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 responsive to the communication filed on 10/9/2025.
Response to Arguments
2. The applicant’s argument filed 10/9/2025 have been taken into consideration, but are not persuasive.
In response to the applicant’s argument (disclosed on pg. 1-3 of the remarks segment) that Park et al fails to disclose that biometric information collected by device ‘100 is compared to biometric information received from device ‘201 or ‘203:
Using the broadest reasonable interpretation of comparing the biometric information sensed by the portable device to the biometric information sensed by the wireless device, the examiner maintains that the comparison of biometric data collected from one or more external devices (fig. 1, ‘201/’203 of Park et al) with biometric data previously stored by device ‘100 (disclosed in par [0077], lines 10-25, par [0222], par [0273], lines 18-25, and par [0279], lines 1-15 of Park et al) is inherent in regards to the limitation in question because the limitation doesn’t specify any time constraint regarding when the biometric data has been connected from the portable device and the wireless device. As disclosed in fig. 1B, ‘100/’200 and par [0145], lines 20-30, biometric data may be collected from a user of the first device (‘100) and the second device (‘200). With this instance, along with the feature disclosed by Park et al of comparing biometric data received from the second/third wireless device (‘201/’203) with the biometric data stored on the first wireless device (‘100), it is inherent that the biometric data stored on device ‘100 would have been previously collected by the first wireless device’s biometric collecting sensors before being compared to the biometric data collected from the second or third wireless device, in order to authenticate the requesting user.
Claim Rejections – 35 USC 102
3. 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.
4. Claims 1, 4, 7-12, 14-17, and 19-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Park et al (US 2017/0142589).
With respect to claim 1, Park et al teaches a system, comprising:
a portable device to sense biometric information of a user (fig. 1, ‘100-’203, fig. 2A, ‘181, and par [0054], lines 1-5, which disclose mobile user devices including sensors for collecting biometric data from the device user); and
a wireless device comprising a controller and a radio transceiver (fig. 1, ‘100-’203, par [0049] and par [0054], lines 1-5, which disclose that the mobile devices (which include communication interfaces and components for transmitting) are operated by the same user and connected via the same home network),
wherein the controller is configured to:
receive, via the radio transceiver, the biometric information sensed by the portable device (par [0056], lines 5-15, which discloses one of the user’s smart mobile devices transmitting biometric data to another one of the user’s smart mobile devices in the home network);
sense, via the wireless device, biometric information of the user corresponding to the biometric information sensed by the portable device (par [0145], lines 20-30, which discloses one of the user’s mobile devices receiving the biometric data from the other of the user’s mobile device connected over the same smart network);
compare the biometric information sensed by the portable device to the biometric information sensed by the wireless device to obtain a first comparison result (fig. 1A, ‘100, ‘201, par [0056], lines 1-5, and par [0077], lines 13-20, which disclose the receiving mobile device’s biometric information processing module being used to compare the received biometric data from the other mobile device in order to authenticate the user); and
authenticate the user in response to the first comparison result being less than a first threshold (par [0126], par [0222], and par [0287], lines 2-10, which disclose comparing the biometric data provided with stored biometric data and authenticating the user upon determining that the distance between the user’s first and mobile devices do no exceed a threshold).
With respect to claim 4, Park et al teaches wherein the controller is configured to receive the biometric information sensed by the portable device in response to the user initiating a transfer of the biometric information sensed by the portable device to the wireless device (fig. 5, ‘160, fig. 7, ‘260, par [0106], lines 10-15, and par [0107], lines 15-20, which disclose the user’s biometric data being transmitted between the first device and the second device).
With respect to claim 7, Park et al teaches wherein the portable device comprises a vital sign sensor (par [0050], lines 1-10, which discloses that the mobile devices may include medical measurement devices) and the biometric information sensed by the portable device comprises a vital sign of the user (par [0050], lines 1-10, “blood glucose monitoring device, heartbeat measuring device, blood pressure measuring device”), and
wherein the controller is configured to sense the biometric information of the user corresponding to the biometric information sensed by the portable device by sensing, via radio frequency (RF) sensing (fig. 22, ‘2227, “RF module”), a vital sign of the user corresponding to the vital sign sensed by the vital sign sensor of the portable device (par [0077], lines 1-5, “heartbeat, stress, …”).
With respect to claim 8, Park et al teaches wherein the portable device comprises a first biometric sensor to sense the biometric information of the user (par [0071], lines 1-3, “first sensor”),
wherein the wireless device comprises a second biometric sensor (par [0098], “second sensor”), and
wherein the controller is configured to sense the biometric information of the user corresponding to the biometric information sensed by the portable device by sensing, via the second biometric sensor, the biometric information of the user corresponding to the biometric information sensed by the first biometric sensor (par [0100-0101], which discloses the second sensor collecting user biometric data corresponding to biometric data collected by the first sensor).
With respect to claim 9, Park et al teaches wherein the biometric information of the user comprises at least one of respiration rate information, pulse rate information (par [0066], lines 7-8), heart rate information (par [0077], lines 1-4), electrocardiogram information (par [0074], lines 20-22), fingerprint information (par [0074], lines 20-22), or iris information (par [0074], lines 20-22).
With respect to claim 10, Park et al teaches wherein the portable device comprises a wearable device (par [0048], lines 10-12).
With respect to claim 11, Park et al teaches wherein the wireless device comprises at least one of a smart lock, a vehicle (par [0293], lines 1-4), or a computing device (fig. 2A, ‘100 & par [0054], lines 1-2).
With respect to claim 12, Park et al teaches a system, comprising:
a wireless device comprising a controller and a radio transceiver (fig. 1, ‘100-’203, par [0049] and par [0054], lines 1-5, which disclose that the mobile devices (which include communication interfaces and components for transmitting) are operated by the same user and connected via the same home network),
wherein the controller is configured to:
retrieve stored biometric information of a user (par [0056], lines 5-15, which discloses one of the user’s smart mobile devices transmitting biometric data to another one of the user’s smart mobile devices in the home network);
in response to the user approaching the wireless device, sense, via a wireless device, biometric information of the user corresponding to the stored biometric information (par [0145], lines 20-30, which discloses one of the user’s mobile devices receiving the biometric data from the other of the user’s mobile device connected over the same smart network);
compare the stored biometric information to the biometric information sensed by the wireless device to obtain a first comparison result (fig. 1A, ‘100, ‘201, par [0056], lines 1-5, and par [0077], lines 13-20, which disclose the receiving mobile device’s biometric information processing module being used to compare the received biometric data from the other mobile device in order to authenticate the user); and
authenticate the user in response to the first comparison result being less than a first threshold (par [0126], par [0222], and par [0287], lines 2-10, which disclose comparing the biometric data provided with stored biometric data and authenticating the user upon determining that the distance between the user’s first and mobile devices do no exceed a threshold).
With respect to claim 14, Park et al teaches wherein the controller is configured to determine the location of the user relative to the wireless device by determining, via radio frequency (RF) sensing, the location of the user relative to the wireless device (fig. 22, ‘2227 & par [0350], “RF module”).
With respect to claim 15, Park et al teaches wherein the controller is configured to sense the biometric information of the user corresponding to the stored biometric information by sensing, via radio frequency (RF) sensing (fig. 22, ‘2227, “RF module”), a vital sign of the user corresponding to the stored biometric information (par [0077], lines 1-5, “heartbeat, stress, …”).
With respect to claim 16, Park et al teaches wherein the wireless device comprises a biometric sensor (par [0074], which discloses one or more of the user devices containing biometric data-capturing sensors), and
wherein the controller is configured to sense the biometric information of the user corresponding to the stored biometric information by sensing, via the biometric sensor, the biometric information of the user corresponding to the stored biometric information (par [0077], which discloses using the one or more biometric sensing device and comparing senses biometric data with stored data).
With respect to claim 17, Park et al teaches a method for authenticating a user, the method comprising:
receiving, at a wireless device, the biometric information of the user sensed by a portable device (par [0056], lines 5-15, which discloses one of the user’s smart mobile devices transmitting biometric data to another one of the user’s smart mobile devices in the home network);
sensing, via the wireless device, biometric information of the user corresponding to the biometric information sensed by the portable device (par [0145], lines 20-30, which discloses one of the user’s mobile devices receiving the biometric data from the other of the user’s mobile device connected over the same smart network);
compare the biometric information sensed by the portable device to the biometric information sensed by the wireless device to obtain a first comparison result (fig. 1A, ‘100, ‘121, par [0056], lines 1-5, and par [0077], lines 13-20, which disclose the receiving mobile device’s biometric information processing module being used to compare the received biometric data from the other mobile device in order to authenticate the user); and
authenticate the user in response to the first comparison result being less than a first threshold (par [0126], par [0222], and par [0287], lines 2-10, which disclose comparing the biometric data provided with stored biometric data and authenticating the user upon determining that the distance between the user’s first and mobile devices do no exceed a threshold).
With respect to claim 19, Park et al teaches wherein sensing the biometric information of the user corresponding to the biometric information sensed by the portable device comprises sensing the biometric information of the user corresponding to the biometric information (par [0077], lines 1-5, “biometric information processing module…”) sensed by the portable device via radio frequency (RF) sensing (fig. 22, ‘2227, “RF module”).
With respect to claim 20, Park et al teaches wherein sensing the biometric information of the user corresponding to the biometric information sensed by the portable device comprises sensing the biometric information of the user corresponding to the biometric information sensed by the portable device via a biometric sensor (par [0100-0101], which discloses the second sensor collecting user biometric data corresponding to biometric data collected by the first sensor).
Claim Rejections – 35 USC 103
5. 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.
6. Claims 2-3, 5-6, 13, and 17-18 are rejected under 35 USC 103 as being unpatentable over Park et al (US 2017/0142589) in view of Mars et al (US 2024/0129708).
Regarding claim 2, Park et al teaches wherein the controller is configured to:
determine, via the radio transceiver, a location of the portable device relative to the wireless device (par [0059], lines 1-7, “location of the second electronic device”);
determine, via the radio transceiver, a location of the user relative to the wireless device (par [0074], lines 11-15, “location, a proximity degree”); and
compare the location of the portable device to the location of the user to obtain a second comparison result (par [0078], “distance between the first electronic device and the second electronic device”).
Park et al does not explicitly teach wherein authenticating the user comprises authenticating the user in response to the first comparison result being less than the first threshold and the second comparison result being less than a second threshold.
However, Mars et al further teaches wherein authenticating the user comprises authenticating the user in response to the first comparison result being less than the first threshold (claim 8, which discloses comparing user biometric data with biometric thresholds) and the second comparison result being less than a second threshold (fig. 14C, ‘1418, par [0012], lines 1-6 & par [0199], lines 1-6, which disclose authenticating smart device users based on their smart devices being within a threshold distance of each other).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective date of the claimed invention that combining the teachings of Mars et al within the teachings disclosed by Park et al would provide the predictive result of improving upon determining that portable device user’s are authorized parties by implementing various protocol to verify which users are currently using each particular device or object (as disclosed in par [0095] of Mars et al), because this feature would allow Park et al to ensure proper authentication of whether the correct authenticated user is currently accessing one of the several devices within an authorized user’s smart network.
Regarding claim 3, Park et al does not explicitly teach wherein the controller is configured to: receive, via the radio transceiver, an active time of the portable device, wherein authenticating the user comprises authenticating the user in response to the first comparison result being less than the first threshold and the active time being greater than a third threshold.
However, Mars et al further teaches receiving, via the radio transceiver, an active time of the portable device (par [0059], which discloses determining whether a user device is currently in an active session),
wherein authenticating the user comprises authenticating the user in response to the first comparison result being less than the first threshold (par [0206], which discloses determining if a user’s smart device exceeds or is below a distance threshold) and the active time being greater than a third threshold (fig. 1, 106 & par [0059], which disclose authenticating a device user of the device that has been determined to be in a session and not inactive for longer than the threshold period of time).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective date of the claimed invention that combining the teachings of Mars et al within the teachings disclosed by Park et al according to the motivation disclosed regarding claim 2.
Regarding claim 5, Park et al does not explicitly teach wherein the controller is configured to receive the biometric information sensed by the portable device automatically in response to the user approaching the wireless device.
However, Mars et al further teaches wherein the controller is configured to receive the biometric information sensed by the portable device automatically in response to the user approaching the wireless device (par [0087], lines 5-15, par [0091] & par [0172], lines 10-15, which disclose collecting biometric data for user devices approaching an identity verifying entity).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective date of the claimed invention that combining the teachings of Mars et al within the teachings disclosed by Park et al would provide the predictive result of improving upon determining that portable device user’s are authorized parties by implementing various protocol to verify which users are currently using each particular device or object (as disclosed in par [0095] of Mars et al), because this feature would allow Park et al to ensure proper authentication of whether the correct authenticated user is currently accessing one of the several devices within an authorized user’s smart network.
Regarding claim 6, Park et al teaches wherein the controller is configured to store the biometric information sensed by the portable device (par [0077], lines 16-23, which discloses a database for storing the retrieved biometric data) such that subsequent to authenticating the user the controller is further configured to:
in response to the user returning to the wireless device, sense, via the wireless device, biometric information of the user corresponding to the stored biometric information (par [0233-0235], which discloses determining biometric data for the user of the first and second devices returning to operation);
compare the stored biometric information to the biometric information sensed by the wireless device to obtain a third comparison result (par [0257], “compare the verified biometric persistent information”); and
reauthenticate the user in response to the third comparison result being less than the first threshold (par [0235], which discloses performing primary re-authentication based on biometric persistent information).
Park et al does not explicitly teach in response to the user departing the wireless device, revoke the authentication of the user.
However, Mars et al teaches in response to the user departing the wireless device, revoke the authentication of the user (par [0206], lines 11-14, which discloses terminating communication between a user’s device and an entity when a user walks away from the entity).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective date of the claimed invention that combining the teachings of Mars et al within the teachings disclosed by Park et al according to the motivation disclosed regarding claim 5.
Regarding claim 13, Park et al teaches wherein the controller is configured to:
determine, via the radio transceiver, a location of the portable device relative to the wireless device (par [0059], lines 1-7, “location of the second electronic device”);
determine, via the radio transceiver, a location of the user relative to the wireless device (par [0074], lines 11-15, “location, a proximity degree”); and
compare the location of the portable device to the location of the user to obtain a second comparison result (par [0078], “distance between the first electronic device and the second electronic device”).
Park et al does not explicitly teach wherein authenticating the user comprises authenticating the user in response to the first comparison result being less than the first threshold and the second comparison result being less than a second threshold.
However, Mars et al further teaches wherein authenticating the user comprises authenticating the user in response to the first comparison result being less than the first threshold (claim 8, which discloses comparing user biometric data with biometric thresholds) and the second comparison result being less than a second threshold (fig. 14C, ‘1418, par [0012], lines 1-6 & par [0199], lines 1-6, which disclose authenticating smart device users based on their smart devices being within a threshold distance of each other).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective date of the claimed invention that combining the teachings of Mars et al within the teachings disclosed by Park et al would provide the predictive result of improving upon determining that portable device user’s are authorized parties by implementing various protocol to verify which users are currently using each particular device or object (as disclosed in par [0095] of Mars et al), because this feature would allow Park et al to ensure proper authentication of whether the correct authenticated user is currently accessing one of the several devices within an authorized user’s smart network.
Regarding claim 18, Park et al teaches determining, via the wireless device, a location of the portable device relative to the wireless device (par [0059], lines 1-7, “location of the second electronic device”);
determining, via the wireless device, a location of the user relative to the wireless device (par [0074], lines 11-15, “location, a proximity degree”); and
comparing the location of the portable device to the location of the user to obtain a second comparison result (par [0078], “distance between the first electronic device and the second electronic device”).
Park et al does not explicitly teach wherein authenticating the user comprises authenticating the user in response to the first comparison result being less than the first threshold and the second comparison result being less than a second threshold.
However, Mars et al further teaches wherein authenticating the user comprises authenticating the user in response to the first comparison result being less than the first threshold (claim 8, which discloses comparing user biometric data with biometric thresholds) and the second comparison result being less than a second threshold (fig. 14C, ‘1418, par [0012], lines 1-6 & par [0199], lines 1-6, which disclose authenticating smart device users based on their smart devices being within a threshold distance of each other).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective date of the claimed invention that combining the teachings of Mars et al within the teachings disclosed by Park et al would provide the predictive result of improving upon determining that portable device user’s are authorized parties by implementing various protocol to verify which users are currently using each particular device or object (as disclosed in par [0095] of Mars et al), because this feature would allow Park et al to ensure proper authentication of whether the correct authenticated user is currently accessing one of the several devices within an authorized user’s smart network.
Conclusion
THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. 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 Randy A. Scott whose telephone number is (571) 272-3797. The examiner can normally be reached on Monday-Thursday 7:30 am-5:00 pm, second Fridays 7:30 am-4pm.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner's supervisor, Luu Pham can be reached on (571) 270-5002. 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.
/RANDY A SCOTT/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2439 20251102
Prosecution Insights