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 Amendment
Applicant's submission filed on 8/8/2025 has been entered. Claims 1-15 are pending. Newly amended features, where relevant, necessitate new grounds of rejections.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 8/8/2025 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
On pages 7-10 or the Remarks, the Applicants argue that Flokos and Stockall fail to disclose or suggest “storing a target program in the user terminal based on the target program information,” where “receiving tag information from a tag device using a near-field communication (NFC) sensor, the tag information comprising target program information” recited in claim 1 and similar features recited in the claims 9-11.
In response, the Examiner respectfully disagrees and submits that Flokos at least discloses a mobile device that stores an age verification application, which corresponds to the claimed “a target program”, to verify the age of the user to unlock a restricted electric product or device based on the age verification (FIG. 1-3, ). Flokos further discloses that mobile device is connected with the restricted electronic product wirelessly via Bluetooth or near-field communication (NFC) (¶ [0032]-[0034]), and Flokos discloses the restricted electronic product or device comprises an age checking component that looks for mobile devices with the ability to serve as age verification systems, and when the mobile device wishes to connect or paired with the restricted electronic product or device, the mobile device enables the advertising features of the mobile device provided by a specific operation of the age verification application or the target program, the mobile device reads a specific tag or receives tag information from the specific tag wherein this tag information is validated by the age verification application to pair with the restricted electronic product or device (¶ [0032]-[0034], [0085]-[0090]); therefore, Flokos at least discloses the claimed “storing a target program in the user terminal,” and “receiving tag information from a tag device using a near-field communication (NFC) sensor, the tag information comprising target program information”. Flokos discloses storing the age verification application in the smartphone but does not explicitly disclose said storing is based on the target program information. However, Stockall discloses the user downloads and installs an application associated with the aerosol generation device by reading or scanning information on the package or user interface of the aerosol generation device that points to the location or website where the application associated with the aerosol generation device to be downloaded or stored in the user device; thus, Stockall at least discloses storing the application is based on the information on the package or user interface of the aerosol generation device or the target program information (¶ [0221]). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine Flokos and Stockall in order to provide the flexibility with which the electronic devices can be controlled and/or to allow electronic device providers monitoring usages to improve user experience (Stockall, ¶ [0002]-[0005]). As such, the Applicants’ arguments are not persuasive.
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted on 8/13/2025 is being considered by the examiner.
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.
Claims 1-13 and 15 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Flokos (US 2021/0209204) in view of Stockall et al. (US 2022/0279860 hereinafter Stockall).
Regarding claim 1, Flokos discloses a user authentication method performed by a user terminal, the method comprising:
receiving tag information from a tag device using a near-field communication (NFC) sensor, the tag information comprising target program information (¶ [0085], [0088]; i.e. the smartphone tries to read a specific tag from the restricted electronic product wherein the specific tag or tag information is the pairing information and/or the age verification application information);
storing a target program in the user terminal (¶ [0032]-[0034]; i.e. storing an age verification application in the smartphone) based on the target program information;
performing user authentication for a user of an electronic device based on the target program (¶ [0032]-[0035]; i.e. authenticating the user and/or verifying the age of the user of the restricted electronic product); and
transmitting a result of the user authentication to the electronic device when the user authentication is successful, wherein the electronic device is unlocked when the result of the user authentication is received (¶ [0032]-[0035]; i.e. the age verification application on the smartphone sends the age confirmation to the restricted electronic product which may then unlock the operation of the restricted electronic product).
Flokos discloses storing the application in the smartphone but does not explicitly disclose said storing is based on the target program information.
However, Stockall discloses storing the application is based on the target program information (¶ [0221]).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine Flokos and Stockall in order to provide the flexibility with which the electronic devices can be controlled and/or to allow electronic device providers monitoring usages to improve user experience (Stockall, ¶ [0002]-[0005]).
Regarding claim 2, Flokos in view of Stockall discloses the method of claim 1, wherein the target program information comprises a uniform resource locator (URL) address of the target program (Stockall, ¶ [0221]).
Regarding claim 3, Flokos in view of Stockall discloses the method of claim 1, wherein the performing the user authentication for the user of the user terminal based on the target program comprises: performing the user authentication using a preset authentication application programming interface (API) (Flokos, ¶ [0014], [0036]).
Regarding claim 4, Flokos in view of Stockall discloses the method of claim 1, further comprising: receiving a beacon transmitted by the electronic device using short-range wireless communication (Flokos, ¶ [0033]; Stockall, ¶ [0016]); and establishing a communication link with the electronic device based on the beacon (Flokos, ¶ [0033]; Stockall, ¶ [0016]).
Regarding claim 5, Flokos in view of Stockall discloses the method of claim 1, wherein the tag information further comprises first serial information for confirming a correlation between the tag device and the electronic device (Flokos, ¶ [0025], [0096]; ]Stockall, ¶ [0189]-[0191]).
Regarding claim 6, Flokos in view of Stockall discloses the method of claim 5, further comprising: receiving second serial information through a user interface (Flokos, [0027], [0071], [0095]-[0099]); and determining that the user authentication is successful based on the first serial information being identical to the second serial information (Flokos, [0071], [0095]-[0099]).
Regarding claim 7, Flokos in view of Stockall discloses the method of claim 5, further comprising: receiving second serial information from the electronic device via a communication link (Flokos, [0071], [0095]-[0099]); and determining that the user authentication is successful based on the first serial information being identical to the second serial information (Flokos, [0071], [0095]-[0099]).
Regarding claim 8, Flokos in view of Stockall discloses the method of claim 1, wherein the electronic device is an electronic cigarette (Flokos, ¶ [0067]; Stockall, ¶ [0067]).
Regarding claim 9, Flokos in view of Stockall discloses a non-transitory computer-readable storage medium storing instructions that are executable by a processor to perform the user authentication method, the method comprising:
receiving tag information from a tag device using a near-field communication (NFC) sensor, the tag information comprising target program information (¶ [0085], [0088]; i.e. the smartphone tries to read a specific tag from the restricted electronic product wherein the specific tag or tag information is the pairing information and/or the age verification application information);
storing a target program in the user terminal ¶ [0032]-[0034]; i.e. storing an age verification application in the smartphone) based on the target program information;
performing user authentication for a user of an electronic device based on the target program (¶ [0032]-[0035]; i.e. authenticating the user and/or verifying the age of the user of the restricted electronic product); and
transmitting a result of the user authentication to the electronic device when the user authentication is successful, wherein the electronic device is unlocked when the result of the user authentication is received (¶ [0032]-[0035]; i.e. the age verification application on the smartphone sends the age confirmation to the restricted electronic product which may then unlock the operation of the restricted electronic product).
Flokos discloses storing the application in the smartphone but does not explicitly disclose said storing is based on the target program information.
However, Stockall discloses storing the application is based on the target program information (¶ [0221]).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine Flokos and Stockall in order to provide the flexibility with which the electronic devices can be controlled and/or to allow electronic device providers monitoring usages to improve user experience (Stockall, ¶ [0002]-[0005]).
Regarding claim 10, Flokos discloses a user terminal, comprising:
a memory in which a program for performing user authentication is recorded (FIG. 1); and
a processor configured to execute the program (FIG. 1), wherein the program include instructions that cause the processor to:
receive tag information from a tag device using a near-field communication (NFC) sensor, the tag information comprising target program information (¶ [0085], [0088]; i.e. the smartphone tries to read a specific tag from the restricted electronic product wherein the specific tag or tag information is the pairing information and/or the age verification application information);
store a target program in the user terminal (¶ [0032]-[0034]; i.e. storing an age verification application in the smartphone) based on the target program information;
perform user authentication for a user of an electronic device based on the target program (¶ [0032]-[0035]; i.e. authenticating the user and/or verifying the age of the user of the restricted electronic product); and
transmit a result of the user authentication to the electronic device when the user authentication is successful (¶ [0032]-[0035]; i.e. the age verification application on the smartphone sends the age confirmation to the restricted electronic product which may then unlock the operation of the restricted electronic product).
Flokos discloses storing the application in the smartphone but does not explicitly disclose said storing is based on the target program information.
However, Stockall discloses storing the application is based on the target program information (¶ [0221]).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine Flokos and Stockall in order to provide the flexibility with which the electronic devices can be controlled and/or to allow electronic device providers monitoring usages to improve user experience (Stockall, ¶ [0002]-[0005]).
Regarding claim 11, Flokos discloses an unlocking method performed by an electronic device, the method comprising:
transmitting a beacon using short-range wireless communication (¶ [0032], [0067]-[0072]; i.e. transmitting short-range signal or beacon to seek a mobile device with an advertised age verification capability);
establishing a communication link with a user terminal based on a response to the beacon-, the response being transmitted by- the user terminal (¶ [0032], [0067]-[0072]; i.e. establishing a communication link or pairing with the mobile device);
receiving, from the user terminal, a result of user authentication for a user of the electronic device via the communication link, the result indicating that the user authentication is successful (¶ [0032], [0067]-[0072]; i.e. receiving an age verification message from the mobile device); and
unlocking the electronic device when the result of the user authentication is received (¶ [0032], [0067]-[0072]; i.e. unlocking the operation of the restricted electronic product upon receiving the age verification message),
wherein the user terminal stores an application [[based on the beacon]] (¶ [0032]-[0034]; i.e. storing an age verification application in the smartphone), and the user authentication of the user is performed by the user terminal based on the application (¶ [0032]-[0035]; i.e. authenticating the user and/or verifying the age of the user of the restricted electronic product).
Flokos discloses storing the application in the smartphone but does not explicitly disclose said storing is based on the beacon.
However, Stockall discloses storing the application is based on the target program information (¶ [0221]).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine Flokos and Stockall in order to provide the flexibility with which the electronic devices can be controlled and/or to allow electronic device providers monitoring usages to improve user experience (Stockall, ¶ [0002]-[0005]).
Regarding claim 12, Flokos in view of Stockall discloses the method of claim 11, further comprising: receiving a request for serial information from the user terminal (¶ [0087], [0095]-[0099]); and transmitting the serial information to the user terminal (¶ [0087], [0095]-[0099]).
Regarding claim 13, Flokos in view of Stockall discloses the method of claim 11, wherein the unlocking the electronic device when the result of the user authentication is received comprises: determining whether first serial information included in the result of the user authentication is identical to second serial information of the electronic device ([0071], [0095]-[0099]); and unlocking the electronic device when the first serial information is identical to the second serial information ([0071], [0095]-[0099]).
Regarding claim 15, Flokos in view of Stockall discloses the method of claim 11, wherein the electronic device is an electronic cigarette, and the method further comprises: determining a smoking pattern of a user using at least one sensor (¶ [0044]); determining whether the smoking pattern corresponds to a verified smoking pattern that is stored in advance (¶ [0044]); and locking the electronic device when the determined smoking pattern does not correspond to the verified smoking pattern (¶ [0044]).
Claim 14 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Flokos (US 2021/0209204) in view of Stockall et al. (US 2022/0279860 hereinafter Stockall) and further in view of Qiu (US 2020/0093180).
Regarding claim 14, Flokos in view of Stockall discloses the method of claim 11.
Flokos in view of Stockall does not explicitly disclose determining whether the user terminal is positioned around the electronic device; and locking the electronic device when the user terminal is not positioned around the electronic device.
However, Qiu discloses determining whether the user terminal is positioned around the electronic device; and locking the electronic device when the user terminal is not positioned around the electronic device (¶ [0014]-[0015]).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine Flokos, Stockall and Qiu in order to allow users manage the electronic device and/or to prevent the electronic device from being lost (Qiu, ¶ [0166]).
Conclusion
THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. 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 CHI D NGUY whose telephone number is (571)270-7311. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 9-5 ET.
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, Joseph P Hirl can be reached at (571)272-3685. 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.
/C.D.N/Examiner, Art Unit 2435
/JOSEPH P HIRL/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2435
Prosecution Insights