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
Claims 21-32, 41-49 are presented for examination.
Claims 1-20, 33-40 are cancelled.
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and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114.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 4/29/26 has been entered.
The New Grounds of Rejection
Applicant’s amendment and argument with respect to claims 21-32, 41-49 filed on 4/29/26 have been fully considered but they are deemed to be moot in views of the new grounds of rejection.
Updated rejection is provided below.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 101
35 U.S.C. 101 reads as follows:
Whoever invents or discovers any new and useful process, machine, manufacture, or composition of matter, or any new and useful improvement thereof, may obtain a patent therefor, subject to the conditions and requirements of this title.
Claims 21-32 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 101 because the claimed invention is directed to non-statutory subject matter. The claims are directed to software per se, which does not fall into the categories of “process”, “machine”, “manufacture” and “composition of matter”. Referring to claim 21, claim 21 recites a system comprising a first analyzer, a second analyzer, and a first network device, without reciting a definite hardware component which directs the claim to software per se.
All dependent claims are rejected to as having the same deficiencies as the claims they depend from.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of 35 U.S.C. 112(a):
(a) IN GENERAL.—The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor or joint inventor of carrying out the invention.
The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112:
The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor of carrying out his invention.
Claim 21-32, 41-49 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(a) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), first paragraph, as failing to comply with the written description requirement. The claim(s) contains subject matter which was not described in the specification in such a way as to reasonably convey to one skilled in the relevant art that the inventor or a joint inventor, or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the inventor(s), at the time the application was filed, had possession of the claimed invention.
Referring to claim 21 and 41, the newly added limitation recites “derive a second-type transmission feature of the first terminal device from the one or more first-type transmission features of the first terminal device”, however, the limitation “derive” cannot be found in the specification. The closest description is found in [0113] that discloses “The network device may further aggregate a plurality of first-type transmission features of one terminal device to obtain a second-type transmission feature of the terminal device, and send the second-type transmission feature of the terminal device to the second analyzer”. Based on the specification, the second-type transmission feature is obtained by aggregating the first-type transmission feature of one terminal device. The second-type transmission feature is not derived from a single first- type transmission feature as claimed. Similar rejection applied to claims 27 and 47 for sixth-type transmission feature.
Referring to claims 26-32, 46-48, the claims recite the elements “a third-type transmission feature”, “a fourth-type transmission feature”, “a fifth-type transmission feature”, “a sixth-type transmission feature”, and ““a seventh-type transmission feature” without support from the specification.
All dependent claims are rejected to as having the same deficiencies as the claims they depend from.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
The following is a quotation of the appropriate paragraphs of 35 U.S.C. 102 that form the basis for the rejections under this section made in this Office action:
A person shall be entitled to a patent unless –
(a)(1) the claimed invention was patented, described in a printed publication, or in public use, on sale or otherwise available to the public before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claims 21-23, 25, 41-43, 45 and 49 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Olsson et al. US Patent Publication Number 2009/0288146, hereinafter Olsson.
Referring to claim 21, Olsson discloses a system (claim 37, figures 21 and 22), comprising a first analyzer (cloud server/at least one processing element), a second analyzer (remote server/at least one additional processing element), and a first network device (gateway 540), wherein:
the first network device (gateway 540) is configured to send one or more first-type transmission features (measurements/sensor data) of a first terminal device (device 1) to the second analyzer (remote server/ at least one additional processing element)(claim 39, at least one additional processing element (second analyzer) configured to: receive the user authentication model from the at least one processing element; receive a second plurality of measurements based on data from the at least one sensor (first-type transmission features),
the first analyzer is configured to send a first authentication model to the second analyzer (claim 39, at least one additional processing element (second analyzer) configured to: receive the user authentication model (a first authentication model ) from the at least one processing element (the first analyzer);, and
the second analyzer (remote server/at least one additional processing element) is configured to:
derive a second-type transmission feature of the first terminal device from the one or more first-type transmission features of the first terminal device (according to further definition from claim 49 in the current application, the first-type transmission features could be the second-type transmission feature, and there is no support and definition for the term “derive” from the specification, see 112 rejection above; Olsson in claim 39 recites the second analyzer authenticates a user based on the second plurality of measurements (received first-type transmission feature/second-type transmission feature) and the user authentication model); and
perform authentication on the first terminal device (device 1) based on the second-type transmission feature (measurements/sensor data) of the first terminal device (device 1) and the first authentication model (authentication model)(claim 39, second analyzer authenticates a user based on the second plurality of measurements and the user authentication model).
Referring to claim 22, Olsson discloses the system according to claim 21, wherein the second analyzer is further configured to: based on that the first terminal device fails to be authenticated, indicate the first network device to execute a policy to restrict access of the first terminal device ([0009], The method also includes an enrollment phase that includes receiving sensor data, sending the data for use in training an authentication model, and receiving the authentication model, whether the training is done by a remote server, or by the device itself such as a smartphone. In response to a failed authorization attempt, the method may also include blocking further access to a device or generating an alert; claim 40, prevent an unauthorized user from gaining access to a device without requiring explicit user-device interaction; access prevention is viewed as a policy to restrict access of the first terminal device).
Referring to claim 23, Olsson discloses the system according to claim 22, wherein the second analyzer is further configured to determine the policy based on the second-type transmission feature of the first terminal device (claims 39 and 40, access prevention is viewed as a policy to restrict access based on the received measurements (the second-type transmission feature).
Referring to claim 25, Olsson discloses the system according to claim 22, wherein the first network device is further configured to determine the policy based on the one or more first-type transmission features of the first terminal device (claims 39 and 40, determined access prevention is viewed as a determined policy to restrict access based on the received measurements (the second-type transmission feature).
Referring to claim 49, Olsson discloses the system according to wherein the second analyzer is configured to derive the second-type transmission feature by: treating a first-type transmission feature of the one or more first-type transmission features as the second-type transmission feature, or aggregating the one or more first-type transmission features into the second-type transmission feature; and wherein the second analyzer is configured to perform the authentication on the first terminal device by inputting the second-type transmission feature into the first authentication model (the scope is viewing the first-type transmission feature as the second-type of transmission feature, or viewing the first-type transmission features as a second-type transmission feature; Olsson in claim 39 discloses using the measurements from sensor as input for authentications with the authentication model, the measurements are viewed as the one or the one or more first-type transmission features, which are treated or aggregated to be the second-type transmission feature).
Referring to claims 41-43, 45, the claims encompass the same scope of the invention as that of the claims 21-23, 25. Therefore, claims 41-43, 45 are rejected on the same ground as the claims 21-23, 25.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to LIANGCHE A WANG whose telephone number is (571)272-3992. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 10:00am to 6:30pm.
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, Joon H Hwang can be reached on 571-272-4036. 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.
Liang-che Alex Wang
May 18, 2026
/LIANG CHE A WANG/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2447
Prosecution Insights