (U.S. Patent Application Publication 2021/0314408) in view of Thomas (U.S. Patent Application Publication 2025/0392596).
Regarding Claim 1,
Hodge discloses a system comprising:
A memory operable to store a user profile comprising a plurality of biometric indicators derived from a user using facial recognition and fingerprint analysis (Exemplary Citations: for example, Abstract; Figure 8 and associated written description; Paragraphs 37-39, 42, 45-48, 63, 64, 67, 70, and associated figures; server memory storing profiles with information, including biometric information, including fingerprints, and facial information, for example); and
A processor operably coupled to the memory, the processor configured to (Exemplary Citations: for example, Abstract; Figure 8 and associated written description; and all below citations; any processor, for example):
Extract the plurality of biometric indicators from the user profile (Exemplary Citations: for example, Abstract; Paragraphs 37-39, 42, 45-48, 63, 64, 67, 70, and associated figures; grabbing stored biometric information from profile, for example);
Embed the extracted plurality of biometric indicators into an avatar associated with the user (Exemplary Citations: for example, Abstract; Paragraphs 38, 44, 45, 56, 60, 63, 64, 67, 68, and associated figures; personalizing avatar to make it resemble user, for example);
Receive a request from the avatar to access a particular virtual operation area in the VR environment, wherein the request indicates that the avatar is entering the particular virtual operation area in the VR environment (Exemplary Citations: for example, Abstract, Figures 4a-4c and associated written description, Paragraphs 29, 39-42, 44, 54, 56-61, 65-69, and associated figures; any request, such as to initiate a session, join a session, make a movement, view certain content, speak, etc., as examples, session, website, content, beach, forest, house, store, virtual display, VR devices, area with tree, area with sun, area with inmate, area with external user, etc., as examples, authentication upon entering new session, new website, new content, session involving a beach instead of a store, authentication upon performing an action or interaction, etc., as examples);
Determine a particular biometric indicator of the user (Exemplary Citations: for example, Abstract, Paragraphs 29, 37-42, 44-48, 54, 56-61, 63-71, and associated figures; authentication and authorization prior to initiating or joining a session, continuous authentication, continuous monitoring, etc., including biometric indicators, such as those noted above, as examples);
Determine the particular biometric indicator embedded into the avatar in response to receiving the request for access (Exemplary Citations: for example, Abstract, Paragraphs 29, 37-42, 44-48, 54, 56-61, 63-71, and associated figures; authentication and authorization prior to initiating or joining a session, continuous authentication, continuous monitoring, etc., as examples);
Compare the determined particular biometric indicator with the corresponding biometric indicator from the user profile stored in the memory (Exemplary Citations: for example, Abstract, Paragraphs 29, 37-42, 44-48, 54, 56-61, 63-71, and associated figures; authentication and authorization prior to initiating or joining a session, continuous authentication, continuous monitoring, etc., as examples);
Determine a match between the determined particular biometric indicator and the corresponding biometric indicator from the user profile stored in the memory (Exemplary Citations: for example, Abstract, Paragraphs 29, 37-42, 44-48, 54, 56-61, 63-71, and associated figures; authenticated, for example);
In response to determining the match, authenticate the avatar (Exemplary Citations: for example, Abstract, Paragraphs 29, 37-42, 44-48, 54, 56-61, 63-71, and associated figures; authenticated, for example); and
In response to authenticating the avatar, approve the request to allow the avatar to access the particular virtual operation area in the VR environment (Exemplary Citations: for example, Abstract, Figures 4a-4c and associated written description, Paragraphs 29, 37-42, 44-48, 54, 56-61, 63-71, and associated figures; allow initiating session, joining session, etc., for example);
But does not appear to explicitly disclose generate a meta profile associated with the user profile wherein the meta profile maps each biometric indicator of the plurality of biometric indicators to a corresponding virtual operation area within a VR environment, each biometric indicator mapped to the corresponding virtual operation area within the VR environment provides the user access to the corresponding virtual operation area, and that the determined biometric indicator of the user is determined from the meta profile and is mapped to the particular virtual operation area.
Thomas, however, discloses that the processor is configured to generate a meta profile associated with the user profile wherein (Exemplary Citations: for example, Paragraphs 27-31, 37, 41, 44-48, 54-57, 59-61, 65-67, 73, 75, 79, and associated figures; databases of information regarding parties authorized to access a specific virtual meeting space, where the virtual environment can have multiple virtual meeting spaces therein, each with their own access controls, for example):
The meta profile maps each biometric indicator of the plurality of biometric indicators to a corresponding virtual operation area within a VR environment (Exemplary Citations: for example, Paragraphs 27-31, 37, 41, 44-48, 54-57, 59-61, 65-67, 73, 75, 79, and associated figures; as above, database has identifiers, including biometrics, for example, such as DNA, fingerprints, facial patterns, voice characteristics, etc., as examples);
Each biometric indicator mapped to the corresponding virtual operation area within the VR environment provides the user access to the corresponding virtual operation area (Exemplary Citations: for example, Paragraphs 27-31, 37, 41, 44-48, 54-57, 59-61, 65-67, 73, 75, 79, and associated figures; user can access virtual meeting space if authorized by having the appropriate identifier (which may be biometric) in the database for this specific space, for example); and
That the determined biometric indicator of the user is determined from the meta profile and is mapped to the particular virtual operation area (Exemplary Citations: for example, Paragraphs 27-31, 37, 41, 44-48, 54-57, 59-61, 65-67, 73, 75, 79, and associated figures; looking up identifiers, including biometric information, within the database, for example). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of applicant’s invention, which is before any effective filing date of the claimed invention, to incorporate the virtual meeting space authorization techniques of Thomas into the VR system of Hodge in order to allow the system to set access controls and authorizations for each different virtual meeting space, to ensure that spaces for which users are not authorized or not yet authorized are invisible to users, even while the users are within the virtual environment, to provide better controls for authorization, and/or to increase security in the system.
Regarding Claim 10,
Claim 10 is a method claim that corresponds to system claim 1 and is rejected for the same reasons.
Regarding Claim 19,
Claim 19 is a medium claim that corresponds to system claim 1 and is rejected for the same reasons.
Regarding Claim 2,
Hodge discloses that the processor is further configured to:
Receive a second request from the avatar to access the VR environment (Exemplary Citations: for example, Abstract, Paragraphs 29, 39-42, 44, 54, 56-61, 65-69, and associated figures; as above, for another request, for example);
Determine additional biometric indicators from the plurality of biometric indicators embedded into the avatar in response to receiving the second request for access (Exemplary Citations: for example, Abstract, Paragraphs 29, 37-42, 44-48, 54, 56-61, 63-71, and associated figures; as above, for another request, for example);
Compare the determined additional biometric indicators with the corresponding additional biometric indicators from the user profile stored in the memory (Exemplary Citations: for example, Abstract, Paragraphs 29, 37-42, 44-48, 54, 56-61, 63-71, and associated figures; as above, for another request, for example);
Determine a mismatch between the determined additional biometric indicators and the corresponding additional biometric indicators from the user profile stored in the memory (Exemplary Citations: for example, Abstract, Paragraphs 29, 37-42, 44-48, 54, 56-61, 63-71, and associated figures; as above, for another request, for example); and
In response to determining a mismatch, reject the second request to allow the avatar to access the VR environment (Exemplary Citations: for example, Abstract, Paragraphs 29, 37-42, 44-48, 54, 56-61, 63-71, and associated figures; as above, for another request, for example).
Regarding Claim 11,
Claim 11 is a method claim that corresponds to system claim 2 and is rejected for the same reasons.
Regarding Claim 20,
Claim 20 is a medium claim that corresponds to system claim 2 and is rejected for the same reasons.
Regarding Claim 3,
Hodge discloses that the VR environment includes a plurality of virtual operation areas configured to provide a corresponding interaction associated with an entity associated with one or more physical locations in a real world environment (Exemplary Citations: for example, Figures 4a-4c and associated written description; session, website, content, beach, forest, house, store, virtual display, VR devices, area with tree, area with sun, area with inmate, area with external user, etc., as examples).
Regarding Claim 12,
Claim 12 is a method claim that corresponds to system claim 3 and is rejected for the same reasons.
Regarding Claim 7,
Hodge discloses that the authentication of the avatar is triggered by the avatar entering a new operation area within the VR environment (Exemplary Citations: for example, Abstract, Paragraphs 29, 37-42, 44-48, 54, 56-61, 63-71, and associated figures; authentication upon entering new session, new website, new content, session involving a beach instead of a store, authentication upon performing an action or interaction, etc., as examples).
Regarding Claim 16,
Claim 16 is a method claim that corresponds to system claim 7 and is rejected for the same reasons.
Regarding Claim 8,
Hodge discloses that the authentication of the avatar is triggered by the avatar attempting to perform a transaction (Exemplary Citations: for example, Abstract, Paragraphs 29, 37-42, 44-48, 54, 56-61, 63-71, and associated figures; continuous authentication during times including interactions, monitoring and verifying that interactions are not prohibited, etc., as examples).
Regarding Claim 17,
Claim 17 is a method claim that corresponds to system claim 8 and is rejected for the same reasons.
Regarding Claim 9,
Hodge discloses that the plurality of biometric indicators includes a token, facial features, and fingerprints (Exemplary Citations: for example, Abstract; Figure 8 and associated written description; Paragraphs 37-39, 42, 45-48, 63, 64, 67, 70, and associated figures; biometric information with respect to face, fingerprints, password, challenge questions/answers that include voice, etc., as examples).
Regarding Claim 18,
Claim 18 is a method claim that corresponds to system claim 9 and is rejected for the same reasons.
Claims 4, 5, 13, and 14 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Hodge in view of Thomas and Sheller (U.S. Patent Application Publication 2014/0282868).
Regarding Claim 4,
Hodge discloses that the processor is configured to perform periodic and event triggered authentication of the avatar associated with the user, further comprising (Exemplary Citations: for example, Abstract, Paragraphs 29, 37-42, 44-48, 54, 56-61, 63-71, and associated figures; continuous authentication, authentication upon requests, actions, etc., etc., as examples):
Determining one or more biometric indicators from the plurality of biometric indicators embedded into the avatar in response to receiving the request for access (Exemplary Citations: for example, Abstract, Paragraphs 29, 37-42, 44-48, 54, 56-61, 63-71, and associated figures);
Comparing the determined one or more biometric indicators with the corresponding biometric indicators from the user profile stored in the memory (Exemplary Citations: for example, Abstract, Paragraphs 29, 37-42, 44-48, 54, 56-61, 63-71, and associated figures);
Determining a match between the determined one or more biometric indicators and the corresponding biometric indicators from the user profile stored in the memory (Exemplary Citations: for example, Abstract, Paragraphs 29, 37-42, 44-48, 54, 56-61, 63-71, and associated figures); and
In response to determining the match, authenticating the avatar (Exemplary Citations: for example, Abstract, Paragraphs 29, 37-42, 44-48, 54, 56-61, 63-71, and associated figures).
Sheller also discloses that the processor is configured to perform periodic and event triggered authentication (Exemplary Citations: for example, Paragraphs 2, 10-13, 24, 28, 35, 44, 45, and associated figures; periodic authentication, for example). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of applicant’s invention, which is before any effective filing date of the claimed invention, to incorporate the re-authentication techniques of Sheller into the VR system of Hodge as modified by Thomas in order to allow the system to re-authenticate a user in a variety of fashions, to conserve power while ensuring a user is still authentic, and/or to increase security in the system.
Regarding Claim 13,
Claim 13 is a method claim that corresponds to system claim 4 and is rejected for the same reasons.
Regarding Claim 5,
Hodge as modified by Thomas and Sheller discloses the system of claim 4, in addition, Hodge discloses that the authentication of the avatar occurs in conjunction with predetermined time periods (Exemplary Citations: for example, Abstract, Paragraphs 29, 37-42, 44-48, 54, 56-61, 63-71, and associated figures; continuous authentication occurs during whatever period is happening (e.g., day, minute, hour, etc.), period of this communication session, etc., as examples); and
Sheller discloses that the authentication of the avatar occurs in conjunction with predetermined time periods (Exemplary Citations: for example, Paragraphs 2, 10-13, 24, 28, 35, 44, 45, and associated figures; period, minute, etc., as examples).
Regarding Claim 14,
Claim 14 is a method claim that corresponds to system claim 5 and is rejected for the same reasons.
Claims 6 and 15 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Hodge in view of Thomas, Sheller, and Gafni (U.S. Patent Application Publication 2014/0372303).
Regarding Claim 6,
Hodge as modified by Thomas and Sheller discloses the system of claim 4, in addition, Hodge discloses that the authentication of the avatar occurs upon an event (Exemplary Citations: for example, Abstract, Paragraphs 29, 37-42, 44-48, 54, 56-61, 63-71, and associated figures);
But does not explicitly disclose that the event comprises a screen refresh.
Gafni, however, discloses that the event comprises a screen refresh (Exemplary Citations: for example, Abstract, Paragraphs 21-25, and associated figures; authentication occurs upon a screen refresh, for example). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of applicant’s invention, which is before any effective filing date of the claimed invention, to incorporate the screen refresh during authentication techniques of Gafni into the VR system of Hodge as modified by Thomas and Sheller in order to ensure that the screen is showing the appropriate authentication information, to provide additional means by which to authenticate, to ensure mutual authentication, and/or to increase security in the system.
Regarding Claim 15,
Claim 15 is a method claim that corresponds to system claim 6 and is rejected for the same reasons.
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 Jeffrey D Popham whose telephone number is (571)272-7215. The examiner can normally be reached Monday through Friday 9:00-5:30.
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, Jeffrey Nickerson can be reached at (469) 295-9235. 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.
/Jeffrey D. Popham/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2432