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 10/27/2025 has been entered. Claims 1-20 are pending.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to claims 1, 8 and 15 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.
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted on 10/27/2025 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 1-6, 8-13 and 15-19 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Lin et al. (US 2022/0284086 hereinafter Lin) in view of Chiang et al. (US 2024/0070045 hereinafter Chiang).
Regarding claim 1, Lin discloses a method for using an event associated with a user as an authentication factor, the method comprising:
receiving, from a user device associated with the user, an indication of a request for the user to access a network resource via the user device (FIG. 1-3, ¶ [0033]-[0035], [0047]-[0048]; i.e. the user device attempts to access a resource, for example, an application, web page, service, data host, etc.);
receiving, from a time series database, time series sensor data associated with the user, wherein the time series sensor data is a sequence of data points collected by one or more sensors associated with the user during real-world events that the user experiences during a period of time (FIG. 1-3, ¶ [0032]-[0035], [0042]-[0046]; i.e. capturing/receiving from data sources and/or sensors different kinds of data associated with data and time information, for example, images, text, video, blog or social posts, reactions to posts, etc.);
identifying, using the sensor data, a particular experience from the real-world events experienced by the user that is a positive memorable experience (FIG. 1-3, ¶ [0050]-[0053]; i.e. retrieving and/or obtaining emotion data associated with the user or the user device, for example, a user’s happy photograph), wherein Reinforcement Learning from Human Feedback (RLHF) is used to determine whether a memorable experience is positive or negative;
generating a challenge prompt associated with the positive memorable experience to authenticate an identity of the user (FIG. 1-3, ¶ [0050]-[0053]; i.e. generating authentication challenge including the emotion data such as the happy photograph to the user); and
causing the user device to output the challenge prompt (FIG. 1-3, ¶ [0050]-[0053]; i.e. presenting the authentication challenge to the user of the client device).
Lin does not explicitly disclose wherein Reinforcement Learning from Human Feedback (RLHF) is used to determine whether a memorable experience is positive or negative.
However, Chiang discloses wherein Reinforcement Learning from Human Feedback (RLHF) is used to determine whether a memorable experience is positive or negative (¶ [0039]-[0042]).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine Lin and Chiang in order to improve user experience with applications, improve digital ergonomics, and allow more personalized interactions with applications by the user (Chiang, ¶ [0022]-[0024]).
Regarding claim 2, Lin in view of Chiang discloses the method of claim 1 wherein the challenge prompt is at least one of a question in text form displayed on a user interface of the user device, one or more images displayed on the user interface of the user device, or an audio question output by a speaker of the user device (Lin, FIG. 10E-G, ¶ [0034]).
Regarding claim 3, Lin in view of Chiang discloses the method of claim 1 wherein the identifying further comprises identifying that the positive memorable experience is exclusively known to the user (Lin, FIG. 10E-G, ¶ [0034]; Chiang, ¶ [0039]-[0042]).
Regarding claim 4, Lin in view of Chiang discloses the method of claim 1 wherein the positive memorable experience is associated with a positive reaction experienced by the user (Lin, FIG. 10E-G, ¶ [0034]; Chiang, ¶ [0039]-[0042]).
Regarding claim 5, Lin in view of Chiang discloses the method of claim 1 further comprising restricting collection of the time series sensor data based at least in part on a user profile associated with the user, the user profile including rules for time series sensor data collection associated with the user and wherein the rules include where and when to restrict collection of the time series sensor data (Lin, FIG. 10E-G, ¶ [0046], [0083]; Chiang, ¶ [0049]).
Regarding claim 6, Lin in view of Chiang discloses the method of claim 1 wherein the identifying is based at least in part on a user profile associated with the user, the user profile including rules for positive memorable experience identification associated with the user (Lin, FIG. 10E-G, ¶ [0046], [0083]; Chiang, ¶ [0049]).
Regarding claim 8, Lin discloses a system comprising:
one or more processors (FIG. 1-3); and
one or more non-transitory computer-readable media storing instructions that, when executed, cause the one or more processors to perform operations comprising (FIG. 1-3):
receiving, from a user device associated with a user, an indication of a request for the user to access a network resource via the user device (FIG. 1-3, ¶ [0033]-[0035], [0047]-[0048]; i.e. the user device attempts to access a resource, for example, an application, web page, service, data host, etc.);
receiving, from a time series database, time series sensor data associated with the user, wherein the time series sensor data is a sequence of data points collected by one or more sensors associated with the user during real-world events that the user experiences during a period of time (FIG. 1-3, ¶ [0032]-[0035], [0042]-[0046]; i.e. capturing/receiving from data sources and/or sensors different kinds of data associated with data and time information, for example, images, text, video, blog or social posts, reactions to posts, etc.);
identifying, using the sensor data, a particular experience from the real-world events experienced by the user that is a positive memorable experience (FIG. 1-3, ¶ [0050]-[0053]; i.e. retrieving and/or obtaining emotion data associated with the user or the user device, for example, a user’s happy photograph), wherein Reinforcement Learning from Human Feedback (RLHF) is used to determine whether a memorable experience is positive or negative;
generating a challenge prompt associated with the positive memorable experience to authenticate an identity of the user (FIG. 1-3, ¶ [0050]-[0053]; i.e. generating authentication challenge including the emotion data such as the happy photograph to the user); and
causing the user device to output the challenge prompt (FIG. 1-3, ¶ [0050]-[0053]; i.e. presenting the authentication challenge to the user of the client device).
Lin does not explicitly disclose wherein Reinforcement Learning from Human Feedback (RLHF) is used to determine whether a memorable experience is positive or negative.
However, Chiang discloses wherein Reinforcement Learning from Human Feedback (RLHF) is used to determine whether a memorable experience is positive or negative (¶ [0039]-[0042]).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine Lin and Chiang in order to improve user experience with applications, improve digital ergonomics, and allow more personalized interactions with applications by the user (Chiang, ¶ [0022]-[0024]).
Regarding claim 9, Lin in view of Chiang discloses the system of claim 8, wherein the challenge prompt is at least one of a question in text form displayed on a user interface of the user device, one or more images displayed on the user interface of the user device, or an audio question output by a speaker of the user device (Lin, FIG. 10E-G, ¶ [0034]).
Regarding claim 10, Lin in view of Chiang discloses the system of claim 8, wherein the identifying further comprises identifying that the positive memorable experience is exclusively known to the user (Lin, FIG. 10E-G, ¶ [0034]; Chiang, ¶ [0039]-[0042]).
Regarding claim 11, Lin in view of Chiang discloses the system of claim 8, wherein the positive memorable experience is associated with a positive reaction experienced by the user (Lin, FIG. 10E-G, ¶ [0034]; Chiang, ¶ [0039]-[0042]).
Regarding claim 12, Lin in view of Chiang discloses the system of claim 8, the operations further comprising restricting collection of the time series sensor data based at least in part on a user profile associated with the user, the user profile including rules for time series sensor data collection associated with the user and wherein the rules include where and when to restrict collection of the time series sensor data (Lin, FIG. 10E-G, ¶ [0046], [0083]; Chiang, ¶ [0049]).
Regarding claim 13, Lin in view of Chiang discloses the system of claim 8, wherein the identifying is based at least in part on a user profile associated with the user, the user profile including rules for positive memorable experience identification associated with the user (Lin, FIG. 10E-G, ¶ [0046], [0083]; Chiang, ¶ [0049]).
Regarding claim 15, Lin discloses one or more non-transitory computer-readable media storing instructions that, when executed, cause one or more processors to perform operations comprising:
receiving, from a user device associated with a user, an indication of a request for the user to access a network resource via the user device (FIG. 1-3, ¶ [0033]-[0035], [0047]-[0048]; i.e. the user device attempts to access a resource, for example, an application, web page, service, data host, etc.);
receiving, from a time series database, time series sensor data associated with the user, wherein the time series sensor data is a sequence of data points collected by one or more sensors associated with the user during real-world events that the user experiences during a period of time (FIG. 1-3, ¶ [0032]-[0035], [0042]-[0046]; i.e. capturing/receiving from data sources and/or sensors different kinds of data associated with data and time information, for example, images, text, video, blog or social posts, reactions to posts, etc.);
identifying, using the sensor data, a particular experience from the real-world events experienced by the user that is a positive memorable experience (FIG. 1-3, ¶ [0050]-[0053]; i.e. retrieving and/or obtaining emotion data associated with the user or the user device, for example, a user’s happy photograph), wherein Reinforcement Learning from Human Feedback (RLHF) is used to determine whether a memorable experience is positive or negative;
generating a challenge prompt associated with the positive memorable experience to authenticate an identity of the user (FIG. 1-3, ¶ [0050]-[0053]; i.e. generating authentication challenge including the emotion data such as the happy photograph to the user); and
causing the user device to output the challenge prompt (FIG. 1-3, ¶ [0050]-[0053]; i.e. presenting the authentication challenge to the user of the client device).
Lin does not explicitly disclose wherein Reinforcement Learning from Human Feedback (RLHF) is used to determine whether a memorable experience is positive or negative.
However, Chiang discloses wherein Reinforcement Learning from Human Feedback (RLHF) is used to determine whether a memorable experience is positive or negative (¶ [0039]-[0042]).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine Lin and Chiang in order to improve user experience with applications, improve digital ergonomics, and allow more personalized interactions with applications by the user (Chiang, ¶ [0022]-[0024]).
Regarding claim 16, Lin in view of Chiang discloses the one or more non-transitory computer-readable media of claim 15, wherein the identifying further comprises identifying that the positive memorable experience is exclusively known to the user (Lin, FIG. 10E-G, ¶ [0034]; Chiang, ¶ [0039]-[0042]).
Regarding claim 17, Lin in view of Chiang discloses the one or more non-transitory computer-readable media of claim 15, wherein the positive memorable experience is associated with a positive reaction experienced by the user (Lin, FIG. 10E-G, ¶ [0034]; Chiang, ¶ [0039]-[0042]).
Regarding claim 18, Lin in view of Chiang discloses the one or more non-transitory computer-readable media of claim 15, the operations further comprising restricting collection of the time series sensor data based at least in part on a user profile associated with the user, the user profile including rules for time series sensor data collection associated with the user and wherein the rules include where and when to restrict collection of the time series sensor data (Lin, FIG. 10E-G, ¶ [0046], [0083]; Chiang, ¶ [0049]).
Regarding claim 19, Lin in view of Chiang discloses the one or more non-transitory computer-readable media of claim 15, wherein the identifying is based at least in part on a user profile associated with the user, the user profile including rules for positive memorable experience identification associated with the user (Lin, FIG. 10E-G, ¶ [0046], [0083]; Chiang, ¶ [0049]).
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.
Claims 7, 14 and 20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Lin et al. (US 2022/0284086 hereinafter Lin) in view of Chiang et al. (US 2024/0070045 hereinafter Chiang) and further in view of Weber et al. (US 2017/0317993 hereinafter Weber).
Regarding claim 7, Lin in view of Chiang discloses the method of claim 1 wherein generating a challenge prompt further comprises: generating one or more plausible events [[using a predetermined level of hallucination and]] based at least in part on the positive memorable experience and the time series sensor data; and generating, using the positive memorable experience and the one or more plausible events, a challenge and response to be used as a challenge-response authentication for the user to access the network resource via the user device (Lin, FIG. 10E-G, ¶ [0033]-[0035]; Chiang, ¶ [0039]-[0042]).
Lin in view of Chiang does not explicitly disclose using a predetermined level of hallucination.
However, Weber discloses generating one or more plausible events using a predetermined level of hallucination (¶ [0064], [0068]).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine Lin, Chiang and Weber in order to scale the difficulty of the authentication challenge to meet different security needs (Weber, ¶ [0039], [0068]).
Regarding claims 14 and 20, see claim 7 above for the same reasons of rejections.
Conclusion
Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP § 706.07(a). Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a).
A shortened statutory period for reply to this final action is set to expire THREE MONTHS from the mailing date of this action. In the event a first reply is filed within TWO MONTHS of the mailing date of this final action and the advisory action is not mailed until after the end of the THREE-MONTH shortened statutory period, then the shortened statutory period will expire on the date the advisory action is mailed, and any nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) pursuant to 37 CFR 1.136(a) will be calculated from the mailing date of the advisory action. In no event, however, will the statutory period for reply expire later than SIX MONTHS from the mailing date of this final action.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to 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