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
Status of the Claims
This is in response to Applicant’s amendment filed 1/7/26. Claims 24-33 and 35-43 are pending in the application.
Continuing Examination
A request for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, including the fee set forth in37 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and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114.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 2/13/26 has been entered.
Claim Objections
Objections to the claims have been withdrawn.
The text of those sections of Title 35, U.S. Code not included in this action can be found in a prior Office action.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
Claim 39-40 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Manton (US 2008/0061927) in view of Saeedi et al. (Saeedi US 2017/0287247), further in view of Hsu et al. (Hsu; US 6038666).
Regarding Claim 39, Manton discloses a system for enrolling a user at a biometric lockset (Abstract; [0041] software algorithms to enroll and validate fingerprints that are sensed through the fingerprint sensor 709), the system comprising:
one or more processors (701, 703 of Fig 7); and
one or more computer-readable storage devices storing data instructions that, when executed by the one or more processors ([0041]-[0042]), cause the system to:
receive, from a biometric lockset (100 Fig 1, 700 of Fig 7), a first notification corresponding to the biometric lockset receiving a first fingerprint touch (1607-1609 of Fig 16; 1707-1709 of Fig 17 beep notifies fingerprint has been read);
receive, from the biometric lockset, a second notification corresponding to the biometric lockset receiving a second fingerprint touch (1611-1613, 1615; 1711-1713 beep notifies fingerprint has been read);
store a userdata and a user privilege, wherein the user data and the user privilege are associated with a user of the biometric lockset (1617, 1723).
The biometric lockset of Manton does not teach a wireless communication interface and transmitting an enrollment status message via the wireless communication interface to the mobile device, and storing a user name.
In the same field of endeavor Saeedi teaches an apparatus and method that enables an owner/administrator to manage access to a shared resource based on identity that is established by use of biometric data. Saeedi discloses a biometric lockset system (Abstract), with a network interface configured to establish wireless connections with a biometric lockset and a mobile device ([0051] wireless transmitter/receiver 303 can communicate via any of various technologies, such as a cellular network, a short-range wireless network, a wireless local area network (WLAN), etc.); [0069] server 609, or any computing device that can communicate with other computing devices via a network, can store data using cloud storage; [0114], Fig 20),
receive, using the network interface from the biometric lockset corresponding to the biometric lockset receiving a first fingerprint touch (after obtaining the biometric data at 872 of Fig 8b, the B-lock receives the biometric data (847) and sends the data through the wireless network [described in [0051]]; [0088] B-lock 601 relays the biometric data);
transmit, using the network interface to the mobile device (the notification is sent through the network (described in [0051]) to the mobile device 875 Fig 8B; [0088] relays the biometric data to mobile/web application 602B, where the biometric data is received (step 875));
Saeedi doesn’t specify a second fingerprint notification in the initial embodiment, but teaches the user can use b-lock application miming on the mobile device to add a second user ([0064]), which would use the same network interface to receive and transmit the second user’s fingerprint to the administrator.
And Saeedi stores a user data and a user privilege, wherein the user data and the user privilege are associated with a user of the biometric lockset [0085] After verifying the digital code and receiving the biometric data, b-lock 601 registers the new user as an authorized user by storing the biometric data in storage, such as non-volatile memory).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the time of the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have provided the lock of Manton with a wireless communication interface network, for the purpose of providing verification to a mobile device application for ease of use and access to the authorized user’s online account with mobile application, for notifications of lockset status and/or software updates, as suggested by Saeedi ([0086]-[0087]).
The combination doesn’t specify storing a user name.
In the same field of endeavor, Hsu et al. (Hsu US 6038666) discloses an apparatus for automatically verifying the identity of a person seeking access to a protected property that is remotely located with respect to the apparatus, such as a remotely located computer file or building alarm system. Hsu discloses storing a user name (Col 6 Lines 40-67). Hsu also teaches a telephone that communicates with a receiver through a communication network and communication interface located near a door (Col 5 Lines 3-5).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Manton and Saeedi with Hsu using a user name in order to provide a more reliable technique for providing secure access to assets, as suggested by Hsu (Col 1 Lines 45-46).
Regarding Claim 40, Hsu discloses the system is further configured to transmit the user name and the user privilege to the biometric lockset (Col 7 Lines 17-20).
Claim 41 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Manton, Saeedi and Hsu, further in view of Al-Shaikh et al. (Al-Shaikh; US 20190172279).
Regarding Claim 41, Manton does not disclose the system does not receive fingerprint data from the biometric lockset.
In the same field of endeavor, Al-Shaikh et al. (Al-Shaikh; US 20190172279) discloses systems of attendance verification using mobile electronic devices. A person's biometric data is acquired and verified locally by a mobile device associated with the person while the mobile device is located in a geographic region associated with an event.
Al-Shaikh discloses the system does not receive fingerprint data from the biometric lockset ([0009] Attendance can be verified without a server needing to store biometric information, such as fingerprints).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Manton with Al-Shaikh in order to prevent the dissemination of sensitive information, as suggested by Al-Shaikh ([0009]).
Claim 42 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Manton, Saeedi and Hsu, further in view of HART et al. (Hart; US 20220046094 A1).
Regarding Claim 42, Manton does not disclose the system is further configured to authenticate the biometric lockset.
In the same field of endeavor, Hart discloses systems of an internet of things device connecting to a remote server. The internet of things device connects to a web target. The web target sends a response to the internet of things device indicating whether a change to the one or more settings of the internet of things device has been received at a cloud server. If a change has occurred, the internet of things device connects to a secure cloud server to update the settings on the internet of things device.
Hart discloses system is further configured to authenticate the biometric lockset ([0027] server 300 generally authenticates the electronic lock 100 before establishing a secure connection).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Manton with Hart in order to establish a secure connection, as suggested by Hart ([0027]).
Claim 43 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Manton, Saeedi and Hsu, further in view of Manchovski (US 20210097795 A1).
Regarding Claim 43, Manton doesn’t disclose a data store storing keys usable to sign challenges sent to the biometric lockset and validate signatures received from the biometric lockset.
In the same field of endeavor, Manchovski discloses a method for digital authentication is disclosed, in which an owner device associated with a smart lock receives identity information of a user device requesting access to the smart lock.
Manchovski discloses a data store storing keys usable to sign challenges sent to the biometric lockset and validate signatures received from the biometric lockset ([0211] Afterwards the owner device 151 sends (step 1503) the key of smart contract or at least some information regarding the availability of the key or smart contract to the user device 153 via the cloud server 152, which first receives (Step 1504) the key and sends (step 1505) the respective push notification to the user device 153. The user device receives (Step 1506) the key and approves (Step 1507) the key, which causes key to be validated and also causes the smart contract information on the Blockchain to be updated (Step 1508). Using the validated key or smart contract information, the use device initiates (Step 1509) a door open procedure of the lock 154. The user device 153 and the lock 154 perform mutual digital signature validation (Step 1510) and the lock furthermore validates (Step 1511) against the contract information stored on the Blockchain (Step 1512) whether this user device 143 is allowed to access the lock 154. If all authentications and validations were successful, the lock then performs the requested open procedure (Step 1513)).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Manton with Manchovski in order to provide a solution for substituting physical keys for people's assets, using a decentralized secure method for digital keys, as suggested by Manchovski ([0007]).
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 24-33 and 35-38 are allowed.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 1/7/26 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive for the following reasons:
A. Applicant argues Manton does not describe "receive, using the network interface, a second notification from the biometric lockset corresponding to the biometric lockset receiving a second fingerprint touch" and "transmit, using the network interface, the second notification to the mobile device." The Office Action relies on Manton as describing receiving notifications from a lockset. See Office Action at pgs. 6, 14. Applicant respectfully disagrees. Manton relates to a biometric lockset with a fingerprint sensor. See Manton at Abstract. In Manton, when a user registers a fingerprint, the lockset beeps after the user places their finger on the read screen. See Manton at [0053]-[0054], FIGS. 16 and 17. However, these beeps are purely local indications that the user placed their finger on the read screen, not notifications received at a mobile device during the registration process. In Manton, the lockset does not include a network interface, so Manton cannot describe a system separate from the lockset receiving a notification from the lockset, as the lockset in Manton has no means to transmit such a notification. Accordingly, Manton does not describe "receive, using the network interface, a second notification from the biometric lockset corresponding to the biometric lockset receiving a second fingerprint touch" and "transmit, using the network interface, the second notification to the mobile device."
It is respectfully submitted Manton receives, from a biometric lockset, a first notification corresponding to the biometric lockset receiving a first fingerprint touch (1607-1609 of Fig 16; 1707-1709 of Fig 17 beep notifies fingerprint has been read); and receives, from the biometric lockset, a second notification corresponding to the biometric lockset receiving a second fingerprint touch (1611-1613, 1615; 1711-1713 beep notifies fingerprint has been read).
Saeedi discloses a biometric lockset system, with a network interface configured to establish wireless connections with a biometric lockset and a mobile device ([0051] wireless transmitter/receiver 303 can communicate via any of various technologies, such as a cellular network, a short-range wireless network, a wireless local area network (WLAN), etc.); [0069] server 609, or any computing device that can communicate with other computing devices via a network, can store data using cloud storage; [0114], Fig 20), used to relay notifications (Fig 8). Together the combination reads on the claim language.
B. Applicant argues Saeedi does not cure the deficiencies of Manton. Saeedi relates to an access management platform that can be used to authorize a new user to access a shared resource. See Saeedi at Abstract. In Saeedi, a server can receive biometric data from a biometric data device and determine if the biometric data matches saved biometric data of an authorized user. See Saeedi at [0073]. If the biometric data matches the saved biometric data, the server can communicate with a b-lock to unlock the b-lock. See Saeedi at [0073]. However, the server in Saeedi does not receive any notifications from the b-lock. At best, the server receives biometric data from a mobile/web app operating on a mobile device of a new user and transmits a message to a mobile device of an administrative user indicating that the new user was registered as an authorized user of a lock. See Saeedi at [0090]; FIG. 8B. Accordingly, the server in Saeedi does not receive any notification from the lockset that is then transmitted to a mobile device.
In response to applicant's argument that the references fail to show certain features of applicant’s invention, it is noted that the features upon which applicant relies (i.e., a server receiving both a first and a second notification from the b-lock and transmitting the first and the second notification to the mobile device) are not recited in the rejected claim(s). Although the claims are interpreted in light of the specification, limitations from the specification are not read into the claims. See In re Van Geuns, 988 F.2d 1181, 26 USPQ2d 1057 (Fed. Cir. 1993).
It is respectfully submitted Manton teaches receiving a first and second notification (1607-1613, 1707-1713). Saeedi discloses a biometric lockset system with a network interface configured to establish wireless connections with a biometric lockset and a mobile device ([0051] wireless transmitter/receiver 303 can communicate via any of various technologies, such as a cellular network, a short-range wireless network, a wireless local area network (WLAN), etc.); [0069] server 609, or any computing device that can communicate with other computing devices via a network, can store data using cloud storage; [0114], Fig 20), used to relay notifications (Fig 8). Together the combination teaches each of the notifications of Manton may be sent wirelessly.
C. Further, even if the biometric data received from the new user's mobile device is interpreted as receiving a notification from the b-lock and sending the message to the administrator's mobile device is interpreted as transmitting the notification to the mobile device, Saeedi does not describe the server receiving both a first and a second notification from the b-lock and transmitting the first and the second notification to the mobile device. In Saeedi, only a single message is transmitted to the administrator's mobile device-a message indicating that the new user is registered with the b-lock. Accordingly, Saeedi does not describe "receive, using the network interface, a second notification from the biometric lockset corresponding to the biometric lockset receiving a second fingerprint touch" and "transmit, using the network interface, the second notification to the mobile device."
It is respectfully submitted Saeedi doesn’t specify a second fingerprint notification in the initial embodiment, but teaches the user can use a b-lock application miming on the mobile device to add a second user ([0064]), which would use the same network interface to receive and transmit the second user’s fingerprint to the administrator.
D. Hsu does not cure the deficiencies of Manton and Saeedi. Hsu relates to identity verification with a personal identification device. See Hsu at Abstract. However, Hsu does not describe any notifications transmitted from the personal identification device to a separate system which transmits the notifications to a mobile device during. Accordingly, Hsu does not describe "receive, using the network interface, a second notification from the biometric lockset corresponding to the biometric lockset receiving a second fingerprint touch" and "transmit, using the network interface, the second notification to the mobile device."
It is respectfully submitted Hsu is used to teach the well-known method of registering a user name when enrolling a new user (Col 6 Lines 40-67). Hsu also teaches a telephone communicates with the receiver through a communication network and a communication interface located near the door (Col 5 Lines 3-5).
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to MARK S RUSHING whose telephone number is (571)270-5876. The examiner can normally be reached on 10-6pm.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Davetta Goins can be reached at 571-272-2957. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300.
Information regarding the status of an application may be obtained from the Patent Application Information Retrieval (PAIR) system. Status information for published applications may be obtained from either Private PAIR or Public PAIR. Status information for unpublished applications is available through Private PAIR only. For more information about the PAIR system, see http://pair-direct.uspto.gov. Should you have questions on access to the Private PAIR system, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative or access to the automated information system, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000.
/MARK S RUSHING/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2689