Detailed Action
Claims 1-5, 8, 10-15, 19, 22, 25, 26, 30-33 are pending in this application. Claims 6, 7, 9, 16-18, 20, 21, 23, 24, 27-29, 34 were 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and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114.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 2/2/26 has been entered. This is a First Action Final.
Double Patenting
The nonstatutory double patenting rejection is based on a judicially created doctrine grounded in public policy (a policy reflected in the statute) so as to prevent the unjustified or improper timewise extension of the “right to exclude” granted by a patent and to prevent possible harassment by multiple assignees. A nonstatutory double patenting rejection is appropriate where the conflicting claims are not identical, but at least one examined application claim is not patentably distinct from the reference claim(s) because the examined application claim is either anticipated by, or would have been obvious over, the reference claim(s). See, e.g., In re Berg, 140 F.3d 1428, 46 USPQ2d 1226 (Fed. Cir. 1998); In re Goodman, 11 F.3d 1046, 29 USPQ2d 2010 (Fed. Cir. 1993); In re Longi, 759 F.2d 887, 225 USPQ 645 (Fed. Cir. 1985); In re Van Ornum, 686 F.2d 937, 214 USPQ 761 (CCPA 1982); In re Vogel, 422 F.2d 438, 164 USPQ 619 (CCPA 1970); In re Thorington, 418 F.2d 528, 163 USPQ 644 (CCPA 1969).
A timely filed terminal disclaimer in compliance with 37 CFR 1.321(c) or 1.321(d) may be used to overcome an actual or provisional rejection based on nonstatutory double patenting provided the reference application or patent either is shown to be commonly owned with the examined application, or claims an invention made as a result of activities undertaken within the scope of a joint research agreement. See MPEP § 717.02 for applications subject to examination under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA as explained in MPEP § 2159. See MPEP § 2146 et seq. for applications not subject to examination under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA . A terminal disclaimer must be signed in compliance with 37 CFR 1.321(b).
The filing of a terminal disclaimer by itself is not a complete reply to a nonstatutory double patenting (NSDP) rejection. A complete reply requires that the terminal disclaimer be accompanied by a reply requesting reconsideration of the prior Office action. Even where the NSDP rejection is provisional the reply must be complete. See MPEP § 804, subsection I.B.1. For a reply to a non-final Office action, see 37 CFR 1.111(a). For a reply to final Office action, see 37 CFR 1.113(c). A request for reconsideration while not provided for in 37 CFR 1.113(c) may be filed after final for consideration. See MPEP §§ 706.07(e) and 714.13.
The USPTO Internet website contains terminal disclaimer forms which may be used. Please visit www.uspto.gov/patent/patents-forms. The actual filing date of the application in which the form is filed determines what form (e.g., PTO/SB/25, PTO/SB/26, PTO/AIA /25, or PTO/AIA /26) should be used. A web-based eTerminal Disclaimer may be filled out completely online using web-screens. An eTerminal Disclaimer that meets all requirements is auto-processed and approved immediately upon submission. For more information about eTerminal Disclaimers, refer to www.uspto.gov/patents/apply/applying-online/eterminal-disclaimer.
Claims 1-5, 8, 10-15, 19, 22, 25, 26, 30-33 provisionally rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claims 1-9 of copending Application No. 18/699,780 (reference application) in view of US 2016/0359349 issued to Todd et al.(Todd). Although the claims at issue are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other because ‘780 teaches the instant claims except for a biometric sensor configured to receive biometric data for biometric authentication, wherein applications for the biometric authentication reside in said memory and are run by said processor, which is taught by Todd, Fig.1A,2,3, para.22,28.
Therefore it would have been obvious to one ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the teachings of ‘780 to include biometric authentication as taught by Todd in order to provide the predictable result of biometric authentication on a charger. One ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to combine the teachings in order to security for charging of devices(Todd, para.3) All other claim limitations are well known and obvious limitations as evident by the art below. This is a provisional nonstatutory double patenting rejection because the patentably indistinct claims have not in fact been patented.
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.
All pending claims except claim 2 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over US 2013/0117854 issued to Britton et al.(Britton) in view of US 2017/0310366 issued to Ben David et al.(Ben) in view of US US 2016/0359349 issued to Todd et al.(Todd).
As per claim 1, Britton teaches a computerized charger for a mobile device(Abstract, Fig.1,5A,B, para.52-53), comprising: a) a charging unit having an AC cord for charging the battery of said mobile device(Fig.5A,B, para.64-65,71); b) a communication and power supply cable connected to a charging interface of said mobile device(Fig.5A,B, para.64-65,71) c) at least one processor and associated memory, for implementing a computation device, being capable malware detection operations(para.62,64); and d) one or more software modules or applications, stored in said memory and run by said processor, being adapted to security services to said mobile device, during charging periods of said mobile device(Abstract, para.64-65,70).
Britton does not explicitly teach performing back and providing predetermine backup and data transfer and e) a biometric sensor configured to receive biometric data for biometric authentication, wherein applications for the biometric authentication reside in said memory and are run by said processor.
Ben explicitly teaches performing back and providing predetermine backup and data transfer(para.5,40,52).
Therefore it would have been obvious to one ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Britton of a secure charger that scans for malware while charging the mobile device to apply the teachings of Ben of backing up and transferring data of the mobile device while charging in order to provide the predictable result of a secure charger that scans for malware and backing up and transferring data while charging a mobile device.
One ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to combine the teachings in order to reduce the number of devices a user has to carry for backing up and charging a mobile device(Ben, para.4).
Britton in view of Ben does not explicitly teach e) a biometric sensor configured to receive biometric data for biometric authentication, wherein applications for the biometric authentication reside in said memory and are run by said processor.
Todd teaches e) a biometric sensor configured to receive biometric data for biometric authentication, wherein applications for the biometric authentication reside in said memory and are run by said processor(Fig.1A,2,3,[0022], [0028] Exemplary FIG. 3 can provide another embodiment of secure charger 100. Here, as in exemplary FIG. 2, charger 100 is coupled with phone 200 via cord 202, as described above. Further, a user may be attempting to charge phone 200 using charger 100. Thus, in this exemplary embodiment, a user may attempt to enter biometric information via biometric sensor 102, for example by pressing his or her finger on biometric sensor 102. Biometric sensor 102 may then obtain the biometric data, for example fingerprint data, and compare it with known fingerprint data, such as fingerprint data associated with an authorized user or users of charger 100. After obtaining biometric data, biometric sensor 102 may compare the biometric data with one or more sets of accepted biometric data. For example, a user may have previously set up charger 100 to accept only his or her fingerprint as a way of accessing the charging capabilities of charger 100. This information may be stored in any of a variety of locations, for example a remotely located or cloud based memory 300, a memory on phone 200, or on a memory in charger 100. It may be appreciated that charger 100 can communicate with cloud based memory 300 through wireless data transmission, as otherwise discussed herein. Additionally, charger 100 can communicate with phone 200 in any wired or wireless fashion, as desired. Biometric sensor 102 may communicate with any of these items, as well as a processor associated with any of memory 300, phone 200, or charger 100 in order to compare the inputted biometric data with known or authorized biometric data. If the biometric data inputted into biometric sensor 102 is authorized, charger 100 may activate or enable certain capabilities, such as the ability to charge mobile phone 200, and indicator 110 may illuminate (or provide some other type of alert) that charger 100 is active.).
Therefore it would have been obvious to one ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Britton in view of Ben of a secure charger that scans for malware, backing up and transferring of data while charging a mobile device to apply the teachings of Todd of a charger with biometric sensor for authorizing a user to perform various capabilities of the charger in order to provide the predictable result of a secure charger with biometric authentication of a user for scanning of malware and backing up and transferring data while charging a mobile device.
One ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to combine the teachings in order to provide security to the user when charging mobile devices outside the home and prevent unauthorized theft or access(Todd, para.3).
As per claim 3, Britton in view of Ben in view of Todd teaches the computerized charger according to claim 1, wherein the communication and power supply cable is a USB or micro-USB cable(Britton, para.63).
As per claim 4, Britton in view of Ben in view of Todd teaches the computerized charger according to claim 1, wherein providing predetermined backup, data transfer(Ben, para.5,40,52), and security services(Britton,Abstract) to the mobile device during charging comprises one or more of:- offline backup of files and applications; - online backup of files and applications; or - malware scanning(Britton, Abstract).
As per claim 5, Britton in view of Ben in view of Todd teaches the computerized charger according to claim 4, wherein offline full or incremental backup is performed into an offline storage device, the offline storage device being a Disk-On-Key or a memory stick(Britton; para.70; SD card it offline memory stick, Ben, para.3; teaches backing up data to external storage devices such as external hard drives or flash drives). Therefore it would have been obvious to one ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Britton in view of Benin view of Todd teachings in order to back up data to external storage devices such as harddrives, flash drives, or SD cards. One ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to combine the teachings in order to save data on external memory because mobile devices have limited memory storage(Ben, para.96).
As per claim 8, Britton in view of Ben in view of Todd teaches the computerized charger according to claim 4, wherein the storage device is integrated into the computerized charger or is an external storage hardware device(Ben, para.3,6; storage element(ie device) on the charger). Motivation to combine set forth in claim 4.
As per claim 10, Britton in view of Ben in view of Todd teaches the computerized charger according to claim 4, wherein online full or incremental backup is performed by uploading files and applications to a remote server or to a computational cloud(Ben, para.121; data synchronization with cloud). Therefore it would have been obvious to one ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Britton in view of Ben in view of Todd teachings in order to back up data to the cloud. One ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to combine the teachings in order to save data on external memory because mobile devices have limited memory storage(Ben, para.96) and server/cloud are easily scalable to add more memory.
As per claim 11, Britton in view of Ben in view of Todd teaches the computerized charger according to claim 4, wherein the communication channel for data transfer, storage and retrieval between the computerized charger and an online storage medium is a wireless channel(Britton, para.75 wireless communication, Ben, para.121-122; wireless backing up data to cloud). Therefore it would have been obvious to one ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Britton in view of Ben in view of Todd teachings in order to back up data to the cloud wirelessly. One ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to combine the teachings in order to save data on external memory because mobile devices have limited memory storage(Ben, para.96) and server/cloud are easily scalable to add more memory.
As per claim 12, Britton in view of Ben in view of Todd teaches the computerized charger according to claim 4, wherein the computerized charger is adapted to provide a backup of the internal firmware, an Operating system(OS), and installed applications, which is done automatically, or based on the user's request(Britton, para.70; teaches OS data, system files, on device database, para. 73; applications on mobile devices, Ben, para.3,25; teaches automatically backing up data; in further Admitted Prior Art; Internal firmware, OS, and installed applications on devices were well known in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention). Therefore it would have been obvious to one ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Britton in view of Ben in view of Todd of automatic back up of mobile device such as OS data, system files, on-device database to have the well known internal firmware and installed applications of a mobile device in order to provide the predictable result of automatic back up mobile devices with OS data, firmware, and installed applications. One ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to combine the teachings in order ensure all the information of a mobile device is backup in case of the user loses their phone. Note: the applicant fails to adequately traverse the Official Notice taken on 5/15/25, therefore the common knowledge or well-known in the art statement is taken to be admitted prior art. MPEP 2144.03(C). In further, see US 2019/0114404, para.22; US 2004/0250245; para.95,102, US 2013/0130653, para.20-21;US 2022/0294854, para.354;US 2007/0173237, para.97;US 2013/0007289, para.42; US 10,057,123,col.12, lines 30-41
As per claim 13, Britton in view of Ben in view of Todd teaches the computerized charger according to claim 4, wherein malware scanning is done at the application level and/or at an Operating system(OS) level(Britton, para.73; scanning OS on mobile device).
As per claim 14, Britton in view of Ben in view of Todd teaches the computerized charger according to claim 13, being adapted to perform one or more of : delete or quarantine suspicious detected files(Britton, para.126; remove “do not trust” application); upload files to be scanned to a remote server or to a computational cloud to perform remote scanning and analysis; during charging, scan and/or check the integrity on bootloaders and/or firmware images in the mobile device; issue warnings and indications to the user regarding malicious files; delete suspected files; block the operation of suspected files; clean malicious applications; perform software updates; transfer stored data between different mobile devices; access low-level storage information from the boot-loader, kernel and operating system of the mobile device to perform forensic investigation and backups; interface with a user via a touch screen, an external screen or via other external devices identified by the charger; or receive credentials from the mobile device to connect to the computational cloud; be paired with several mobile devices.
As per claim 15, Britton in view of Ben in view of Todd teaches the computerized charger according to claim 14, wherein scanning is done based on one or more of the following:- connection to a signature database containing typical signatures of known viruses or malware(Britton, para.84; signature detections using database); - statical analysis; - dynamic analysis; or - heuristic methods.
As per claim 19, Britton in view of Ben in view of Todd teaches the computerized charger according to claim 14, configured to issue indications about malware, wherein the indications about malware are visual or voice indications(Britton, para.66;using LED to indicate the mobile device is compromised ie has a malware).
As per claim 22, Britton in view of Ben in view of Todd teaches the computerized charger according to claim 4, being used as a debugging interface(Britton; [0062] FIGS. 5A and 5B show a side view and a front view, respectively, of a first embodiment of the secure charger for connection to a mobile smart device. The secure charger has the capability of conducting malware and other virus scans of the applications and OS of the mobile smart device while it is charging the device; applicant spec. pg.12, recites “debugging interface by….scanning…for malware”.) or to provide a security token wherein upon establishing a connection between the computerized charger and the mobile device and completing a dedicated pairing process, the security token is transferred to the mobile device and applied to enforce predetermined policy rules
As per claim 25, Britton in view of Ben in view of Todd teaches the computerized charger according to claim 1, the inherent interface of the mobile device is used to interface with the user(Britton, Fig.2, shows a smartphone with a display).
As per claim 26, Britton in view of Ben in view of Todd teaches the computerized charger according to claim 1, wherein the charging unit wirelessly charges the mobile device(Ben, para.122; wireless charging). Motivation to combine set forth in claim 1.
As per claim 30, Britton in view of Ben in view of Todd teaches the computerized charger according to claim 1, wherein the mobile device is one of the following:- a smartphone(Britton, Fig.2, shows smartphone); - a wearable smartwatch;or- smart glasses.
As per claim 31, Britton in view of Ben in view of Todd teaches the computerized charger according to claim 1, wherein the charging interface of the mobile device is a socket for wired charging or a wireless charging interface(Britton, Fig.5A,B, para.65; USB plugs into mobile device for wired charging).
As per claim 32, Britton in view of Ben in view of Todd teaches the computerized charger according to claim 1, further comprising one or more of the following: one or more dedicated software applications to be run by an Operating system(OS) and its computational resources, for providing external trusted services to the mobile device; or short-range networking capabilities(Britton, para.76-77; Bluetooth is “short-range networking capabilities”).
As per claim 33, Britton in view of Ben in view of Todd teaches the computerized charger according to claim 32, wherein the dedicated software application is selected from the group of:- a token for authenticating transactions made by the mobile device; - an application to provide high-level encryption to the user's digital or electronic; - applications developed by external providers, to be used by the mobile device; - dedicated antivirus for the mobile device; - keys of a trusted e-wallet;or - updating the OS of the mobile device. (Since claim 32 is a Markush group and the “dedicated software application” was not selected, claim 33 was not given patentable weight for prior art purposes, in other words, claim 33 is interpreted as below
the computerized charger according to claim 1, further comprising one or more of the following: one or more dedicated software applications to be run by the OS and its computational resources, for providing external trusted services to the mobile device, wherein the dedicated software application is selected from the group of:- a token for authenticating transactions made by the mobile device; - an application to provide high-level encryption to the user's digital or electronic; - applications developed by external providers, to be used by the mobile device; - dedicated antivirus for the mobile device; - keys of a trusted e-wallet;or - updating the OS of the mobile device); or
short-range networking capabilities(Britton, para.76-77; Bluetooth is “short-range networking capabilities”).
Claim 2 rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over US 2013/0117854 issued to Britton et al.(Britton) in view of US 2017/0310366 issued to Ben David et al.(Ben) in view of US 2016/0261128 issued to Johnston et al.(Johnston).
As per claim 2, Britton teaches a charger for a mobile device, comprising: a) a wired or wireless interface to be coupled to a port of said mobile device (Fig.5A,B, para.64-65,71); b) at least one processor and associated memory, for implementing a computation device, being capable of malware detection operations(para.62,64); and c) one or more software modules or applications, stored in said memory and run by said processor, being adapted to provide security services to said mobile device, upon connection to said mobile device via said wired or wireless interface(Abstract, para.64-65,70).
Britton does not explicitly teach performing back and providing predetermine backup and data transfer and dongle interface device.
Ben explicitly teaches performing back and providing predetermine backup and data transfer(para.5,40).
Therefore it would have been obvious to one ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Britton of scanning for malware while charging the mobile device to apply the teachings of Ben of backing up mobile device while charging in order to provide the predictable result of scanning for malware and backing up data while charging a mobile device.
One ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to combine the teachings in order to reduce the number of devices a user has to carry for backing up and charging a mobile device(Ben, para.4).
Britton in view of Ben does not explicitly teach dongle interface device.
Johnston explicitly teaches dongle interface device(Fig.2A).
Therefore it would have been obvious to one ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Britton in view of Ben of scanning for malware and backing up data while charging a mobile device to use a dongle adapter as taught by Johnston in order to provide the predictable result of scanning for malware and backing up data while charging a mobile device via a dongle adapter.
One ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to combine the teachings in order to reduce the number of devices a user has to carry for backing up and charging a mobile device(Ben, para.4) and/or provide extended functionality for the mobile device.
Response to Arguments
The applicant did not file TD or persuasively argue the double patenting rejection, therefore that rejection is maintained. The applicant amended claim 4-5, 8, 10-15, 22 to overcome the 112(b) rejection, therefore that rejection is withdrawn.
a) The applicant argues that the Official Notice taken on 5/5/2025 was improper, is not persuasive. The applicant Remarks on 9/15/2025 traverses the Official Notice, however applicant’s traversal was not persuasive because appellant’s traversal must contain information or argument that is adequate to create, on its face, a reasonable doubt as to the circumstances justifying the Examiner’s notice. See In re Boon, 439 F.2d 724, 728 (CCPA 1971). That is, Appellant must specifically point out the supposed errors in the Examiner's action, which would include stating why the noticed fact is not considered to be common knowledge or well-known in the art. See 37 C.F.R. § 1.111(b); see also MPEP § 2144.03. Appellant’s contention contains no information or argument to create on its face, a reasonable doubt regarding the circumstances justifying the official notice. More specifically, the allegation does not explain why the noticed fact is not considered to be common knowledge or well-known in the art. On this record, Appellant has not adequately traversed the Official Notice.
The applicant also argues that the Office did not provide instant and unquestionable demonstration as being well-known, which is also unpersuasive because the Office provided instant and unquestionable evidential support for the Official Notice taken, specifically US 2019/0114404, para.22; US 2004/0250245; para.95,102, US 2013/0130653, para.20-21;US 2022/0294854, para.354;US 2007/0173237, para.97;US 2013/0007289, para.42; US 10,057,123,col.12, lines 30-41.
The applicant’s current argument merely alleges the Official Notice is improper but does not expand on why the Official Notice taken was improper nor why the noticed fact is not considered to be common knowledge or well known in the art and/or why the supporting documents provided does not demonstrate that Internal firmware, OS, and installed applications on devices were well known in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention. Therefore since the applicant fails to adequately traverse the Official Notice taken on 5/15/25, therefore the common knowledge or well-known in the art statement is taken to be admitted prior art. MPEP 2144.03(C).
b) The applicant argues that the prior art in combination does not teach, “e) a biometric sensor configured to receive biometric data for biometric authentication, wherein applications for the biometric authentication reside in said memory and are run by said processor” because Todd’s charger is limited to controlling whether to enable charging or not, is unpersuasive.
In reply, applicant's arguments against the references individually, one cannot show nonobviousness by attacking references individually where the rejections are based on combinations of references. See In re Keller, 642 F.2d 413, 208 USPQ 871 (CCPA 1981); In re Merck & Co., 800 F.2d 1091, 231 USPQ 375 (Fed. Cir. 1986).
Britton, teaches
[0053] Secure charger 124 reports the results of malware and virus scans to internal network 102. Preferably, these scans will include non-private analysis data or statistics and analysis, for example, relating to a version of an operating system, installed applications, carriers, etc. When secure charger 124 scans mobile smart device 128 and the secure charger has no baseline for that mobile smart device or there has been a change to the mobile smart device's baseline, e.g., the mobile smart device had a software update, then secure charger 124 will query backend server 104 for a new baseline and that baseline will be retrieved from MSD database 110. The use of the baseline by the secure charger in scanning a mobile smart device will be described subsequently.
[0062] FIGS. 5A and 5B show a side view and a front view, respectively, of a first embodiment of the secure charger for connection to a mobile smart device. The secure charger has the capability of conducting malware and other virus scans of the applications and OS of the mobile smart device while it is charging the device.
[0064] Again referring to FIG. 5A, within housing 504 of secure charger 500 is a power transformer 506 for converting AC power to DC power. Secure charger 500 also includes CPU 508, random access memory ("RAM") 510, and secure digital ("SD") card 512. CPU 508 is for controlling all of the operations of secure charger 500. RAM 510 serves as system memory and stores the running program code and data, as well as volatile system files, e.g., logs. SD card 512 is for storing the OS, security analysis programs, and the on-device database. Security analysis programs include, but not limited to, software programs that are included in secure charger 500 or available for download from internal network 102 that perform the various analyses of the mobile smart device as described herein. It is understood that additional security analysis programs may be added and it will still be within the scope of the present invention.
Britton clearly teaches a secure charger with malware and virus scan application for scanning of a mobile device(security services) while charging the mobile device.
Britton however lacks performing backup and providing predetermine backup and data transfer and e) a biometric sensor configured to receive biometric data for biometric authentication, wherein applications for the biometric authentication reside in said memory and are run by said processor.
Ben explicitly teaches
[0005] The present invention is a single device for performing data backup and recharging for a mobile communication device.
[0040] Referring now to the drawings, FIGS. 1-3 and 5 show various views of a device, generally designated 10, for interfacing with a mobile communication device 50 having a rechargeable power supply and a data storage medium (i.e., memory), to perform data backup and recharging of the mobile communication device 50. Generally speaking, the device 10 includes a device body 12, an alternating current (AC) input interface 16, an output interface 20, and electronics 30 fully integrated within the device body 12. The electronics 30 perform data backup and recharging functions, as will be discussed in more detail below with reference to FIG. 4 and FIGS. 6A-6D.
[0052] It is noted herein that most common mobile communication devices employ cables for charging and transferring data which have a male universal serial bus (USB) type A plug on one end of the cable. Therefore, according to certain non-limiting implementations, the output interface 20 is implemented as a USB female type A port for receiving a male USB type A plug. In such a non-limiting implementation, the first connector 74 is implemented as a male USB type A plug.
Ben clearly teaches a charger for a mobile device that performs predetermined backup and data transfer.
Therefore the combination of Britton in view of Ben teaches a secure charger for malware and virus scan, backup and data transfer while the mobile device is being charged.
What Britton and Ben lack is e) a biometric sensor configured to receive biometric data for biometric authentication, wherein applications for the biometric authentication reside in said memory and are run by said processor.
Todd teaches
[0022] Still referring to exemplary FIGS. 1A and 1B, the body 106 of the charger 100 can have a biometric device 102 mounted thereon. The biometric device 102 may be such that it can read biometric data to provide or deny access or capabilities associated with the charger 100. For example, the biometric device 102 may be coupled to or capable of actuating a locking mechanism or lockout capabilities associated with the charger 100. Such capabilities can include, but are not limited to, providing power or charging capabilities to an authorized mobile device or authorized user, transmitting an accepted message to an authorized device or unauthorized device regarding access to the charger 100, denying power or preventing charging of an unauthorized device, data and/or communication transmissions to and from a remote server, communicating with a software application on a mobile communication device, and the like. For example, if unauthorized use or unauthorized biometric data in inputted into charger 100 or biometric sensor 102, a switch embedded in biometric sensor may deactivate the charger or otherwise prevent use. The switch may be any type of switch, for example a software switch, data switch, mechanical switch, or the like. In some alternative exemplary embodiments, mobile communication device charger 100 may also have capabilities to actively couple the charger 100 to a mobile communication device and prevent its removal, or deny access to mobile device connector 108 until authorized access is made via biometric sensor 102.
[0028] Exemplary FIG. 3 can provide another embodiment of secure charger 100. Here, as in exemplary FIG. 2, charger 100 is coupled with phone 200 via cord 202, as described above. Further, a user may be attempting to charge phone 200 using charger 100. Thus, in this exemplary embodiment, a user may attempt to enter biometric information via biometric sensor 102, for example by pressing his or her finger on biometric sensor 102. Biometric sensor 102 may then obtain the biometric data, for example fingerprint data, and compare it with known fingerprint data, such as fingerprint data associated with an authorized user or users of charger 100. After obtaining biometric data, biometric sensor 102 may compare the biometric data with one or more sets of accepted biometric data. For example, a user may have previously set up charger 100 to accept only his or her fingerprint as a way of accessing the charging capabilities of charger 100. This information may be stored in any of a variety of locations, for example a remotely located or cloud based memory 300, a memory on phone 200, or on a memory in charger 100. It may be appreciated that charger 100 can communicate with cloud based memory 300 through wireless data transmission, as otherwise discussed herein. Additionally, charger 100 can communicate with phone 200 in any wired or wireless fashion, as desired. Biometric sensor 102 may communicate with any of these items, as well as a processor associated with any of memory 300, phone 200, or charger 100 in order to compare the inputted biometric data with known or authorized biometric data. If the biometric data inputted into biometric sensor 102 is authorized, charger 100 may activate or enable certain capabilities, such as the ability to charge mobile phone 200, and indicator 110 may illuminate (or provide some other type of alert) that charger 100 is active.
Todd, para.22 clearly teaches the charger with the biometric authorization reader provides capabilities beyond that of charging, with the non-limiting examples of transmitting messages, data and/or communication transmission, communicating with software applications on the mobile device, etc, therefore Todd teaches the charger has a biometric reader to read biometrics from a user and compares the captured biometric of the user with stored biometrics on the memory of the charger and authorize the user for the charger capabilities with non-limiting examples such as providing power or charging capabilities, transmitting messages, data and/or communication transmission, communicating with software applications on the mobile device, etc., therefore teaches e) a biometric sensor configured to receive biometric data for biometric authentication, wherein applications for the biometric authentication reside in said memory and are run by said processor.
Therefore it would have been obvious to one ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Britton in view of Ben of scanning for malware, backing up and transferring of data while charging a mobile device to apply the teachings of Todd of a charger with biometric sensor for authorizing a user to perform various capabilities of the charger in order to provide the predictable result of biometric authentication of a user for charging a mobile device and scanning for malware and backing up and transferring data while charging a mobile device.
One ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to combine the teachings in order to provide security to the user when charging mobile devices outside the home and prevent unauthorized theft or access(Todd, para.3).
In other words, the combination of Britton in view of Ben in view of Todd would produce a secure charger with a biometric reader that read biometric and compares the biometric to biometric on the memory of the charger for authorizing user to perform malware and virus scan, backup, and data transfer while the mobile device is being charged.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. See PTO-892.
US 2020/0137209 issued to Ziv et al., teaches starting a backup application on the mobile device responsive to the trigger signal. The trigger signal is generated and transmitted wirelessly by the memory station responsive to the memory station detecting the beginning of a charging cycle. In this way, the mobile device can automatically execute a backup program or application without user intervention.
US 2019/0197240 issued to Pradhan et al., teaches malware scanner is carried by the housing, and is to perform a first scan of an external electronic device to detect malware. A file handler is carried by the housing, and is to detect, using the secure file transfer driver, a file to be transferred intermediate the external electronic device and the mobile device. The malware scanner is to scan the file. The file handler is to quarantine the file in response to the malware scanner detecting malware in the file.
All claims are identical to or patentably indistinct from, or have unity of invention with claims in the application prior to the entry of the submission under 37 CFR 1.114 (that is, restriction (including a lack of unity of invention) would not be proper) and all claims could have been finally rejected on the grounds and art of record in the next Office action if they had been entered in the application prior to entry under 37 CFR 1.114. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL even though it is a first action after the filing of a request for continued examination and the submission under 37 CFR 1.114. See MPEP § 706.07(b). 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 BACKHEAN TIV whose telephone number is (571)272-5654. The examiner can normally be reached on Mon.-Thurs. 5:30-3:30.
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, TONIA DOLLINGER can be reached on (571) 272-4170. 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.
/BACKHEAN TIV/
Primary Examiner
Art Unit 2459