DETAILED ACTION
This Non Final Office Action is in response to Request for Continued Examination filed on 01/12/2026. Claims 1-2, 9-10 and 17 have been amended. Claims 8, 16 and 20 were previously cancelled. Claims 1-7, 9-15 and 17-19 filed on01/12/2026 remain pending in the application.
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 .
Drawings
The drawings filed on 05/04/2023 are accepted.
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and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114.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 01/12/2026 has been entered.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments in the applicant’s remarks filed on 01/12/2026 are considered moot in light of the newly found prior art. Please see detailed rejection below.
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 1-7, 9-15 and 17-19 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 “wherein each unlock gesture of the series of unlock gestures comprises at least (i)… and (ii)…”, emphasis in italic. It is unclear how each gesture is to comprise two physical states detected by two different sensors. For examination purpose, each gesture constitute a physical change detected by one sensor, this is consistent with the specification in the instant application in publication paragraph [0041] or as filed [0041]. Examiner further notes that newly found prior art discloses a sequence of a number of sensors, where two different detections from two different sensors can be interpreted as one gesture as drafted in the claim.
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 1-4, 9-12, 7, 15, 17-19 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Boss (US 20170147809 A1), hereinafter Boss.
Regarding claim 1 (Currently Amended), Boss teaches One or more non-transitory computer-readable media having computer-executable instructions embodied thereon that, when executed, perform a method for leveraging physical state changes of a user equipment (UE) for authentication (Boss Abstract and Figure 1 100 smart phone authentication), the method comprising:
receiving, via one or more sensors of the UE, sensor data corresponding to a series of unlock gestures, the series of unlock gestures comprising a plurality of physical state changes of the UE detected by two or more different classes of the one or more sensors (Boss receiving [0024] “The position/action mechanism 180 includes one or more suitable sensors, such as accelerometers and switches, that allow sensing orientation, movement, screen taps, and button presses of the mobile device 100. The position/action mechanism 180 can detect any suitable movement of the mobile device, including rotation of the mobile device (e.g., from portrait orientation to landscape orientation), linear movement of the mobile device in any direction, and shaking the mobile device. Of course, the position/action mechanism 180 could detect other types of movements as well, such as moving the mobile device in an arc or circular pattern.”, [0025] “The position/action detection mechanism 123 is preferably used by the pre-authentication mechanism 124 to detect a sequence of events when a user defines a pre-authentication sequence, such as 125 shown in FIG. 1. Once the user defines a pre-authentication sequence 125, the pre-authentication detection mechanism 126 monitors actions of the user, and when the user actions match a pre-authentication sequence, a suitable authentication is then provided by the user to the authentication mechanism 127 to access the full functions of the mobile device 100.”, [0026] “The authentication mechanism 127 can include any suitable way for a user to authenticate to the mobile device, whether currently known or developed in the future. There are many different known ways for a user to authenticate to a mobile device, including entering a password, scanning a fingerprint, entering a geometrical pattern on the screen, voice recognition, retinal scan, etc.”, once the pre-authentication sequence and then follows by the authentication sequence are correctly entered, the device is unlocked as illustrated in Figure 5 560, where the gestures utilizes multiple sensors, e.g. accelerometer, pressure sensor on the device display and pressing buttons as illustrated in Figure 4 460 in the pre-authentication sequence stage, then followed by the authentication stage using e.g. voice recognition sensor as disclosed in e.g. [0026]), the physical state changes comprising one or more of:
detecting a location of the UE, detecting a change to movement of the UE, detecting a change to orientation of the UE, detecting contact with the UE, detecting audible signals, or detecting light intensity (Boss [0024-0026] discloses device orientation, further see Figure 4 460 and [0036-0038]),
wherein each unlock gesture of the series of unlock gestures comprises at least (i) a first physical state change detected by a first sensor, and (ii) a second physical state change detected by a second sensor, wherein the first sensor is a different class of sensor than the second sensor; determining that an ordered sequence of the unlock gestures matches a stored unlock sequence associated with a user of the UE and in response to determining that the ordered sequence matches the stored unlock sequence, unlocking at least a portion of the UE to perform a specific action (Boss [0024-0026 and [0036-0038]] discloses (1) pre-authentication sequence entered by the user as illustrated in Figure 5 520, where the sequence utilize (i) accelerometer for device rotation/motion, and (i) pressure sensor for tapping on the screen with a pattern followed by other gestures of pressing on buttons as illustrated in Figure 4), then (2) the authentication information is entered by the user, i.e. when the user actions match the stored pre-authentication sequence in Figure 5 510, a suitable authentication is then provided by the user to the authentication mechanism 127 to access the full functions of the mobile device 100, which includes utilizing voice recognition, retinal scan or fingerprint, and accordingly a device is unlocked as illustrated in Figure 5 550-560, where [0036] “The resulting pre-authentication sequence is shown at 460 in FIG. 4, with each of the actions in the sequence in the order it was performed.”) .
Regarding claim 9, claim 9 recites similar limitations to claim 1, therefore rejected with the same rationale applied to claim 1.
Regarding claim 17, claim 1 recites similar limitations to claim 1, therefore rejected with the same rationale applied to claim 1. Note that the action is recited in the alternative, which includes unlocking the device, which is disclosed Boss in Figure 5 560 as discussed in claim 1
Regarding claim 2 (Currently Amended), Boss teaches the non-transitory media of claim 1, further comprising, based on the determining that the ordered sequence matches the stored unlock sequence, selecting the specific action to perform (Boss Figure 5 520-560).
Regarding claim 10, claim 10 recites similar limitations to claim 2, therefore rejected with the same rationale applied to claim 2.
Regarding claim 3 (Previously Presented), Boss teaches the non-transitory media of claim 1, further comprising performing the specific action opens an application on the UE (Boss [0043] when the sequence is matched, the device can have a limited access pertains to opening a limited function, i.e. an application in the smart phone “[0043] Referring to FIG. 13, a method 1300 begins by determining whether multiple pre-authentication/authentication is enabled (step 1310). If not (step 1310=NO), the default pre-authentication sequence is selected (step 1320). If so (step 1310=YES), method 1300 waits for the user to input a valid pre-authentication sequence (step 1330). The authentication corresponding to the detected pre-authentication sequence is determined (step 1340). The main authorization screen is then displayed to the user (step 1350). When the user enters the correct authentication information (step 1360=YES), the device is unlocked for full use (step 1380). When the user does not enter the correct authentication information (step 1360=NO), the device is kept locked (step 1370). Method 1300 is then done. A simple example will illustrate. We assume the user has defined three different pre-authentication sequences, with three different corresponding passwords, as shown in FIG. 12. Assuming step 1310=YES in FIG. 13, we assume the user inputs Sequence 2, which is detected in step 1330. The corresponding authentication is PW2, as shown in entry 1240 in table 1220 in FIG. 12, which is determined in step 1340. The main authentication screen is then displayed to the user in step 1350. If the user enters PW2, step 1360=YES, and the device is unlocked for full use (step 1380). If the user enters PW1, even though this is a valid password, it is not the password corresponding to the pre-authentication sequence, so step 1360=NO, and the device is kept locked (step 1370). Of course, method 1300 in FIG. 13 could be modified to replace step 1370 with steps similar to those shown in FIG. 6 so limited access functions could be provided in some circumstances.”, [0039] “Note the limited access functions can include any suitable subset of functions on the mobile device.”).
Regarding claim 11, claim 11 recites similar limitations to claim 3, therefore rejected with the same rationale applied to claim 3.
Regarding claim 4 (Previously Presented), Boss teaches the non-transitory media of claim 1, further comprising performing the specific action causes the UE to communicate information to another device (Boss Figure 5 560 full use of the smart device including communicating with other devices 175 in Figure 1 [0033]).
Regarding claim 12, claim 12 recites similar limitations to claim 4, therefore rejected with the same rationale applied to claim 4.
Regarding claim 7 (Previously Presented), Boss teaches the non-transitory media of claim 1, further comprising performing the specific action blocks a portion of functionality of the UE (Boss [0043] when the sequence is matched, the device can have a limited access pertains to opening a limited function, i.e. an application in the smart phone “[0043] Referring to FIG. 13, a method 1300 begins by determining whether multiple pre-authentication/authentication is enabled (step 1310). If not (step 1310=NO), the default pre-authentication sequence is selected (step 1320). If so (step 1310=YES), method 1300 waits for the user to input a valid pre-authentication sequence (step 1330). The authentication corresponding to the detected pre-authentication sequence is determined (step 1340). The main authorization screen is then displayed to the user (step 1350). When the user enters the correct authentication information (step 1360=YES), the device is unlocked for full use (step 1380). When the user does not enter the correct authentication information (step 1360=NO), the device is kept locked (step 1370). Method 1300 is then done. A simple example will illustrate. We assume the user has defined three different pre-authentication sequences, with three different corresponding passwords, as shown in FIG. 12. Assuming step 1310=YES in FIG. 13, we assume the user inputs Sequence 2, which is detected in step 1330. The corresponding authentication is PW2, as shown in entry 1240 in table 1220 in FIG. 12, which is determined in step 1340. The main authentication screen is then displayed to the user in step 1350. If the user enters PW2, step 1360=YES, and the device is unlocked for full use (step 1380). If the user enters PW1, even though this is a valid password, it is not the password corresponding to the pre-authentication sequence, so step 1360=NO, and the device is kept locked (step 1370). Of course, method 1300 in FIG. 13 could be modified to replace step 1370 with steps similar to those shown in FIG. 6 so limited access functions could be provided in some circumstances.”, [0039] “Note the limited access functions can include any suitable subset of functions on the mobile device.”).
Regarding claim 15, claim 15 recites similar limitations to claim 7, therefore rejected with the same rationale applied to claim 7.
Regarding claim 18, Boss teaches the system of claim 17, wherein the physical state changes comprise one or more of detecting a location of the UE, detecting changes to movement of the UE, or detecting changes to an orientation of the UE (Boss Figure 4 460 [0036-0037] sequences 1-2).
Regarding claim 19, Boss teaches the system of claim 17, wherein the physical state changes comprise detecting contact with the UE (Boss Figure 4 460 [0036-0037] e.g. sequences 3-4).
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 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.
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 5 and 13 rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Boss (US 20170147809 A1), hereinafter Boss in view of Rivera (US 20230101658 A1) hereinafter Rivera.
Regarding claim 5 (Previously Presented), Boss teaches the non-transitory media of claim 1.
Boss does not disclose but Rivera discloses further comprising performing the specific action causes fake information to be displayed by the UE (Rivera [0037] “the designated aspects may appear to be active and/or accessible but are not actually performing the desired functions. For example, an individual can interact with a banking application on a user account and work through the steps of transferring finances from one account to the next. Although it may appear to a user that a successful transaction was conducted, no finances were actually transferred.”, where the appearance to the user that the user of successful transaction was conducted is construed as fake information presented to the user).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Boss to incorporate the teaching of Rivera to utilize the above feature, with the motivation of ensure that the authentication is performed while the user is under no duress, as recognized by (Rivera Abstract and throughout).
Regarding claim 13, claim 13 recites similar limitations to claim 5, therefore rejected with the same rationale applied to claim 5.
Claims 6 and 14 rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Boss (US 20170147809 A1), hereinafter Boss in view of Mannby (US 20210064726 A1), hereinafter Mannby.
Regarding claim 6 (Previously Presented), Boss teaches the non-transitory media of claim 1.
Boss does not explicitly disclose but Mannby discloses further comprising performing the specific action causes sensitive information to be encrypted or unavailable (Mannby [0033] “Thus, for example, where authentication score 110 reflects indications of detected duress in the user as described above, access controller 112 may be configured to permit access to the device (i.e., unlock the device) while simultaneously and hiding (e.g., undetectably hiding) one or more resources of computing device 102 from the user.”, [0061] “In step 404, in response to detecting indicia of duress, the user is provided with a modified access to a computing device in response to detecting indicia of duress, and wherein such modified access results in one or more items of information (e.g., secrets) stored on the computing device being hidden (e.g., undetectably hidden).”).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Boss to incorporate the teaching of Mannby to utilize the above feature, with the motivation of hiding information when duress is detected by the user to protect user sensitive information, as recognized by (Mannby Abstract, [0033] and throughout).
Regarding claim 14, claim 14 recites similar limitations to claim 6, therefore rejected with the same rationale applied to claim 6.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure:
Aurongzeb (US 9613202 B2) discloses system and method for motion gesture access to an application and limited resources of an information handling system
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to BASSAM A NOAMAN whose telephone number is (571)272-2705. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 8:30 AM-5:00PM.
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, Eleni A. Shiferaw can be reached at (571) 272-3867. 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.
/BASSAM A NOAMAN/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2497