DETAILED ACTION
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 .
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status.
The following is a quotation of 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)(2) the claimed invention was described in a patent issued under section 151, or in an application for patent published or deemed published under section 122(b), in which the patent or application, as the case may be, names another inventor and was effectively filed before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claim(s) 21, 27-33 and 38-40 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) as being anticipated by Castoro et al. (US 2020/0097965 A1).
At to claim 21, Castoro discloses a computer-implemented method [Paragraph 0001], comprising:
establishing, using at least one processor, a three-way voice connection with a first device and a second device in response to receiving a request from the first device to provide sensitive information [“The system initiates a voice-enabled transactions between a user and a merchant on a three-way communication.” Paragraph 0014];
identifying, using the at least one processor, the sensitive information in the request and retrieving the sensitive information from a storage location communicatively coupled to the at least one processor [“The user device is configured to parse the audio to determine the transaction data.” Paragraph 0018];
converting, using the at least one processor, the retrieved sensitive information into an audio format and generating, based on the converting, an audio of the sensitive information [“The user device converts at least a portion of the audio to an accepted transaction data packet.” Paragraph 0056]; and
transmitting, using the at least one processor, the audio of the sensitive information to the second device over the three-way voice connection [“The transaction account transmits the audio transaction signal to the payment network.” Paragraph 0056].
As to claim 27, Castoro discloses the method of claim 21, wherein at least one of the first device and the at least one second device include at least one of the following: a mobile device, a telephone device, and any combination of thereof [The communication signal is implemented using a telephone line and a cellular link (mobile).” Paragraph 0076].
As to claim 28, Castoro discloses the method of claim 21, wherein the converting includes speech-synthesizing the sensitive information to generate the audio of the sensitive information [“The audio signal generator comprise software configured to generate audio such as speech-synthesizer.” Paragraph 0027].
As to claim 29, Castoro discloses the method of claim 21, further comprising authenticating the first device in response to the receiving of the request [“A user inputs credentials and in response being authenticated.” Paragraph 0020].
As to claim 30, Castoro discloses the method of claim 29, wherein the authenticating includes requesting the first device to generate a prompt for providing an authentication input [“The mobile device prompts the user to interact with the payment network.” Paragraph 0014];
comparing the authentication input received in response to the generated prompt with a stored authentication input [“Based on the user input an in response to the payment network including the credentials stored in the database.” Paragraph 0020];
upon determining a match between the authentication input and the stored authentication input, authenticating the first device [“Authenticating the user credentials is based in comparison of credentials stored in the database.” Paragraph 0020];
upon a failure to determine a match between the authentication input and the stored authentication input, preventing an authentication of the first device and generation and providing of the sensitive information to the at least one second device [“The security system excludes users from accessing the data set if there is no match.” Paragraph 0098].
As to claim 31, Castoro discloses the method of claim 30, wherein the authentication input includes at least one of the following: a username and a password, a password pattern, a password and an email confirmation, a biometric input, and any combination thereof [The user credentials included a username, password and biometric input.” Paragraph 0020].
As to claim 32, Castoro discloses the method of claim 21, wherein the voice connection includes a connection established over at least one of the following networks: a cellular telephone network, a public switched telephone network, a voice over internet protocol network, and any combination thereof [The communication signal is implemented using a telephone line and a cellular link (mobile).” Paragraph 0076].
As to claim 33, Castoro discloses the system [FIG. 1], comprising:
at least one processor [“Processing apparatus.” Paragraph 0105]; and
at least one non-transitory storage media storing instructions, that when executed by the at least one processor [Paragraph 0105], cause the at least one processor to:
receive a request from a first device to provide sensitive information and establish a three-way voice connection with the first device and at least one second device [“The system initiates a voice-enabled transactions between a user and a merchant on a three-way communication.” Paragraph 0014];
retrieve the sensitive information identified in the request and generate an audio of the retrieved sensitive information [“The user device is configured to parse the audio to determine the transaction data.” Paragraph 0018]; and
transmit the audio of the sensitive information to the at least one second device over the three-way voice connection [“The transaction account transmits the audio transaction signal to the payment network.” Paragraph 0056].
As to claim 38, Castoro discloses the system of claim 33, wherein at least one of the first device and the at least one second device include at least one of the following: a mobile device, a telephone device, and any combination of thereof [The communication signal is implemented using a telephone line and a cellular link (mobile).” Paragraph 0076].
As to claim 39, Castoro discloses the system of claim 33, wherein the at least one processor is configured to convert the retrieved sensitive information into an audio format by speech-synthesizing the sensitive information to generate the audio of the sensitive information [“The audio signal generator comprise software configured to generate audio such as speech-synthesizer.” Paragraph 0027].
As to claim 40, Castoro discloses a computer program product comprising a non-transitory machine-readable medium storing instructions that, when executed by at least one programmable processor [Paragraph 0105], cause the at least one programmable processor to:
receive a request from a first device to provide sensitive information and establish a three-way voice connection with the first device and at least one second device [“The system initiates a voice-enabled transactions between a user and a merchant on a three-way communication.” Paragraph 0014];
authenticate the first device in response to receiving the request [“Authenticating the user credentials is based in comparison of credentials stored in the database.” Paragraph 0020];
retrieve the sensitive information identified in the request and convert the retrieved sensitive information into an audio format by speech-synthesizing the sensitive information to generate an audio of the sensitive information [“The user device is configured to parse the audio to determine the transaction data.” Paragraph 0018]; and
transmit the audio of the sensitive information to the at least one second device over the three-way voice connection [“The transaction account transmits the audio transaction signal to the payment network.” Paragraph 0056];
wherein the sensitive information includes at least one of the following: a banking account number, an expiration date, a card verification value, and any combination of thereof [“The account code, consumer account, personal identification number (PIN) and other identification code such as (expiration date).” Paragraph 0065].
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 103 which forms the basis for all obviousness rejections set forth in this Office action:
A patent for a claimed invention may not be obtained, notwithstanding that the claimed invention is not identically disclosed as set forth in section 102, if the differences between the claimed invention and the prior art are such that the claimed invention as a whole would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which the claimed invention pertains. Patentability shall not be negated by the manner in which the invention was made.
The factual inquiries for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized as follows:
1. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art.
2. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue.
3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art.
4. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness.
This application currently names joint inventors. In considering patentability of the claims the examiner presumes that the subject matter of the various claims was commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the claimed invention(s) absent any evidence to the contrary. Applicant is advised of the obligation under 37 CFR 1.56 to point out the inventor and effective filing dates of each claim that was not commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the later invention in order for the examiner to consider the applicability of 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(C) for any potential 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) prior art against the later invention.
Claim(s) 22-26 and 34-37 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Castoro in view of Keiser et al. (US 2017/0251100 A1).
As to claim 22, Castoro discloses the method of claim 21, but fails to disclose applying a speech recognition.
However, Keiser et al. (US 2017/0251100 A1) teaches wherein the identifying includes applying a speech-recognition analyzer to identify the sensitive information [“The fingerprint recognition is done using a speech recognition device.” Paragraph 0027].
Castoro and Keiser are analogous because they are all directed to control environment system. One of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention would have found obvious to modify Castoro reference with the teaching of Keiser, so that the incoming user input would include the speech-recognition the transaction signal of Castoro, would have been combined into a transaction signal, for the obvious purpose of providing the user authentication using the PIN, by combining prior art elements according to known methods to yield predictable results.
As to claim 23, Castoro discloses the method of claim 22, but fails to disclose applying a speech recognition.
However, Keiser teaches wherein the request includes a request in an audible format, wherein the request is detected by the speech-recognition analyzer communicatively coupled to the at least one processor [“The fingerprint recognition is done using a speech recognition device.” Paragraph 0027].
Castoro and Keiser are analogous because they are all directed to control environment system. One of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention would have found obvious to modify Castoro reference with the teaching of Keiser, so that the incoming user input would include the speech-recognition the transaction signal of Castoro, would have been combined into a transaction signal, for the obvious purpose of providing the user authentication using the PIN, by combining prior art elements according to known methods to yield predictable results.
As to claim 24, Castoro discloses the method of claim 23, wherein the speech-recognition analyzer is configured to analyze the request and identify the sensitive information, the sensitive information includes at least one of the following: a banking account number, an expiration date, a card verification value, and any combination of thereof [“The account code, consumer account, personal identification number (PIN) and other identification code such as (expiration date).” Paragraph 0065].
As to claim 25, Castoro discloses the method of claim 22, but fails to disclose detecting keywords.
However, Keiser teaches wherein the receiving the request includes detecting one or more keywords associated with the request [“The communication system detected thee keywords in the user’s input.” Paragraph 0041].
Castoro and Keiser are analogous because they are all directed to control environment system. One of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention would have found obvious to modify Castoro reference with the teaching of Keiser, so that the incoming user input would include detecting a keyword in the transaction signal of Castoro, would have been combined into a transaction signal, for the obvious purpose of providing the user authentication using the PIN, by combining prior art elements according to known methods to yield predictable results.
As to claim 26, Castoro discloses the method of claim 25, but fails to disclose detecting keywords.
However, Keiser teaches wherein the one or more keywords are received from at least one of the first device and the second device [“The communication system detected thee keywords in the user’s input.” Paragraph 0041].
Castoro and Keiser are analogous because they are all directed to control environment system. One of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention would have found obvious to modify Castoro reference with the teaching of Keiser, so that the incoming user input would include detecting a keyword in the transaction signal of Castoro, would have been combined into a transaction signal, for the obvious purpose of providing the user authentication using the PIN, by combining prior art elements according to known methods to yield predictable results.
As to claim 34, Castoro discloses the system of claim 33, but fails to disclose applying a speech recognition.
However, Keiser et al. (US 2017/0251100 A1) teaches wherein the at least one processor is configured to apply a speech-recognition analyzer to identify the sensitive information.
Castoro and Keiser are analogous because they are all directed to control environment system. One of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention would have found obvious to modify Castoro reference with the teaching of Keiser, so that the incoming user input would include the speech-recognition the transaction signal of Castoro, would have been combined into a transaction signal, for the obvious purpose of providing the user authentication using the PIN, by combining prior art elements according to known methods to yield predictable results.
As to claim 35, Castoro discloses the system of claim 34, but fails to disclose applying a speech recognition.
However, Keiser teaches wherein the request includes a request in an audible format, wherein the request is detected by the speech-recognition analyzer communicatively coupled to the at least one processor [“The fingerprint recognition is done using a speech recognition device.” Paragraph 0027].
Castoro and Keiser are analogous because they are all directed to control environment system. One of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention would have found obvious to modify Castoro reference with the teaching of Keiser, so that the incoming user input would include the speech-recognition the transaction signal of Castoro, would have been combined into a transaction signal, for the obvious purpose of providing the user authentication using the PIN, by combining prior art elements according to known methods to yield predictable results.
As to claim 36, Castoro discloses the system of claim 35, wherein the speech-recognition analyzer is configured to analyze the request and identify the sensitive information, the sensitive information includes at least one of the following: a banking account number, an expiration date, a card verification value, and any combination of thereof. [“The account code, consumer account, personal identification number (PIN) and other identification code such as (expiration date).” Paragraph 0065].
As to claim 37, Castoro discloses the system of claim 33, but fails to disclose detecting keywords.
However, Keiser teaches wherein the at least one processor is configured to detect one or more keywords associated with the request in response to receiving the request, wherein the one or more keywords are received from at least one of the first device and the second device [“The communication system detected thee keywords in the user’s input.” Paragraph 0041].
Castoro and Keiser are analogous because they are all directed to control environment system. One of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention would have found obvious to modify Castoro reference with the teaching of Keiser, so that the incoming user input would include detecting a keyword in the transaction signal of Castoro, would have been combined into a transaction signal, for the obvious purpose of providing the user authentication using the PIN, by combining prior art elements according to known methods to yield predictable results.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. See PTO-892 form.
Channakeshava et al. (US 10,728,384 B1) discloses a call center records a voice conversation between a call center agent and a customer. A call recording of the voice conversation is transcribed. When a customer provides a call center agent with sensitive information, the sensitive information is detected from the transcribed voice conversation.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to GERALD GAUTHIER whose telephone number is (571)272-7539. The examiner can normally be reached 8:00 AM to 4:30 PM.
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, CAROLYN R EDWARDS can be reached at (571) 270-7136. 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.
/GERALD GAUTHIER/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2692 February 5, 2026
/CAROLYN R EDWARDS/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2692