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 .
DETAILED ACTION
This action is in reply to the request for continued application filed on 09/04/2025.
Claims 1, 3-6, 10, 12-15 have been amended.
Claims 2, 7, 8, 11, 16, 17, 20 and 21 have been cancelled.
Claims 22-26 have been added.
Claims 1, 3-6, 9, 10, 12-15, 19, and 22-26 have been examined
Response to Arguments
With regard to the 101 rejection, in the Remarks, the Applicant asserted in page 12 that “the claims are not merely directed to authenticating the transaction but, instead, are directed to ongoing authentication of a user . . . While the present claims may merely involve an exception, they do not recite an exception . . .” & “the claims recite features for ongoing capture and comparison of biometric data of a user, captured, by more than one specific biometric data capture devices at a self-service kiosk, such as an ATM . . .”. The Examiner found these arguments persuasive given various biometric devices being used in a specific sequence of authenticating a user during a transaction.
Note: Claim 10 is a method claim, and the contingent limitations only need one branch to occur (MPEP 2111.04(II)). Nonetheless, both branches are patent eligible.
Therefore, the 101 rejection is withdrawn.
With regard to the 103 rejection, the arguments are considered but they are not persuasive. In page 16, the Applicant asserted that “[rather], Zagarese merely describes authenticating a user in a first instance, not initiating biometric authentication after the user has been authenticated”. However, Bombacino cured the deficiency by disclosing the second biometric authentication after the first biometric authentication. Other elements are also disclosed by the cited references in the independent claims. It would be obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to combine the features of claimed limitations as taught by Shahidzadeh with the elements of determining the matching of biometric data and corresponding action as taught by Zagarese in view of Bombacino in further view of Lloyd to help verifying continuous biobehavioral data for system access (abstract). Therefore, the combination is obvious.
The Examiner objected to claims 6, 15 and 24.
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.
The factual inquiries set forth in Graham v. John Deere Co., 383 U.S. 1, 148 USPQ 459 (1966), that are applied for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized as follows:
1. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art.
2. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue.
3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art.
4. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness.
Claims 1, 9-11, 19 and 26 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Zagarese et al. (US 2018/0181964 A1) in view of Bombacino et al. (US 10,515,320 B2) in further view of Lloyd et al. (US 2017/0091765 A1) in further view of Shahidzadeh et al. (US 11,367,323 B1).
Claims 1, 10, 19 are grouped together: Claim 1, for instance, is disclosed: Zagarese teaches: A computing platform, comprising: at least one processor; a communication interface communicatively coupled to the at least one processor (par. [0131] “ . . .The at least one processor 114 is configured to execute digital identity management code so as to implement various services, including an enrolment service 14a and a validation service 14b. The processor 4 has access to in-memory storage (“cache”) 108, which may for example be implemented, at the hardware level, in volatile electronic storage . . .”);
and a memory storing computer-readable instructions that (par. [0132] “The services 14a, 14b implemented by the processor 114 are accessed, by external devices 12, via a secure interface 104, such as a secure API. The secure interface 104 provides a secure (i.e. encrypted) channel(s) by which an external device 12 can communicate with the services 14a, 14b securely . . .”), when executed by the at least one processor, cause the computing platform to: receive registration data for a plurality of users, the registration data including biometric data of each user of the plurality of users, wherein the plurality of users includes at least a first user (Zagarese, see at least par. [0136] “. . . The purpose of the various data stores 24, 31, 33, 34 within the digital identity system 1 is described in further to detail below. Suffice it to say that user data is held on behalf of users of the digital identify system 1 in the secure store 24. Each piece of user data is encrypted using an encryption keys (“user keys”, generated by the user key generator 102) that are held only by the user himself, i.e. which are not stored within the digital identity system 1 itself. . . “ & par. [0137] & par. [0155]) Interpretation: the system enrolls users, or receives, user registration data which include biometric data associated with the users, including a first user;
receive, from a self-service kiosk, a request to process a transaction for the first user, the request to process the transaction including an indication of authentication of the first user (Zagarese, par. [0229], see at least “. . . However, with the transaction of FIG. 5, the user can verify their age and provide a payment token to the self-checkout terminal (the merchant device 12M in this context) in one go. Age verification can be performed automatically at the self-checkout terminal, and assuming the user meets the age requirement, the self-checkout terminal can proceed with the payment using the provided payment token 510 . . .”) Upon verifying the age, the self-checkout terminal proceeds with the payment ;
initiate, after authentication of the first user and in response to the request to process the transaction and the indication of authentication of the first user, passive biometric authentication processes, wherein the passive biometric authentication processes include activating one or more biometric data capture devices associated self-service kiosk (Zagarese, par. [0231] “. . . In this case, at least two identity attributes can be provided for the user in question in the transaction by the digital identity system 1. One of these confirms that the user meets the relevant age-requirement, and the other comprises biometric data. A biometric identifier is captured from the actual user by the self-checkout terminal, for example using a camera, fingerprint sensor or other biometric sensor of the self-checkout terminal, and the captured biometric is compared to the biometric attribute received from the digital identity system 1 . . .” ) The cited portion discloses activating a biometric identifier authentication such as using a camera, fingerprint sensor or other biometric sensor of the terminal to capture after age verification. The use of biometric capturing device corresponds to performing passive biometric authentication process for the first user.
compare the received first biometric data of the first user captured at the first time to the biometric data of the registration data associated with the first user (Zagarese (see at least par. [0230] “. . . biometric identifier, such as a facial image or fingerprint, is captured from a user and compared with a biometric of (or associated) with the digital identity that user is asserting as his own. For example, the captured biometric identifier can be compared with a biometric template that forms part of (or that is associated with) the digital identity in question . . .”) ;
Zagarese does not disclose the following; however, Bombacino teaches:
responsive to determining that the received first biometric data matches the biometric data of the registration data associated with the first user: determine whether a predetermined amount of time has elapsed (Bombacino, Col. 5 “. . . In case of a match, the ticket control application 131 may retrieve the additional ticket information 123 to determine the validity of the ticket, e.g., whether the ticket is used within a specified time period, whether the ticket is used at a valid location, etc. Once so determined, the ticket control application 131 may authorize access to the user for the public infrastructure. Otherwise, the ticket control application 131 may reject the user and perform some other action, e.g. . . .”) there is a specified time duration associate with each of the ticket, if the time has elapsed, the ticket for validation would reject the user;
Receive, at a first time during the transaction and from a first biometric data capture device of the one or more biometric data capture devices on the self-service kiosk (Bombacino, see at least Claim 1 “. . . wherein the second frame includes the first biometric data associated with the ticket user, wherein the mobile device comprises a plurality of input sensors including a microphone, a camera, a touch sensor, and a fingerprint scanner, wherein the mobile device obtains the first biometric data at a first point in time and encapsulates the first biometric data in the second frame . . .”) The device captures the first biometric data. , first biometric data of the first user, wherein the first biometric data capture device is an integrated fingerprint scanner integrated into a touchscreen of the self-service kiosk and captures a first type of biometric data including at least fingerprint data of the first user captured during the transaction (Bombacino, see at least claim 1 “. . . wherein the mobile device comprises a plurality of input sensors including a microphone, a camera, a touch sensor, and a fingerprint scanner, wherein the mobile device obtains the first biometric data at a first point in time and encapsulates the first biometric data in the second frame, wherein the first biometric data in the second frame is encrypted or compressed . . .”) The touch sensor is integrated into the touch screen of the device;
upon determining that the predetermined amount of time has elapsed, receive, at a second, subsequent time during the transaction and from the first biometric data capture device of the one or more biometric data capture devices on the self-service kiosk, second biometric data of the first user, wherein the second biometric data of the first user is the first type of biometric data and includes fingerprint data of the first user captured at the second, subsequent time during the transaction (Bombacino, see at least claim 2 “. . . that the first ticket identifier and the first biometric data match a corresponding second ticket identifier and a second biometric data obtained by the mobile device at a second point in time subsequent to the first point in time . . . and second biometric data, prevent the ticket user from accessing the physical service; wherein each of the first and second biometric data is obtained by the authorization program by: scanning a respective fingerprint of the ticket user by the mobile device,”) The mobile device captures a second biometric data subsequent to the first time;
and responsive to determining that the received first biometric data does not match the biometric data of the registration data associated with the first user, transmitting a mitigation command to the self-service kiosk (Bombacino, Claim 1 “. . . determining that the first ticket identifier and the first biometric data do not match any corresponding second ticket identifier and second biometric data, prevent the ticket user from accessing the physical service . . .”) Interpretation: mitigation command corresponds to preventing the user from accessing the device, wherein transmitting the mitigation command to the self-service kiosk causes the self-service kiosk to execute the mitigation command and wherein executing the mitigation command includes:
causing the self-service kiosk to pause the transaction (Bombacino, see at least claim 2 “. . . upon determining that the first ticket identifier and the first biometric data do not match any corresponding second ticket identifier and second biometric data, prevent the ticket user from accessing the physical service; wherein each of the first and second biometric data is obtained by the authorization program by: scanning a respective fingerprint of the ticket user by the mobile device, recording a respective voice of the ticket user by the mobile device, obtaining a respective digital signature of the ticket user via the mobile device, and capturing a respective facial image of the ticket user via the mobile device; wherein the ticket user comprises a first ticket user, wherein the ticket controller is further configured to prevent transferred use of non-transferrable tickets. . .”) If the second biometric data does not match first biometric data, then the system prevents, or pauses, the accessing of evidence;
activating a second biometric data capture device of the one or more biometric data capture devices, wherein the second biometric data capture device is a camera and captures a second type of biometric data including facial image data of the first user (Bombacino, see at least Claim 1 “. . . second biometric data is obtained by the authorization program by: scanning a respective fingerprint of the ticket user by the mobile device, recording a respective voice of the ticket user by the mobile device, obtaining a respective digital signature of the ticket user via the mobile device, and capturing a respective facial image of the ticket user via the mobile device . . .”);
It would be obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing to combine the features of determining the matching of biometric data and corresponding action as taught by Bombacino with the invention disclosed by Zagarese to help improving the validation of biometric data that corresponds to user (Abstract). Therefore, the combination is obvious.
Zagarese in view of Bombacino does not disclose the following; however, Lloyd teaches:
sending, by the computing platform, a one-time passcode to a pre-registered user device (see at least par. [0124] “. . . . As another example, the system may transmit a one-time pass code to a user device registered with the user profile and request the user to provide the one-time passcode at the point of sale terminal. In some embodiments, the system may transmit control instructions to the user device and request and/or receive the one or more additional authentication credentials from the user device . . .”) Interpretation: When asking for additional authentication information, the transaction will inevitably be paused;
It would be obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to combine the features of pausing transaction by sending OTP as taught by Lloyd with the elements of determining the matching of biometric data and corresponding action as taught by Zagarese in view of Bombacino to help authorizing payment credentials and transactions associated with user (abstract). Therefore, the combination is obvious.
Zagarese in view of Bombacino in further view of Lloyd does not disclose the following; however, Shahidzadeh teaches:
and receiving, from a second biometric data capture device of the one or more biometric data capture devices, third biometric data of the first user captured at a third time subsequent to the first time ( Col. 12 ln 9-19, The gold key (or third key) 114 is generated by (or derived from) the blue key 110 and green key 112 as valid with certain thresholds being met plus the additional or final validation performed by facility 101. This additional validation may be a biometric face recognition through a specialized secured vision system as illustrated in FIG. 1 or an alternative third step of authentication via an out of band notification initiated by location based services that sends a push notification to user devices 200 or 202. The additional validation may also be one or more of a plurality of other protocols at the secure facility 101. These protocols may include voice recognition, wherein the third biometric data of the first user is facial image data of the first user captured by the camera at the third time during the transaction ( Col. 5, ln 21-30“ . . . In some embodiments user device 200 will not be allowed to enter the facility 101 and hence the auxiliary device 202 may only be allowed. In some cases the auxiliary device 202 may be used to continue collecting user 102 biobehavioral data and scoring within the premises of the secure facility 101 and maintaining the validity of the green key (or second key) by ensuring the biobehavioral threshold meets the minimum requirement to maintain the validity of the gold key (i.e., biobehavioral derived credential or third key) for the current access. . . .” & Col. 12 ln 5-9 “. . . The green key (or second key) 112 is generated by determining the behavior of the user 102 through measuring against graphed behavior using the user device 200 and meeting a confidence threshold . . .”) Interpretation: the second key correspond to second biometric data capture which includes the biobehavioral (environmental and biometric data discussed above). Upon the second biometric data is captured, a third biometric data, or third key/gold key, such as a facial recognition is captured to finalize the authentication step.
It would be obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to combine the features of receiving third biometric data subsequent to second biometric data as taught by Shahidzadeh with the elements of determining the matching of biometric data and corresponding action as taught by Zagarese in view of Bombacino in further view of Lloyd to help verifying continuous biobehavioral data for system access (abstract). Therefore, the combination is obvious.
Claims 9 and 26 are grouped together. Claim 9, for instance, is taught: Zagarese in view of Bombacino in further view of Lloyd in further view of Shahidzadeh teaches: the computing platform of claim 1. Furthermore, Bombacino further teaches: wherein the mitigation command further includes a command to modify a functionality of the self-service kiosk (Bombacino, Col. 11 ln 51-61) Interpretation: the cited portion discloses modifying functionality of the kiosk, for instance, in a reverse order of functions.
It would be obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing to combine the features of mitigating the matching of biometric data and corresponding action as taught by Bombacino with the invention disclosed by Zagarese in view of Bombacino in further view of Shahidzadeh to help improving the validation of biometric data that corresponds to user Therefore, the combination is obvious.
Claims 3-4, 12-13, 22, 23 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Zagarese et al. (US 2018/0181964 A1) in view of Bombacino et al. (US 10,515,320 B2) in further view of Lloyd et al. (US 2017/0091765 A1) in further view of Shahidzadeh et al. (US 11,367,323 B1) in further view of Wadhwa (US 11,042,852 B1).
Claims 3, 12 and 22 are grouped together. Claim 3, for instance is disclosed. Zagarese in view of Bombacino in further view of Lloyd in further view of Shahidzadeh teaches: The computing platform of claim 1. Wadhwa, however, teaches: wherein at least one biometric data capture device of the one or more biometric data capture devices is integrated into a keypad of the self-service kiosk (Wadhwa, Col. 4 ln 40-59) Interpretation: the cited portion discloses keypad of the self-service kiosk.
It would be obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to combine the features of having kiosk components as taught by Wadhwa with the invention disclosed by Zagarese in view of Bombacino in further view of Lloyd in further view of Shahidzadeh to authenticate transaction. Therefore, the combination is obvious.
Claims 4, 13, 23 are grouped together. Claim 3, for instance is disclosed. Zagarese in view of Bombacino in further view of Lloyd in further view of Shahidzadeh in further view of Wadhwa teaches: the computing platform of claim 3. Wadhwa further teaches: wherein the keypad of the self- service kiosk includes an integrated fingerprint scanner (Wadhwa, Col. 4 ln 40-59) Interpretation: the cited portion discloses a fingerprint scanner device integrated into a self-service kiosk.
It would be obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to combine the features of having kiosk components as taught by Wadhwa with the invention disclosed by Zagarese in view of Bombacino in further view of Lloyd in further view of Shahidzadeh in further view of Wadhwa to authenticate transaction. Therefore, the combination is obvious.
It would be obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to combine the features of having kiosk components as taught by Wadhwa with the invention disclosed by Zagarese in view of Bombacino in further view of Lloyd in further view of Shahidzadeh to authenticate transaction. Therefore, the combination is obvious.
Claims 5, 14 and 25 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Zagarese et al. (US 2018/0181964 A1) in view of Bombacino et al. (US 10,515,320 B2) in further view of Lloyd et al. (US 2017/0091765 A1) in further view of Shahidzadeh et al. (US 11,367,323 B1) in further view of Siu, Kwok Hoong (WO 2019/045639 A1).
Claims 5, 14 and 25 are grouped together. Claim 5, for instance, is taught: Zagarese in view of Bombacino in further view of Lloyd in further view of Shahidzadeh in further view of Wadhwa teaches: The computing platform of claim 1. Furthermore, Wadhwa teaches: wherein the integrated fingerprint scanner is integrated into an entirety of the touch screen of the self-service kiosk (Siu, see at least par. [0075] “Even though an RCU is described above for using built-in fingerprint sensor in the navigation keypad area . . .) Interpretation: keypad keys also have built-in fingerprint sensor & see at least par. [0077] “ . . . The one or more navigation keys may be configured to move the cursor or select the one or more UI items on the display device. In one embodiment, the one or more navigation keys may be displayed on a touch screen of the remote controller unit and the navigation keypad area may be a portion of the touch screen. In one embodiment, the at least one finger touch may include at least one press of user finger. In one embodiment, the at least one finger touch may include at least one swipe of user finger.”) Interpretation: the touch screen area could contain fingerprint scanner.
It would be obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to combine the features of having kiosk components as taught by Siu with the invention disclosed by Zagarese in view of Bombacino in further view of Lloyd in further view of Shahidzadeh to authenticate transaction. Therefore, the combination is obvious.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 6, 15 and 24 do not have art applied to the currently. However, other rejections are still outstanding such as the rejection(s) under 35 U.S.C. 103 set forth in this Office action. The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of withdrawing art: wherein the integrated fingerprint scanner is integrated into the keypad is integrated into each key of the keypad when combined have allowable subject matter . However, the claims still do not overcome 103 rejections.
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 TOAN DUC BUI whose telephone number is (571)272-0833. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 8-5:00 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, Mike W. Anderson can be reached at (571) 270-0508. 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.
/TOAN DUC BUI/Examiner, Art Unit 3693
/BRUCE I EBERSMAN/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3693