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 . 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.
Claims 1-3, 6-8, 12 and 13 are amended.
Claim 4 is cancelled.
Claims 1-3, 5-13 are pending.
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and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114.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 10/24/2025 has been entered.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments, see page 10, filed 10/24/2025, with respect to 3, 7 and 13 under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) claim interpretation have been fully considered and are persuasive. The claim rejection under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) of 08/26/2025 has been withdrawn.
Applicant’s arguments, see page 10, filed 10/24/2025, with respect to 2 and 3 under 35 U.S.C. 112(a) have been fully considered and are persuasive. The claim rejection under 35 U.S.C. 112(a) of 08/26/2025 has been withdrawn.
Applicant’s arguments with respect to claim(s) 1-13 have been considered but are moot because the new ground of rejection does not rely on any reference applied in the prior rejection of record for any teaching or matter specifically challenged in the argument.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(d):
(d) REFERENCE IN DEPENDENT FORMS.—Subject to subsection (e), a claim in dependent form shall contain a reference to a claim previously set forth and then specify a further limitation of the subject matter claimed. A claim in dependent form shall be construed to incorporate by reference all the limitations of the claim to which it refers.
The following is a quotation of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, fourth paragraph:
Subject to the following paragraph [i.e., the fifth paragraph of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112], a claim in dependent form shall contain a reference to a claim previously set forth and then specify a further limitation of the subject matter claimed. A claim in dependent form shall be construed to incorporate by reference all the limitations of the claim to which it refers.
Claim 9 rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(d) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, 4th paragraph, as being of improper dependent form for failing to further limit the subject matter of the claim upon which it depends, or for failing to include all the limitations of the claim upon which it depends. Claim 9 doesn’t further limit parent claim 8 because it contains already a similar amendment. Applicant may cancel the claim(s), amend the claim(s) to place the claim(s) in proper dependent form, rewrite the claim(s) in independent form, or present a sufficient showing that the dependent claim(s) complies with the statutory requirements.
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, 6, 7, 8, 9, 12 and 13 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.
Regarding independent claims 1, 6, 8-7, 12-13, the claim recites “control information regarding a notification”. The claims does not define what is “control information regarding a notification”. It is unclear from the claim which information regarding notification is included into the authentication request. It is necessary to clarify exact definition of “control information regarding a notification”. For the examination purpose, examiner interpreting “control information regarding a notification” as custom notification setting and/or user may specify the mode of the notification specified by user to receive notifications.
Appropriate corrections are required.
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.
Claim(s) 1-13 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Funane (U. S. PGPub. No. 2019/0165937 A1 (hereinafter “Funane”) in view of Lee (U. S. Pat. No 9,558,336 B2) (hereinafter “Lee”); and further in view of Bouey et al. (U. S. Pat. No. 11,361,290 B2) (hereinafter “Bouey”).
Regarding Claim 1, Funane teaches:
An information processing apparatus configured to execute an application for controlling authentication processing using an external authenticator connected to the information processing apparatus, the information processing apparatus comprising (Funane: [0037] In FIG. 1, wearable terminals such as a plurality of smartwatches 104 may be connected to the network 101. In other words, this system is a system that includes a plurality of terminals such as the smartphone 103 and the smartwatch 104. [0038] The voice assistant 105 is an information processing apparatus…)
A processor (Funane: [0234], The computer may comprise one or more processors (e.g, central processing unit (CPU), micro processing unit (MPU)) and may include a network of separate computers or separate processors to read out and execute the computer executable instructions); and
a memory storing a program which, when executed by the processor, cause the information processing apparatus to (Funane: [0011], the information processing apparatus comprises: a memory storing first instructions, and at least one processor executing the first instructions causing the information processing apparatus to):
transmit a request to a system configured to communicate via a network (Funane: [0090] Description will be continued with reference to FIG. 9. In Step S401, when an input of user information is accepted, the application 320 transmits a use registration request of the mail-order service 310 of the user to the mail-order service 310 through the communication unit 322. In the request, attribute information and a password that have been input by the user are included. The communication unit 317 of the mail-order service 310 receives the request transmitted from the application 320 in Step S401)
receive parameters including verification data from the system (Funane (2019/0165937 A1): [0091], In Step S403, the authenticator information processing unit 313 of the mail-order service 310 transmits a credential generation request to the application 320 through the communication unit 317. [0075] An attestation challenge management table represented in a Table C is data managed by the data storing unit 312 of the mail-order service 310. In the attestation challenge management table, one record represents information of one attestation challenge. An attestation challenge is a parameter (=parameter) that is used as verification data for executing challenge response authentication and is issued for each user. [0076] A process of issuing an attestation challenge will be described later. In an attestation challenge column, a value of an attestation challenge is stored. In a user ID column, a user ID of a user who has issued the attestation is stored. In a validity period column, a validity period of an attestation challenge is stored);
transmit an authentication request (Funane: [0144] In Step S514, the biometric authentication control unit 364 specifies an authenticator (terminal) to execute a request for biometric authentication using the authenticator management table (table F)…) including the verification data to the external authenticator (Funane: [0140] Hereinafter, the biometric authentication parameter will be described. The biometric authentication parameter is data that is used when the mail-order service 310 executes authentication of the application 320. The biometric authentication parameter is composed of an assertion challenge and an assertion expansion area),
receive, from the external authenticator, signature data (Funane: [0152] In addition, the biometric authentication processing unit 352 generates assertion information including the specified authentication information ID and the generated signature data. In Step S517, the biometric authentication processing unit 352 returns the generated assertion information (=assertion information includes signature data) to the voice assistant 105) generated by the external authenticator (Funane: [0151]: Step S516, the biometric authentication processing unit 352 generates signature data by encrypting an assertion challenge included in the Auth biometric authentication parameter using the specified secret key);
transmit the signature data to the system (Funane: [0163] In Step S523, the communication unit 365 of the voice service 360 returns the assertion information (=assertion information includes signature data) received in Step S517 or S522 to the mail-order service 310);
receive data based on a result of verification processing on the signature data using a public key registered in the system (Funane: [0167] In the verification, the signature data included in the assertion information is decrypted using a public key specified by the authentication information ID included in the assertion information. In the specifying of the public key, the authenticator information management table (table D) is used. Then, it is verified whether or not the decrypted value matches the assertion challenge included in the biometric authentication parameter that is generated and transmitted in Step S513), wherein the external authenticator is worn by a user of the information processing apparatus (Funane: [0035], The smartwatch 104 is a wearable terminal and may be a wearable terminal of a different form such as smartglasses, an accessory (an earphone, a headphone, a ring, a necklace, a nail, or the like), shoes, underwear, a heart rate meter, an internal-use device, or a human body-embedded device),
and a request transmitted from the information processing apparatus to the external authenticator in response to receiving the data (Funane: [0153] On the other hand, in Step S514, in a case in which the voice assistant (= information processing apparatus) 105 transmits a request for biometric authentication, there may be a case which the user does not wear the watch in the body, a case in which power of the smartwatch 104 is off, ante he like. In such cases, time-out is acquired without presenting biometric information even when a predetermined time has elapsed, and the request for biometric authentication of Step S514 fails. In addition, the authenticator 350 of the smartwatch 104 executes biometric authentication, and, also in the case of an authentication failure, the request for biometric authentication of Step S514 fails)
Funane does not explicitly teaches:
and wherein the external authenticator provides a notification to the user in response to at least one of a result of biometric authentication in response to the authentication request,
However, in an analogous art, Lee teaches:
and wherein the external authenticator provides a notification to the user (Lee: [Col 4, lines 33-37], The user-wearable device (=external authenticator) 102 can inform the user of a new alert (=notification) by vibrating and/or emitting an audible sound. In certain embodiments, the user-wearable device 102 will only provide such alerts to a user wearing the device 102 if the user is authenticated) in response to at least one of a result of biometric authentication in response to the authentication request (Lee: [Col 14, lines 32-35], (65) Referring again to FIG. 3, as indicated at block 310 in FIG. 3, if there is a determination that the sensed biometric information and the baseline biometric information match, then the user is authenticated),
It would be obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the invention, to modify Funane’s method of automatically sensing biometric information and registering the wearable device in order to communicate with the services by applying Lee’s method of providing alerts to the user if authentication fails, in order to indicate to indicate the biometric authentication result to the user. The motivation is to provide computer security to prevent a user from accessing data available via a computer system but for which the user does not have access permission (Lee: [Col 1, lines16-17]).
The Funane in view of Lee does not explicitly disclose:
wherein the authentication request further includes control information regarding a notification by the external authenticator in a case where the control information is included in the parameters received from the system
in a case where the authentication request received from the information processing apparatus includes the control information in addition to the verification data.
However, in an analogous art, Bouey teaches:
wherein the authentication request further includes control information regarding a notification by the external authenticator in a case where the control information is included in the parameters received from the system (Bouey: [Col 16, lines 50-58], (55) The default notification settings field 401 presents the user with information regarding the current default notification settings for a funds transfer event. As shown in the screen shot in FIG. 4, notification settings field 401 may include settings to specify a telephone number to which automated telephone call notifications or text message notifications should be sent (field 403) and an e-mail address to which e-mail notifications should be sent (field 405) [Col 18, lines 44-64], (64) FIG. 5 is a screen shot of a form that allows a user to update default or custom notification settings….The user may use a checkbox to indicate which e-mail address should receive a notification….The user may use a check mark 509 to select a phone number that receives a notification…In other embodiments, the user may choose multiple telephone numbers and multiple e-mail addresses for notification…The user may click on save button 513 to save the notification changes implemented by the user);
in a case where the authentication request received from the information processing apparatus includes the control information in addition to the verification data (Bouey: [col 13, lines 4-7], As another example, if the fund transfer request originated from a particular sender, then the user may specify the mode of the notification (=control information) (e.g., e-mail, voicemail, or text message))
A person having ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the invention, would have found it obvious to modify The Funane in view of Lee by applying the well-known technique as disclosed by Bouey of receiving notifications based on notification mode specified by user. The motivation is to provides an additional level of security to facilitate secure communications over a computer network (Bouey: [Col 1, lines 63-65]).
Regarding Claim 2, Funane in view of Lee teaches:
The information processing apparatus of claim 1 (see rejection of claim 1 above),
wherein the program when executed by the processor further causes the information processing apparatus to use a network interface (Funane: [0011], the information processing apparatus comprises: a memory storing first instructions, and at least one processor executing the first instructions causing the information processing apparatus to) to control a display for the user wearing the external authenticator (Lee: [Col 3, lines 27-29], The user-wearable device 102 can be a standalone device which gathers and processes data and displays results to a user) in response to at least one of the result of the biometric authentication in response to the authentication request, and the third reception unit receiving the data (Lee: [Col 15, lines 7-29], (67) The performing of steps 306, 308, 310 and 312 is an example of what can collectively be referred to as the performing of an authentication determination that compares the sensed biometric information to baseline biometric information to determine whether or not they match one another, wherein if the sensed biometric information matches the baseline biometric information the user wearing the user-wearable device is authenticated. Steps 306, 308, 310 and 312 can all be performed by the user-wearable device being worn by the user whose biometric information is sensed at step 304…the user-wearable device may receive results of an authentication determination that compares the sensed biometric information to baseline biometric information to determine whether or not they match one another, wherein if the sensed biometric information matches the baseline biometric information the user wearing the user-wearable device is authenticated).
It would be obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the invention, to modify Funane’s method of registering the wearable device in order to communicate with the services by applying Lee’s method of providing alerts to the user if authentication fails, in order to indicate to indicate the biometric authentication result to the user. The motivation is to provide computer security to prevent a user from accessing data available via a computer system but for which the user does not have access permission (Lee: [Col 1, lines16-17]).
Regarding Claim 3, Funane in view of Lee teaches:
The information processing apparatus of claim 2 (see rejection of claim 2 above),
wherein, when the external authenticator does not support a function for the notification, the display is controlled by the information processing apparatus (Funane: Examiner interpreting that if authenticator dies not support for receiving notification by sending vibrations, then authenticator receives an message using voice/speech as disclosed in [0230] In Step S821 and S824, the speech generating unit 363 of the voice service 360 notifies the user of an acceptance result of the request received in Step S801 through a voice…. As the notification, in addition to a notification using speech, for example, a message or the like may be transmitted to a target terminal).
Regarding Claim 5, Funane in view of Lee teaches:
The information processing apparatus of claim 1 (see rejection of claim 1 above),
wherein the external authenticator is any one of a smartwatch, an earphone, and a smart ring that are configured to perform biometric authentication even while being worn by the user (Funane: [0035], The smartwatch 104 is a wearable terminal and may be a wearable terminal of a different form such as smartglasses, an accessory (an earphone, a headphone, a ring, a necklace, a nail, or the like), shoes, underwear, a heart rate meter, an internal-use device, or a human body-embedded device),
Regarding Claim 6, this claim contains identical limitations found within that of claim 1 above albeit directed to a different statutory category (method medium). For this reason the same grounds of rejection are applied to claim 6.
Regarding Claim 7, Funane teaches:
A non-transitory computer-readable storage medium storing a program for causing a computer to (Funane: [0234], a ‘non-transitory computer-readable storage medium’) to perform the functions of one or more of the above-described embodiments and/or that includes one or more circuits (e.g, application specific integrated circuit (ASIC)) for performing the functions of one or more of the above-described embodiments, and by a method performed by the computer of the system or apparatus).
This claim contains identical limitations found within that of claim 1 above albeit directed to a different statutory category (non-transitory computer-readable storage medium). For this reason the same grounds of rejection are applied to claim 7.
Regarding Claim 8, Funane teaches:
An authenticator configured to connect as an external authenticator to an information processing apparatus configured to execute an application for controlling authentication processing using the external authenticator (Funane: [0037] wearable terminals such as a plurality of smartwatches 104 may be connected to the network 101. In other words, this system is a system that includes a plurality of terminals such as the smartphone 103 and the smartwatch 104. [0038] The voice assistant 105 is an information processing apparatus…)
and configured to be worn by a user of the information processing apparatus, the authenticator comprising (Funane: [0035], The smartwatch 104 is a wearable terminal and may be a wearable terminal of a different form such as smartglasses, an accessory (an earphone, a headphone, a ring, a necklace, a nail, or the like), shoes, underwear, a heart rate meter, an internal-use device, or a human body-embedded device),
a processor (Funane: [0234], The computer may comprise one or more processors (e.g, central processing unit (CPU), micro processing unit (MPU)) and may include a network of separate computers or separate processors to read out and execute the computer executable instructions);
and a memory storing a program which, when executed by the processor, cause the authenticator to (Funane: [0011], the information processing apparatus comprises: a memory storing first instructions, and at least one processor executing the first instructions causing the information processing apparatus to):
generate signature data (Funane: [0151]: Step S516, the biometric authentication processing unit 352 generates signature data by encrypting an assertion challenge included in the Auth biometric authentication parameter using the specified secret key) using verification data included in the authentication request (Funane: [0151], In other words, the authenticator 350 executes biometric authentication and a secret key is extracted in the case of an authentication success. In addition, in the table A, not only the feature quantity but a match of a service ID included in the Auth biometric authentication parameter may be verified. Then, in Step S516, the biometric authentication processing unit 352 generates signature data by encrypting an assertion challenge included in the Auth biometric authentication parameter using the specified secret key) and a private key corresponding to the biometric information in a case where the biometric authentication is successful (Funane: [0068] In an authentication information management table illustrated in the table A, one record represents an entry of one piece of authentication information. A record of the table A is generated when the smartphone 103 registers the authenticator 330 in the mail-order service 310 of the server 102 and is added to the table A. An ID used for uniquely identifying each piece of authentication information is stored in an authentication information ID column. An ID used for uniquely identifying a service using an authentication function using biometric information is stored in a service ID column);
transmit the signature data to the information processing apparatus (Funane: [0163], In addition, in a case in which a result of the biometric authentication process of Step S520 is an authentication failure in the terminal that is a retry destination, here, the smartphone 103, the smartphone 103 executes the following process in Step S522. In other words, the smartphone 103 returns information indicating that the result of the biometric authentication process is an authentication failure to the voice assistant 105);
Funane does not explicitly teaches:
detect biometric information about the user in response to receiving an authentication request from the information processing apparatus;
perform biometric authentication using the biometric information;
and provide a notification to the user in response to at least one of a result of the biometric authentication in response to the authentication request,
However, Lee disclose:
detect biometric information about the user in response to receiving an authentication request from the information processing apparatus (Lee: [Col 13, lines 43-45], the type of biometric information that is sensed (=detected) at step 304 is the same as the type of baseline biometric information that is obtained and stored at step 302. [Col 13, lines 57-60], (63) At step 306, the biometric information sensed at step 304 is compared to the baseline biometric information obtained and stored at step 302, so that there can be a determination at step 308 of whether they match one another);
perform biometric authentication using the biometric information (Lee: [Col 13, lines 57-60], (63) At step 306, the biometric information sensed at step 304 is compared to the baseline biometric information obtained and stored at step 302, so that there can be a determination at step 308 of whether they match one another);
provide a notification to the user in response to at least one of a result of the biometric authentication in response to the authentication request (Lee: [Col 4, lines 33-37], The user-wearable device 102 can inform the user of a new alert (=notify) by vibrating and/or emitting an audible sound. In certain embodiments, the user-wearable device 102 will only provide such alerts to a user wearing the device 102 if the user is authenticated. [Col 14, lines 32-35], (65) Referring again to FIG. 3, as indicated at block 310 in FIG. 3, if there is a determination that the sensed biometric information and the baseline biometric information match, then the user is authenticated)),
It would be obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the invention, to modify Funane’s method of registering the wearable device in order to communicate with the services by applying Lee’s method of providing notifications to the user if authentication fails, in order to indicate the biometric authentication result. The motivation is to provide computer security to prevent a user from accessing data available via a computer system but for which the user does not have access permission (Lee: [Col 1, lines16-17]).
The Funane in view of Lee does not explicitly disclose:
in a case where the authentication request received from the information processing apparatus includes the control information regarding the notification in addition to the verification data,
wherein the authentication request further includes control information in a case where information processing apparatus receives parameters including both verification data and the control information from the system
However, in an analogous art, Bouey teaches:
in a case where the authentication request received from the information processing apparatus includes the control information regarding the notification in addition to the verification data (Bouey: [col 13, lines 4-7], As another example, if the fund transfer request originated from a particular sender, then the user may specify the mode of the notification (=control information) (e.g., e-mail, voicemail, or text message))
wherein the authentication request further includes control information in a case where information processing apparatus receives parameters including both verification data and the control information from the system (Bouey: [Col 16, lines 50-58], (55) The default notification settings field 401 presents the user with information regarding the current default notification settings for a funds transfer event. As shown in the screen shot in FIG. 4, notification settings field 401 may include settings to specify a telephone number (=verification data) to which automated telephone call notifications or text message notifications should be sent (field 403) and an e-mail address (=verification data) to which e-mail notifications should be sent (field 405) [Col 18, lines 44-64], (64) FIG. 5 is a screen shot of a form that allows a user to update default or custom notification settings…. The user may use a checkbox to indicate which e-mail address should receive a notification….The user may use a check mark 509 to select a phone number that receives a notification… In other embodiments, the user may choose multiple telephone numbers and multiple e-mail addresses for notification… The user may click on save button 513 to save the notification changes implemented by the user);
A person having ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the invention, would have found it obvious to modify The Funane in view of Lee by applying the well-known technique as disclosed by Bouey of receiving notifications based on notification mode specified by user. The motivation is to provides an additional level of security to facilitate secure communications over a computer network (Bouey: [Col 1, lines 63-65]).
Regarding claim 9, this claim contains identical limitations found within that of claim 4 above albeit directed to a different statutory category (apparatus medium). For this reason the same grounds of rejection are applied to claim 9.
Regarding Claim 10, Funane in view of Lee teaches:
The authenticator of claim 8 (see rejection of claim 8 above),
wherein the authenticator is any one of a smartwatch, an earphone, and a smart ring that are configured to perform the biometric authentication while being worn by the user (Funane: [0035], The smartwatch 104 is a wearable terminal and may be a wearable terminal of a different form such as smartglasses, an accessory (an earphone, a headphone, a ring, a necklace, a nail, or the like), shoes, underwear, a heart rate meter, an internal-use device, or a human body-embedded device),
Regarding Claim 11, Funane in view of Lee teaches:
The authenticator of claim 8 (see rejection of claim 8 above),
wherein the notification is provided by sound or vibration (Lee: [Col 4, lines 33-37],The user-wearable device 102 can inform the user of a new alert by vibrating and/or emitting an audible sound. In certain embodiments, the user-wearable device 102 will only provide such alerts to a user wearing the device 102 if the user is authenticated)
It would be obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the invention, to modify Funane’s method of registering the wearable device in order to communicate with the services by applying Lee’s method of providing alerts to the user if authentication fails, in order to indicate the user by sending vibrations of sound. The motivation is to provide computer security to prevent a user from accessing data available via a computer system but for which the user does not have access permission (Lee: [Col 1, lines16-17]).
Regarding Claim 12, this claim contains identical limitations found within that of claim 8 above albeit directed to a different statutory category (method medium). For this reason the same grounds of rejection are applied to claim 12.
Regarding Claim 13, this claim contains identical limitations found within that of claim 7 above. For this reason the same grounds of rejection are applied to claim 13.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. Refer to PTO-892, Notice of References Cited for a listing of analogous art.
Park et al. (U. S. PGPub. No. 2015/0294554 A1): In one aspect of the disclosed implementations, a device includes one or more motion sensors for sensing motion of the device and providing activity data indicative of the sensed motion. The device also includes one or more feedback devices for providing feedback, a notice, or an indication to a user based on the monitoring. The device also includes one or more processors for monitoring the activity data, for determining one or more activity metrics based on the activity data, and for causing one or more of the feedback devices to produce an indication to the user that an activity goal has been achieved by the user based on one or more of the activity metrics. The device further includes a portable housing that encloses at least portions of the motion sensors, the processors and the feedback devices.
Sarkar et al. (U. S. Pat. No. 10,187,364 B2): A wearable user device is provided, which can be donned and doffed by a user, and which is configured for use in a user authentication system. To enhance the security of a user authentication, the wearable user device comprises a detector device to detect a donned or doffed condition of said wearable user device; and an alert processing module, connected with said detector device. The alert processing module is configured to determine whether said wearable user device is doffed forcefully, and if said wearable user device is doffed forcefully, to transmit an authentication exception corresponding to a forceful doffed condition to an authentication server.
Slaby et al. (U. S. PGPub. No. 2014/0279528 A1): In embodiments, a wearable authentication device includes a fingerprint sensor to capture a fingerprint image that is used to authenticate a user to an associated device of the wearable authentication device. The wearable authentication device can also include a presence sensor, or a presence sensing mode of the fingerprint sensor, to periodically detect a presence of the user wearing the wearable authentication device, and presence data is communicated to the associated device to maintain operability of the associated device.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to RUPALI DHAKAD whose telephone number is (571)270-3743. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 8:30-5:30.
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, Alexander Lagor can be reached at 5712705143. 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.
/R.D./Examiner, Art Unit 2437
/ALEXANDER LAGOR/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2437