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
1. This action is in response to application amendments filed on 10-17-2025.
2. Claims 1 - 16 are pending. Claims 1 - 16 have been amended. Claims 1, 7, 12 are independent. This application was filed on 12-20-2023.
Response to Arguments
3. Applicant’s arguments, see Arguments/Remarks Made in an Amendment, filed
10-17-2025, with respect to the rejection(s) under Wentink in view of Yamamura have been fully considered and are persuasive. Therefore, the rejection has been withdrawn. However, upon further consideration, a new ground(s) of rejection is made in view of Wentink in view of Reeves and further in view of Ajitomi and Mechaley.
A. Applicant argues on page 10 of Remarks: ... "a day-of-week time period as during which a user, of a first terminal associated with the target person, is likely to operate the first terminal" much less that the alleged "information indicating a transmission timing, indicates a day-of-week time period as during which a user, of a first terminal associated with the target person, is likely to operate the first terminal" ... .
The Examiner respectfully disagrees. Reeves discloses a day of week time period a target user is operating a computing device (terminal). (see Reeves col 4: The user profile could also include service usage patterns associated with the user of wireless communication device 101, such as times of the day and days of the week that service is typically used, geographic areas where service is typically utilized, social maps, frequency of roaming usage, frequency and duration of local, long distance, and international calling, frequency of data usage (history), typical data usage amounts, data applications, web sites, and server paths typically accessed by the user, frequency of short message service (SMS) text messaging, and any other information associated with the use of communication network 130 by the user; selected: day of week); (computing device operated by target user))
B. Applicant argues on page 10 of Remarks: ... modify Wentink according to those features since such features would frustrate the purpose of or otherwise is taught away from by Wentink.
The Examiner respectfully disagrees. Wentink does not teach away from the usage of a computing device by a target user at a particular day of week time period.
Applicant is reminded: “the prior art’s mere disclosure of more than one alternative does not constitute a teaching away from any of these alternatives because such disclosure does not criticize, discredit, or otherwise discourage the solution claimed….” In re Fulton, 391 F.3d 1195, 1201, 73 USPQ2d 1141, 1146 (Fed. Cir. 2004)
C. Applicant argues on page 11 of Remarks: ... there is also no convincing line of reasoning from the references why one of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to consider such features ... .
The Examiner respectfully disagrees. A 103 rejection based on multiple references is a legitimate technique according to the MPEP. The 103 rejection allows portions of the rejection citations for a claimed invention to come from different prior art references. The rejection to each independent and dependent claim includes a citation from the referenced prior art that discloses the basis for the rejection. Each obviousness combination clearly indicates the claim limitation(s) the combined referenced prior art teaches. In addition, a cited passage from the referenced prior art indicates the motivation for the obviousness combination. Each obviousness combination’s disclosure is equivalent to the Applicant’s claim limitation(s) for the claimed invention. Achieved advantage is a valid motivation for the combination of referenced prior art. The rejection of each referenced prior art combination states a motivation for the combination, which translates to an achieved advantage for the combination.
D. Applicant argues on pages 11-12 of Remarks: ... "transmit. the permission request information to the first terminal associated with the target person and as, at the transmission timing, operated by a person different from the target person" in contrast to a "target person" and "second terminal" context noted by the other claim features.
The Examiner respectfully disagrees. Wentink discloses the transmission of digital content (request information) between network-connected devices such as a permission request message. (see Wentink paragraph [0006]: Apparatus and methods are disclosed that may allow a wireless device to arrange a scheduled access interval (SAI). In one example, a method of arranging an SAI is disclosed. The method may include: reserving a wireless medium for scheduled access during a first interval; determining a guard time within the first interval, wherein no scheduled transmissions are to occur; and performing one or more unscheduled transmissions via the wireless medium during the guard time.; paragraph [0074]: the wireless device may request permission by transmitting a request-to-send (RTS) frame. The wireless device may form and transmit the RTS frame by executing frame formation and exchange software module 242, scheduled channel access software module 243, and/or channel access protocol selection software module 244 of STA 200 of FIG. 2, or by executing frame formation and exchange software module 342,)
E. Applicant argues on page 12 of Remarks: ... "transmit. The permission request information to the first terminal associated with the target person and as, at the transmission timing, operated by a person different from the target person" in contrast to a "target person" and "second terminal" ... .
The Examiner respectfully disagrees. Wentink discloses the transmission of digital content between network-connected devices such as a permission request message. (see Wentink paragraph [0006]: Apparatus and methods are disclosed that may allow a wireless device to arrange a scheduled access interval (SAI). In one example, a method of arranging an SAI is disclosed. The method may include: reserving a wireless medium for scheduled access during a first interval; determining a guard time within the first interval, wherein no scheduled transmissions are to occur; and performing one or more unscheduled transmissions via the wireless medium during the guard time.; paragraph [0074]: the wireless device may request permission by transmitting a request-to-send (RTS) frame. The wireless device may form and transmit the RTS frame by executing frame formation and exchange software module 242, scheduled channel access software module 243, and/or channel access protocol selection software module 244 of STA 200 of FIG. 2, or by executing frame formation and exchange software module 342,)
Mechaley discloses image authentication indicating a different individual can utilize computing device (terminal) based upon completion of authentication. (see Mechaley paragraph [0028]: user captures display image on display 104 and transmits the captured image to the authentication server 110. The image processor 146 then compares the captured display image with the generated image to determine if they match.; paragraph [0050]: If the captured images match the stored images, the images match and the result of decision 212 is YES. In that event, the authentication server 110 (see FIG. 1) authenticates the identity of the user (target user or different user based upon image authentication) of the mobile communication device 130 in step 214. An authentication message may be transmitted from the authentication server 110 to the web server 116 to indicate a match and the process ends at 216. if the images do not match, the result of decision 212 is NO and, in step 218, the authentication server 110 denies access. An access denied message (i.e., a "no match" message) may be sent from the authentication server 110 to the web server 116 and the process ends at 216.; (communication with another person, prohibit another person from accessing or recognizing reply message designated for a first person); (image verification enables terminal being operated by a person different from the target person)
F. Applicant argues on page 12 of Remarks: ... And as for the rejection of independent claims 7 and 12, it is requested that the rejection be withdrawn for at least reasons similar to those noted above for claim 1 insomuch as these claims' recite similar features.
Independent claims 7 and 12 have similar limitations as independent claim 1. Responses to arguments against independent claim 1 also answer arguments against independent claims 7 and 12.
G. Applicant argues on page 12 of Remarks: ... And for the rejection of the dependent claims 2-6, 8-11, and 13-16, it is requested that the rejection be withdrawn at least by those claims' dependencies ... .
Responses to arguments against the independent claims also answer arguments against the associated dependent claims.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
4. 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.
5. Claims 1 - 5, 7 - 16 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Wentink et al. (US PGPUB No. 20160353484) in view of Reeves et al. (US Patent No. 8,554,912) and further in view of Ajitomi et al. (US PGPUB No. 20120110646) and Mechaley, JR et al. (US PGPUB No. 20150109428, referred to as “Mechaley”).
Regarding Claims 1, 7, 12, Wentink discloses a communication apparatus and a communication method and a non-transitory computer-readable storage medium storing a program causing a computer to perform operations, comprising:
a) at least one memory configured to store instructions; and at least one processor configured to execute the instructions (see Wentink paragraph [0040]: Each software module includes instructions that, when executed by processor 230, cause STA 200 to perform the corresponding functions. The non-transitory computer-readable medium of memory 240 thus includes instructions for performing all or a portion of the STA-side operations) to:
c) receive, from a second terminal operated by any of the target person and an assistant, permission request information indicating a request for a permission; (see Wentink paragraph [0074]: the wireless device may request permission by transmitting a request-to-send (RTS) frame. The wireless device may form and transmit the RTS frame by executing frame formation and exchange software module 242, scheduled channel access software module 243, and/or channel access protocol selection software module 244 of STA 200 of FIG. 2, or by executing frame formation and exchange software module 342, scheduled channel access software module 343, and/or channel access protocol selection software module 344 of AP 300 of FIG. 3. The wireless device may then receive permission to reserve the wireless medium for scheduled access during the first interval (902).; (selected: operated by target person))
Wentink does not specifically disclose for d) acquire information indicating a transmission timing that is preset for the target person and indicates a day-of-week time period as during which a user is likely to operate the first terminal.
However, Reeves discloses:
d) acquire information indicating a transmission timing that is preset for the target person and indicates a day-of-week time period as during which a user, of a first terminal associated with the target person, is likely to operate the first terminal. (see Reeves col 4: The user profile could also include service usage patterns associated with the user of wireless communication device 101, such as times of the day and days of the week that service is typically used, geographic areas where service is typically utilized, social maps, frequency of roaming usage, frequency and duration of local, long distance, and international calling, frequency of data usage, typical data usage amounts, data applications, web sites, and server paths typically accessed by the user, frequency of short message service (SMS) text messaging, and any other information associated with the use of communication network 130 by the user; (selected: day of week))
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to modify Wentink for d) acquire information indicating a transmission timing that is preset for the target person and indicates a day-of-week time period as during which a user is likely to operate the first terminal as taught by Reeves. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to employ the teachings of Reeves for the flexibility of a system that enables the determination of a timing schedule for communication transmissions utilizing current and previous communication transmissions within a network environment. (see Reeves col 4)
Furthermore, Wentink discloses for e) transmit, at the transmission timing, the permission request information to the first terminal, associated with the target person. (see Wentink paragraph [0074]: the wireless device may request permission by transmitting a request-to-send (RTS) frame. The wireless device may form and transmit the RTS frame by executing frame formation and exchange software module 242, scheduled channel access software module 243, and/or channel access protocol selection software module 244 of STA 200 of FIG. 2, or by executing frame formation and exchange software module 342,) at the transmission timing. (see Wentink paragraph [0006]: Apparatus and methods are disclosed that may allow a wireless device to arrange a scheduled access interval (SAI). In one example, a method of arranging an SAI is disclosed. The method may include: reserving a wireless medium for scheduled access during a first interval; determining a guard time within the first interval, wherein no scheduled transmissions are to occur; and performing one or more unscheduled transmissions via the wireless medium during the guard time.)
Wentink does not specifically disclose for e) store the permission request information.
However, Ajitomi discloses wherein for e) store the permission request information. (see Ajitomi paragraph [0046]: The token issuer 304 acquires the user identification information, the device identification information and the approval information from the application 110. ... The token issuer 304 passes these pieces of the acquired information to the above described token issuance determining unit 303, and requests to determine whether the token issuance is enabled or disabled. ... The generated token information is registered in the token information storage (permission information stored) 305 to be described later. Communication related to this token issuance, between the application 110 (the device 104 in which the application 110 operates) and the token issuer 304, is also performed via the network 201.; The generated token information is registered in the token information storage 305 ... . Communication related to this token issuance, between the application 110 (the device 104 in which the application 110 operates) and the token issuer 304, is also performed via the network 201)
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to modify Wentink for e) store the permission request information as taught by Ajitomi. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to employ the teachings of Ajitomi for the enhanced security of a system that enables the secure storage of access control information within a network environment. (see Ajitomi paragraph [0046])
Wentink does not specifically disclose for b) to authenticate a target person, and for e) at the transmission timing, operated by a person different from the target person.
However, Mechaley discloses for b) authenticate a target person; and for e) at the transmission timing, operated by a person different from the target person. (see Mechaley paragraph [0028]: user captures display image on display 104 and transmits the captured image to the authentication server 110. The image processor 146 then compares the captured display image with the generated image to determine if they match.; paragraph [0050]: If the captured images match the stored images, the images match and the result of decision 212 is YES. In that event, the authentication server 110 (see FIG. 1) authenticates the identity of the user of the mobile communication device 130 in step 214. An authentication message may be transmitted from the authentication server 110 to the web server 116 to indicate a match and the process ends at 216. if the images do not match, the result of decision 212 is NO and, in step 218, the authentication server 110 denies access. An access denied message (i.e., a "no match" message) may be sent from the authentication server 110 to the web server 116 and the process ends at 216.; (communication with another person, prohibit another person from accessing or recognizing reply message designated for a first person); (image verification enables computing system being operated by a person different from the target person)
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to modify Wentink for b) to authenticate a target person, and for e) at the transmission timing, operated by a person different from the target person as taught by Mechaley. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to employ the teachings of Mechaley for the flexibility of a system that enables multiple authentication techniques such as image comparisons within a network environment. (see Mechaley paragraph [0028]; paragraph [0050])
Furthermore, for Claim 12, Wentink discloses a non-transitory computer-readable storage medium storing a program causing a computer to perform operations. (see Wentink paragraph [0040]: Each software module includes instructions that, when executed by processor 230, cause STA 200 to perform the corresponding functions. The non-transitory computer-readable medium of memory 240 thus includes instructions for performing all or a portion of the STA-side operations)
Regarding Claims 2, 8, 13, Wentink-Reeves-Ajitomi-Mechaley discloses the communication apparatus according to claim 1 and the communication method according to claim 7 and the non-transitory computer-readable medium according to claim 12, wherein the at least one processor is further configured to perform:
a) receiving reply information for the permission request information from the first terminal and that indicates any of the permission and a non-permission. (see Wentink paragraph [0056]: STA1 (network device) may transmit a request to send (RTS) frame 401 to reserve the wireless medium for a scheduled access interval (SAI) 410. The RTS frame 401 may indicate a requested duration for the upcoming SAI 410. AP 110 may transmit a CTS (clear to send response) frame 402, also indicating the requested duration of the SAI 410, in response to RTS frame 401. (request for communication); paragraph [0057]: After receiving CTS frame 402, STA1 may transmit a SAIA message 405 indicating the details of the SAI 410, such as a guard time (GT) 406, a transmission schedule, etc. (after RTS/CTS exchange, communication enabled))
Wentink does not specifically disclose for b) transmitting reply information to a second terminal used by a person other than a user of the first terminal.
However, Mechaley discloses:
b) transmitting the reply information to the second terminal as used by another person other than the user of the first terminal. (see Mechaley paragraph [0028]: user captures display image on display 104 and transmits the captured image to the authentication server 110 (reply information). The image processor 146 then compares the captured display image with the generated image to determine if they match.; paragraph [0050]: If the captured images match the stored images, the images match and the result of decision 212 is YES. In that event, the authentication server 110 (see FIG. 1) authenticates the identity of the user of the mobile communication device 130 in step 214. An authentication message may be transmitted from the authentication server 110 to the web server 116 to indicate a match and the process ends at 216. if the images do not match, the result of decision 212 is NO and, in step 218, the authentication server 110 denies access. An access denied message (i.e., a "no match" message) may be sent from the authentication server 110 to the web server 116 and the process ends at 216.; (communication with another person, prohibit another person from accessing or recognizing reply message designated for a first person))
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to modify Wentink for b) transmitting reply information to a second terminal used by a person other than a user of the first terminal as taught by Mechaley. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to employ the teachings of Mechaley for the flexibility of a system that enables multiple authentication techniques such as image comparisons within a network environment. (see Mechaley paragraph [0028]; paragraph [0050])
Regarding Claims 3, 9, 14, Wentink-Reeves-Ajitomi-Mechaley discloses the communication apparatus according to claim 2 and the communication method according to claim 8 and the non-transitory computer-readable medium according to claim 13, wherein the at least one processor is further configured to perform determining whether transmission/reception of information to and from the first terminal is enabled based on whether a predetermined condition is satisfied, the predetermined condition including an input from the assistant and that permits contact with the first terminal. (see Wentink paragraph [0056]: STA1 (network device) may transmit a request to send (RTS) frame 401 to reserve the wireless medium for a scheduled access interval (SAI) 410. The RTS frame 401 may indicate a requested duration for the upcoming SAI 410. AP 110 may transmit a CTS (clear to send response) frame 402, also indicating the requested duration of the SAI 410, in response to RTS frame 401. (request for communication); paragraph [0057]: After receiving CTS frame 402, STA1 may transmit an SAIA message 405 indicating the details of the SAI 410, such as a guard time (GT) 406, a transmission schedule, etc. (after RTS/CTS exchange, communications between devices enabled); (RTS predetermined condition including input from target person or assistant))
Regarding Claims 4, 10, 15, Wentink-Reeves-Ajitomi-Mechaley discloses the communication apparatus according to claim 2 and the communication method according to claim 8 and the non-transitory computer-readable medium according to claim 13.
Wentink does not specifically disclose perform prohibiting the person other than the user of first terminal from recognizing reply information.
However, Mechaley discloses wherein the at least one processor is further configured to execute the instructions to perform prohibiting, by at least transmitting prohibition request information based on the target person and controlling an output at the second terminal according to whether a face of the target is detected, the other person, that is also other than the target person from recognizing, at the second terminal, the reply information. (see Mechaley paragraph [0028]: user captures display image on display 104 and transmits the captured image to the authentication server 110. The image processor 146 then compares the captured display image with the generated image to determine if they match.; paragraph [0050]: If the captured images match the stored images, the images match and the result of decision 212 is YES. In that event, the authentication server 110 (see FIG. 1) authenticates the identity of the user of the mobile communication device 130 in step 214. An authentication message may be transmitted from the authentication server 110 to the web server 116 to indicate a match and the process ends at 216. if the images do not match (analogous to prohibition), the result of decision 212 is NO and, in step 218, the authentication server 110 denies access. An access denied message (i.e., a "no match" message) may be sent from the authentication server 110 to the web server 116 and the process ends at 216.; (prohibit another person from accessing or recognizing reply message))
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to modify Wentink for perform prohibiting the person other than the user of first terminal from recognizing reply information as taught by Mechaley. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to employ the teachings of Mechaley for the flexibility of a system that enables multiple authentication techniques such as image comparisons within a network environment. (see Mechaley paragraph [0028]; paragraph [0050])
Regarding Claims 5, 11, 16, Wentink-Reeves-Ajitomi-Mechaley discloses the communication apparatus according to claim 1 and the communication method according to claim 7 and the non-transitory computer-readable medium according to claim 12, wherein the at least one processor is further configured to perform operations.
Wentink does not specifically disclose for a) acquiring an access history to information transmitted from communication apparatus, and for b) setting transmission timing by using access history.
However, Reeves discloses:
a) acquiring, from the first terminal, an access history to information transmitted from the communication apparatus; and b) setting the transmission timing by aggregating, by day of week, a time period in which an access frequency is high, by using the access history. (see Reeves col 4: The user profile could also include service usage patterns associated with the user of wireless communication device 101, such as times of the day and days of the week that service is typically used, geographic areas where service is typically utilized, social maps, frequency of roaming usage, frequency and duration of local, long distance, and international calling, frequency of data usage (access history), typical data usage amounts, data applications, web sites, and server paths typically accessed by the user, frequency of short message service (SMS) text messaging, and any other information associated with the use of communication network 130 by the user; (frequency of usage indicated access history information))
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to modify Wentink for a) acquiring an access history to information transmitted from communication apparatus, and for b) setting transmission timing by using access history as taught by Reeves. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to employ the teachings of Reeves for the flexibility of a system that enables the determination of a timing schedule for communication transmissions utilizing current and previous communication transmissions within a network environment. (see Reeves col 4)
6. Claim 6 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Wentink in view of Reeves and further in view of Ajitomi and Mechaley and Sutherland et al. (US PGPUB No. 20220309089).
Regarding Claim 6, Wentink-Reeves-Ajitomi-Mechaley discloses the communication apparatus according to claim 2.
Wentink does not specifically disclose perform outputting decision support information useful for making decision whether or not to comply with the request including attention utilizing a machine learning model.
However, Sutherland discloses wherein the at least one processor is further configured to perform outputting decision support information useful for making decision whether or not to comply with the request indicated by the permission request information, the decision support information including an attention level generated by a machine learning model trained on trends of the permission request information and response in the past. (see Sutherland paragraph [0017]: various aspects and embodiments of the present disclosure can accelerate, not fully automating, the selection by using machine learning-assisted decision support system trained on historical selections.; paragraph [0133]: server device 20 may perform a decision support process to provide for display one or more of the documents with attention information that indicates significance of one or more parts of each document provided for display in the classification of the document. For example, the one or more of the documents provided for display may be the document(s) selected for further processing at step S20. The attention information provided for display with the document may facilitate and/or accelerate decision making for the document,; (utilizing decision support tools and attention in making a decision associated with network communications))
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to modify Wentink for perform outputting decision support information useful for making decision whether or not to comply with the request including attention utilizing a machine learning model as taught by Sutherland. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to employ the teachings of Sutherland for the flexibility of a system utilizing additional tools in the making of decisions associated with network communications within a network environment. (see Sutherland page 20 - page 21)
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 extension fee 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 date of this final action.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to CARLTON JOHNSON whose telephone number is (571)270-1032. The examiner can normally be reached Work: 12-9PM (most days).
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, Shewaye Gelagay can be reached at 571-272-4219. 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.
/CJ/
January 26, 2026
/KHOI V LE/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2436