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 .
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statements (IDS), submitted on 3/4/2024 and 4/10/2025, are being considered by the examiner.
Objections
The drawings are objected to under 37 CFR 1.83(a). The drawings must show every feature of the invention specified in the claims. Therefore, “a gate” must be shown or the feature(s) must be canceled from the claims 1-13. No new matter should be entered.
Corrected drawing sheets in compliance with 37 CFR 1.121(d) are required in reply to the Office action to avoid abandonment of the application. Any amended replacement drawing sheet should include all of the figures appearing on the immediate prior version of the sheet, even if only one figure is being amended. The figure or figure number of an amended drawing should not be labeled as “amended.” If a drawing figure is to be canceled, the appropriate figure must be removed from the replacement sheet, and where necessary, the remaining figures must be renumbered and appropriate changes made to the brief description of the several views of the drawings for consistency. Additional replacement sheets may be necessary to show the renumbering of the remaining figures. Each drawing sheet submitted after the filing date of an application must be labeled in the top margin as either “Replacement Sheet” or “New Sheet” pursuant to 37 CFR 1.121(d). If the changes are not accepted by the examiner, the applicant will be notified and informed of any required corrective action in the next Office action. The objection to the drawings will not be held in abeyance.
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 of this title, 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.
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 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 factual inquiries set forth in Graham v. John Deere Co., 383 U.S. 1, 148 USPQ 459 (1966), that are applied for establishing a background for determining obviousness under pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 103(a) 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 under pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 103(a), the examiner presumes that the subject matter of the various claims was commonly owned at the time any inventions covered therein were made absent any evidence to the contrary. Applicant is advised of the obligation under 37 CFR 1.56 to point out the inventor and invention dates of each claim that was not commonly owned at the time a later invention was made in order for the examiner to consider the applicability of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 103(c) and potential pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102(e), (f) or (g) prior art under pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 103(a).
Claim 1 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Irwin (US Patent Application Publication 2022/0004617 A1), (“Irwin”), in view of Medina et al. (US Patent 9,953,231 B1), (“Medina”).
Regarding claim 1, Irwin meets the claim limitations as follow.
A method (systems and methods for authenticating a user) [Irwin: para. 0003] of detecting active liveness ((detecting a response of the user) [Irwin: para. 0008]; (Certain embodiments verify that the body part is alive, as opposed to being a fake replica of the body part. The physical user interaction may be captured using the same sensor that performs biometric identification, e.g., a fingerprint sensor or a face recognition module, and recorded. In an alternative embodiment, the physical user interaction may be captured by the biometric sensor and recorded) [Irwin: para. 0021]), comprising:generating (generates) [Irwin: para. 0029], by an authentication device (systems and methods for authenticating a user) [Irwin: para. 0003], a command for user authentication (generate and send an authentication request 153, containing at least computer address 156 (e.g., an IP address) of user computer 140 and optionally a user ID entered by user 102 to user computer 140, to authenticator 162) [Irwin: para. 0033];outputting (send) [Irwin: para. 0033], by the authentication device (systems and methods for authenticating a user) [Irwin: para. 0003], the command to a screen (flash pattern 170 may be output as a grid to computer screen 142) [Irwin: para. 0036] and capturing a facial image of a user ((application 130 captures the evidence as remitted light from a part ( e.g., a finger, face, eye, etc.) of user 102 being used for biometric authentication) [Irwin: para. 0026]; (Certain embodiments verify that the body part is alive, as opposed to being a fake replica of the body part. The physical user interaction may be captured using the same sensor that performs biometric identification, e.g., a fingerprint sensor or a face recognition module, and recorded. In an alternative embodiment, the physical user interaction may be captured by the biometric sensor and recorded) [Irwin: para. 0021]; (User 102 is shown with three example biometric sources, a finger 104 (e.g., for fingerprint biometric authentication), a face 106 (e.g., for facial biometric authentication), and an eye 108 (e.g., for iris and/or retinal biometric authentication). In certain embodiments, camera 122 may include, or be co-located with, an infrared projector 135 that projects infrared light onto face 106 of user 102 during facial authentication. Advantageously, application 130 may control the infrared projector 135 based upon flash pattern 170 and use camera 122 (or another optical IR detector) to detect remitted pattern 139 from face 106) [Irwin: para. 0035] pronouncing the output command ((The detected facial movement may include one or more of blinking, smiling, speaking, mouthing (moving the mouth to make certain shapes), head tilting, head shaking, nodding, yawning, and so on) [Irwin: para. 0091]; (The detected facial movement may include one or more of blinking, smiling, speaking, mouthing (moving the mouth to make certain shapes), head tilting, head shaking, nodding, yawning, and so on) [Irwin: para. 0091]; (DQ) In any of the facial-movement tracking methods denoted as (DN)-(DP), the facial movement including one or more of blinking, smiling, speaking, mouthing, head tilting, head shaking, nodding, and yawning) [Irwin: para. 0239, claim 25]); andextracting (extracts) [Irwin: para. 0091], by the authentication device (systems and methods for authenticating a user) [Irwin: para. 0003], feature points for a change in mouth shape from the facial image (The detected facial movement may include one or more of blinking, smiling, speaking, mouthing (moving the mouth to make certain shapes), head tilting, head shaking, nodding, yawning, and so on) [Irwin: para. 0091] and determining whether the user pronounces the command ((DQ) In any of the facial-movement tracking methods denoted as (DN)-(DP), the facial movement including one or more of blinking, smiling, speaking, mouthing, head tilting, head shaking, nodding, and yawning) [Irwin: para. 0239, claim 25].
In the same field of endeavor Medina further discloses the claim limitations and the deficient claim limitations, as follows:
the user pronounces the command (receiving audio data of the user speaking the at least one word) [Medina: col. 2, line 4-5]
It would have been obvious to one with an ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the teachings of Irwin with Medina to program the system to implement of Medina’s method.
Therefore, the combination of Irwin with Medina will enable the system to improve operation
of a computing device configured to control user access to information [Medina: col. 3, line 4-6].
Claims 2, 7-8 and 13 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Irwin (US Patent Application Publication 2022/0004617 A1), (“Irwin”), in view of Medina et al. (US Patent 9,953,231 B1), (“Medina”), in view of Oh et al. (US Patent 2006/0090079 A1), (“Oh”).
Regarding claim 2, Irwin meets the claim limitations as set forth in claim 1. Irwin further meets the claim limitations as follow.
the command is generated when it is identified that the user enters a range where face capturing is possible ((Particularly, system 100 verifies that user 102 is biometrically identified by mobile device 102, and that user 102 is present at user computer 140 when it is used to access account 154) [Irwin: para. 0027]; (In another embodiment, where user computer 740 includes a camera, user computer 40 may detect eye movement as user 702 follows challenge command 770. For example, user computer 740 may accepts an input, or series of inputs, from user 702 via a keyboard, mouse, and/or other input device, in response to challenge command 770 and display of the challenge response display on computer screen 742) [Irwin: para. 0096]).
In the same field of endeavor Oh further discloses the claim limitations as follows:
a sensor that identifies that a user enters a range where face capturing is possible (In the example shown, the user 100 approaches the building 130 when the user desires to enter the building 130. The user carries a wireless tag 110. The tag can be provided, e.g., in a key fob or badge, and carried, including worn, by the user. Using proximity detecting technology (e.g., RF active tags, proximity passive tags), the user interface 120 detects the presence of the tag 110, e.g., within a few feet away from the user interface 120) [Oh: para. 0019];
It would have been obvious to one with an ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the teachings of Irwin and Medina with Oh to program the system to implement of Oh’s method.
Therefore, the combination of Irwin and Medina with Oh will enable the system to improve the processing speed [Oh: para. 0019].
Regarding claim 7, Irwin meets the claim limitations as set forth in claim 1. Irwin further meets the claim limitations as follow.
wherein the authentication device (systems and methods for authenticating a user) [Irwin: para. 0003] is connected to a control device (In another embodiment, a passwordless authentication method, includes: receiving, at an authentication server, a computer address of a communication channel to a
user computer) [Irwin: para. 0096] that controls a gate to be opened or closed and transmits a control signal to the control device according to a result of the determination (an optical signal carrying the code, and detecting remission of the optical signal by the body part to generate a recording of the code; and communicating, to the authenticator) [Irwin: para. 0118].
Irwin and Medina do not explicitly disclose the following claim limitations (Emphasis added).
controls a gate to be opened or closed.
In the same field of endeavor Oh further discloses the claim limitations as follows:
controls a gate to be opened or closed (The biometric data processor 375 informs the processor 365 of whether or not there is a match. If there is no match, the processor 365 may take an action such as alerting security personnel, or simply recording the information provided by the user, and flagging it for later review by a system administrator. Or, the user may be requested to provide a repeat of the same biometric input, or a different type of biometric input. If there is a match, the identity of the user has been verified, and the processor 365 may take a predetermined action such as arming or disarming the security system, or unlocking or locking a door, for example) [Oh: para. 0027];
It would have been obvious to one with an ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the teachings of Irwin and Medina with Oh to program the system to implement of Oh’s method.
Therefore, the combination of Irwin and Medina with Oh will enable the system to improve the processing speed [Oh: para. 0019].
Regarding claim 8, Irwin meets the claim limitations as follow.
A device (systems and methods for authenticating a user) [Irwin: para. 0003] for detecting active liveness ((detecting a response of the user) [Irwin: para. 0008]; (Certain embodiments verify that the body part is alive, as opposed to being a fake replica of the body part. The physical user interaction may be captured using the same sensor that performs biometric identification, e.g., a fingerprint sensor or a face recognition module, and recorded. In an alternative embodiment, the physical user interaction may be captured by the biometric sensor and recorded) [Irwin: para. 0021], comprising:a sensor (a camera, user computer) [Irwin: para. 0096] that identifies that a user enters a range where face capturing is possible ((Particularly, system 100 verifies that user 102 is biometrically identified by mobile device 102, and that user 102 is present at user computer 140 when it is used to access account 154) [Irwin: para. 0027]; (In another embodiment, where user computer 740 includes a camera, user computer 40 may detect eye movement as user 702 follows challenge command 770. For example, user computer 740 may accepts an input, or series of inputs, from user 702 via a keyboard, mouse, and/or other input device, in response to challenge command 770 and display of the challenge response display on computer screen 742) [Irwin: para. 0096]);a storage device that stores data on (stored hash values memory) [Irwin: para. 0003] a plurality of syllables to generate a command for authenticating the user (In one example of block 418, authenticator 128 may compare the hashed biometric image to a previously stored biometric hash corresponding to user 102 and generate authentic indication 129 to indicate that the user 102 presenting the biometric source is recognized/authentic. In certain embodiments, authentic indication 129 may be a Boolean value that is true only when (a) the biometric image is authenticated to user 102, and (b) a user ID 132, stored within mobile device 120 and corresponding to the authenticable user 102 matches a user ID corresponding to account 154 that is received within 2D barcode 168 via webpage 152. In certain embodiments, authentic indication 129 may also include user ID 132 (e.g., a name, a user ID, or another unique alphanumerical code) as stored within mobile device 120 is association with user) [Irwin: para. 0052];an output device (output as a grid to computer screen 142) [Irwin: para. 0036] that outputs (send) [Irwin: para. 0033] the command to a screen (flash pattern 170 may be output as a grid to computer screen 142) [Irwin: para. 0036] and captures a facial image of the user ((In another embodiment, a facial-movement tracking method, includes: imaging, at a mobile device, face of a user to authenticate the user to the mobile device based upon the face; and concurrently with the step of imaging, tracking facial movement of the user in response to a challenge command) [Irwin: para. 0007]; (application 130 captures the evidence as remitted light from a part ( e.g., a finger, face, eye, etc.) of user 102 being used for biometric authentication) [Irwin: para. 0026]; (User 102 is shown with three example biometric sources, a finger 104 (e.g., for fingerprint biometric authentication), a face 106 (e.g., for facial biometric authentication), and an eye 108 (e.g., for iris and/or retinal biometric authentication). In certain embodiments, camera 122 may include, or be co-located with, an infrared projector 135 that projects infrared light onto face 106 of user 102 during facial authentication. Advantageously, application 130 may control the infrared projector 135 based upon flash pattern 170 and use camera 122 (or another optical IR detector) to detect remitted pattern 139 from face 106) [Irwin: para. 0035]) pronouncing the output command ((The detected facial movement may include one or more of blinking, smiling, speaking, mouthing (moving the mouth to make certain shapes), head tilting, head shaking, nodding, yawning, and so on) [Irwin: para. 0091]; (The detected facial movement may include one or more of blinking, smiling, speaking, mouthing (moving the mouth to make certain shapes), head tilting, head shaking, nodding, yawning, and so on) [Irwin: para. 0091]; (DQ) In any of the facial-movement tracking methods denoted as (DN)-(DP), the facial movement including one or more of blinking, smiling, speaking, mouthing, head tilting, head shaking, nodding, and yawning) [Irwin: para. 0239, claim 25]); anda calculation device (computer is for example a computing device that includes a processor and memory) [Irwin: para. 0032] that generates the command ((authenticator 762 may generate challenge command) [Irwin: para. 0075]; (generate and send an authentication request 153, containing at least computer address 156 (e.g., an IP address) of user computer 140 and optionally a user ID entered by user 102 to user computer 140, to authenticator 162) [Irwin: para. 0033] composed of a certain number of syllables using the data on the plurality of syllables (generate and send an authentication request 153, containing at least computer address 156 (e.g., an IP address) of user computer 140 and optionally a user ID entered by user 102 to user computer 140, to authenticator 162) [Irwin: para. 0033], and extracts (extracts) [Irwin: para. 0091] feature points from the facial image (The detected facial movement may include one or more of blinking, smiling, speaking, mouthing (moving the mouth to make certain shapes), head tilting, head shaking, nodding, yawning, and so on) [Irwin: para. 0091] to determine whether the user pronounces the command ((DQ) In any of the facial-movement tracking methods denoted as (DN)-(DP), the facial movement including one or more of blinking, smiling, speaking, mouthing, head tilting, head shaking, nodding, and yawning) [Irwin: para. 0239, claim 25].
In the same field of endeavor Medina further discloses the claim limitations as follows:
the user pronounces the command (receiving audio data of the user speaking the at least one word) [Medina: col. 2, line 4-5].
It would have been obvious to one with an ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the teachings of Irwin with Medina to program the system to implement of Medina’s method.
Therefore, the combination of Irwin with Medina will enable the system to improve operation
of a computing device configured to control user access to information [Medina: col. 3, line 4-6].
In the same field of endeavor Oh further discloses the claim limitations as follows:
a sensor that identifies that a user enters a range where face capturing is possible (In the example shown, the user 100 approaches the building 130 when the user desires to enter the building 130. The user carries a wireless tag 110. The tag can be provided, e.g., in a key fob or badge, and carried, including worn, by the user. Using proximity detecting technology (e.g., RF active tags, proximity passive tags), the user interface 120 detects the presence of the tag 110, e.g., within a few feet away from the user interface 120) [Oh: para. 0019];
It would have been obvious to one with an ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the teachings of Irwin and Medina with Oh to program the system to implement of Oh’s method.
Therefore, the combination of Irwin and Medina with Oh will enable the system to improve the processing speed [Oh: para. 0019].
Regarding claim 13, Irwin meets the claim limitations as set forth in claim 8. Irwin further meets the claim limitations as follow.
wherein the calculation device (systems and methods for authenticating a user) [Irwin: para. 0003] transmits a control signal to a control device (an optical signal carrying the code, and detecting remission of the optical signal by the body part to generate a recording of the code; and communicating, to the authenticator) [Irwin: para. 0118] that controls a gate to be opened or closed according to a result of the determination (an optical signal carrying the code, and detecting remission of the optical signal by the body part to generate a recording of the code; and communicating, to the authenticator) [Irwin: para. 0118].
Irwin and Medina do not explicitly disclose the following claim limitations (Emphasis added).
controls a gate to be opened or closed.
In the same field of endeavor Oh further discloses the claim limitations as follows:
controls a gate to be opened or closed (The biometric data processor 375 informs the processor 365 of whether or not there is a match. If there is no match, the processor 365 may take an action such as alerting security personnel, or simply recording the information provided by the user, and flagging it for later review by a system administrator. Or, the user may be requested to provide a repeat of the same biometric input, or a different type of biometric input. If there is a match, the identity of the user has been verified, and the processor 365 may take a predetermined action such as arming or disarming the security system, or unlocking or locking a door, for example) [Oh: para. 0027];
It would have been obvious to one with an ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the teachings of Irwin and Medina with Oh to program the system to implement of Oh’s method.
Therefore, the combination of Irwin and Medina with Oh will enable the system to improve the processing speed [Oh: para. 0019].
Claims 3, 5-6 and 10-11 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Irwin (US Patent Application Publication 2022/0004617 A1), (“Irwin”), in view of Medina et al. (US Patent 9,953,231 B1), (“Medina”), in view of Rodriguez et al. (US Patent 2006/0090079 A1), (“Rodriguez”).
Regarding claim 3, Irwin meets the claim limitations as set forth in claim 1.Irwin further meets the claim limitations as follow.
wherein the command is (a challenge command) [Irwin: para. 0007] a certain number of syllables randomly selected from among a plurality of syllables.
Irwin and Medina do not explicitly disclose the following claim limitations (Emphasis added).
a certain number of syllables randomly selected from among a plurality of syllables.
In the same field of endeavor Rodriguez further discloses the claim limitations as follows:
a certain number of syllables randomly selected from among a plurality of syllables (At step S1510 the recorded facial movements are verified, by verifying both that the eyes of the user 102 correctly followed the follow element and eye movement correlates to the positions on the display at which the randomly selected words are known to have been displayed, and that mouth shapes correspond to those expected to be used to say the random word out loud, and verified using a database of mouth movements corresponding to the International Phonetic Alphabet, IPA (FIG. 15C-see below). Step S1510 is performed at the server 130, using the video image itself as, preferably, information extracted from the captured video image at the user device 104 and transmitted to the server, such as a "mouth shape descriptor) [Rodriguez: col. 24, line 42-54];
It would have been obvious to one with an ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the teachings of Irwin and Medina with Rodriguez to program the system to implement of Rodriguez’s method.
Therefore, the combination of Irwin and Medina with Rodriguez will enable the system to improve the accuracy of the test as the user is more likely to speak words correctly in his native language [Rodriguez: col. 28, line 59-61].
Regarding claim 5, Irwin meets the claim limitations as set forth in claim 1.Irwin further meets the claim limitations as follow.
in the determining of whether the user pronounces the command, it is determined whether feature points for the mouth shape extracted from the facial image are similar to feature points for the mouth shape ((The detected facial movement may include one or more of blinking, smiling, speaking, mouthing (moving the mouth to make certain shapes), head tilting, head shaking, nodding, yawning, and so on) [Irwin: para. 0091]; (The detected facial movement may include one or more of blinking, smiling, speaking, mouthing (moving the mouth to make certain shapes), head tilting, head shaking, nodding, yawning, and so on) [Irwin: para. 0091]; (DQ) In any of the facial-movement tracking methods denoted as (DN)-(DP), the facial movement including one or more of blinking, smiling, speaking, mouthing, head tilting, head shaking, nodding, and yawning) [Irwin: para. 0239, claim 25]) for pronouncing the certain number of syllables included in the command.
Irwin and Medina do not explicitly disclose the following claim limitations (Emphasis added).
pronouncing the certain number of syllables included in the command.
In the same field of endeavor Rodriguez further discloses the claim limitations as follows:
it is determined whether feature points for the mouth shape extracted from the facial image are similar to feature points for the mouth shape pronouncing the certain number of syllables included in the command (At step S1510 the recorded facial movements are verified, by verifying both that the eyes of the user 102 correctly followed the follow element and eye movement correlates to the positions on the display at which the randomly selected words are known to have been displayed, and that mouth shapes correspond to those expected to be used to say the random word out loud, and verified using a database of mouth movements corresponding to the International Phonetic Alphabet, IPA (FIG. 15C-see below). Step S1510 is performed at the server 130, using the video image itself as, preferably, information extracted from the captured video image at the user device 104 and transmitted to the server, such as a "mouth shape descriptor) [Rodriguez: col. 24, line 42-54];
It would have been obvious to one with an ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the teachings of Irwin and Medina with Rodriguez to program the system to implement of Rodriguez’s method.
Therefore, the combination of Irwin and Medina with Rodriguez will enable the system to improve the accuracy of the test as the user is more likely to speak words correctly in his native language [Rodriguez: col. 28, line 59-61].
Regarding claim 6, Irwin meets the claim limitations as set forth in claim 1.Irwin further meets the claim limitations as follow.
in the determining of whether the user pronounces the command, it is determined whether feature points for facial muscles extracted from the facial image match feature points for a facial change ((The detected facial movement may include one or more of blinking, smiling, speaking, mouthing (moving the mouth to make certain shapes), head tilting, head shaking, nodding, yawning, and so on) [Irwin: para. 0091]; (The detected facial movement may include one or more of blinking, smiling, speaking, mouthing (moving the mouth to make certain shapes), head tilting, head shaking, nodding, yawning, and so on) [Irwin: para. 0091]; (DQ) In any of the facial-movement tracking methods denoted as (DN)-(DP), the facial movement including one or more of blinking, smiling, speaking, mouthing, head tilting, head shaking, nodding, and yawning) [Irwin: para. 0239, claim 25]) among the certain number of syllables included in the command.
Irwin and Medina do not explicitly disclose the following claim limitations (Emphasis added).
among the certain number of syllables included in the command.
In the same field of endeavor Rodriguez further discloses the claim limitations as follows:
whether feature points for facial muscles extracted from the facial image match feature points for a facial change among the certain number of syllables included in the command (At step S1510 the recorded facial movements are verified, by verifying both that the eyes of the user 102 correctly followed the follow element and eye movement correlates to the positions on the display at which the randomly selected words are known to have been displayed, and that mouth shapes correspond to those expected to be used to say the random word out loud, and verified using a database of mouth movements corresponding to the International Phonetic Alphabet, IPA (FIG. 15C-see below). Step S1510 is performed at the server 130, using the video image itself as, preferably, information extracted from the captured video image at the user device 104 and transmitted to the server, such as a "mouth shape descriptor) [Rodriguez: col. 24, line 42-54 – Note: Please see the facial muscles in Figs. 16A-C, 22-24].
It would have been obvious to one with an ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the teachings of Irwin and Medina with Rodriguez to program the system to implement of Rodriguez’s method.
Therefore, the combination of Irwin and Medina with Rodriguez will enable the system to improve the accuracy of the test as the user is more likely to speak words correctly in his native language [Rodriguez: col. 28, line 59-61].
Regarding claim 10, Irwin meets the claim limitations as set forth in claim 8.Irwin further meets the claim limitations as follow.
determines whether feature points for a mouth shape extracted from the facial image are similar to feature points for mouth shape ((The detected facial movement may include one or more of blinking, smiling, speaking, mouthing (moving the mouth to make certain shapes), head tilting, head shaking, nodding, yawning, and so on) [Irwin: para. 0091]; (The detected facial movement may include one or more of blinking, smiling, speaking, mouthing (moving the mouth to make certain shapes), head tilting, head shaking, nodding, yawning, and so on) [Irwin: para. 0091]; (DQ) In any of the facial-movement tracking methods denoted as (DN)-(DP), the facial movement including one or more of blinking, smiling, speaking, mouthing, head tilting, head shaking, nodding, and yawning) [Irwin: para. 0239, claim 25]) f for pronouncing the certain number of syllables included in the command.
Irwin and Medina do not explicitly disclose the following claim limitations (Emphasis added).
for pronouncing the certain number of syllables included in the command.
In the same field of endeavor Rodriguez further discloses the claim limitations as follows:
determines whether feature points for a mouth shape extracted from the facial image are similar to feature points for mouth shape for pronouncing the certain number of syllables included in the command (At step S1510 the recorded facial movements are verified, by verifying both that the eyes of the user 102 correctly followed the follow element and eye movement correlates to the positions on the display at which the randomly selected words are known to have been displayed, and that mouth shapes correspond to those expected to be used to say the random word out loud, and verified using a database of mouth movements corresponding to the International Phonetic Alphabet, IPA (FIG. 15C-see below). Step S1510 is performed at the server 130, using the video image itself as, preferably, information extracted from the captured video image at the user device 104 and transmitted to the server, such as a "mouth shape descriptor) [Rodriguez: col. 24, line 42-54; Figs. 15A-16C, 22-24]; (Lip Reading Based on the International Phonetic Alphabet) [Rodriguez: col. 25, line 15 – col. 28, line 28; Figs. 15A-16C, 22-24];
It would have been obvious to one with an ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the teachings of Irwin and Medina with Rodriguez to program the system to implement of Rodriguez’s method.
Therefore, the combination of Irwin and Medina with Rodriguez will enable the system to improve the accuracy of the test as the user is more likely to speak words correctly in his native language [Rodriguez: col. 28, line 59-61].
Regarding claim 11, Irwin meets the claim limitations as set forth in claim 8.Irwin further meets the claim limitations as follow.
determines whether feature points for facial muscles extracted from the facial image match feature points for a facial change ((The detected facial movement may include one or more of blinking, smiling, speaking, mouthing (moving the mouth to make certain shapes), head tilting, head shaking, nodding, yawning, and so on) [Irwin: para. 0091]; (The detected facial movement may include one or more of blinking, smiling, speaking, mouthing (moving the mouth to make certain shapes), head tilting, head shaking, nodding, yawning, and so on) [Irwin: para. 0091]; (DQ) In any of the facial-movement tracking methods denoted as (DN)-(DP), the facial movement including one or more of blinking, smiling, speaking, mouthing, head tilting, head shaking, nodding, and yawning) [Irwin: para. 0239, claim 25]) among the certain number of syllables included in the command.
Irwin and Medina do not explicitly disclose the following claim limitations (Emphasis added).
among the certain number of syllables included in the command.
In the same field of endeavor Rodriguez further discloses the claim limitations as follows:
determines whether feature points for facial muscles extracted from the facial image match feature points for a facial change among the certain number of syllables included in the command (At step S1510 the recorded facial movements are verified, by verifying both that the eyes of the user 102 correctly followed the follow element and eye movement correlates to the positions on the display at which the randomly selected words are known to have been displayed, and that mouth shapes correspond to those expected to be used to say the random word out loud, and verified using a database of mouth movements corresponding to the International Phonetic Alphabet, IPA (FIG. 15C-see below). Step S1510 is performed at the server 130, using the video image itself as, preferably, information extracted from the captured video image at the user device 104 and transmitted to the server, such as a "mouth shape descriptor) [Rodriguez: col. 24, line 42-54 – Note: Please see the facial muscles in Figs. 16A-C, 22-24].
It would have been obvious to one with an ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the teachings of Irwin and Medina with Rodriguez to program the system to implement of Rodriguez’s method.
Therefore, the combination of Irwin and Medina with Rodriguez will enable the system to improve the accuracy of the test as the user is more likely to speak words correctly in his native language [Rodriguez: col. 28, line 59-61].
Claim 12 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Irwin (US Patent Application Publication 2022/0004617 A1), (“Irwin”), in view of Medina et al. (US Patent 9,953,231 B1), (“Medina”), in view of Centeno et al. (Smartphone Continuous Authentication Using Deep Learning Autoencoders), (“Centeno”).
Regarding claim 12, Irwin meets the claim limitations as set forth in claim 8.Irwin further meets the claim limitations as follow.
wherein the calculation device ((computer is for example a computing device) [Irwin: para. 0032]) [Irwin: para. 0007] includes a deep learning model that analyzes the facial image (The detected facial movement may include one or more of blinking, smiling, speaking, mouthing (moving the mouth to make certain shapes), head tilting, head shaking, nodding, yawning, and so on) [Irwin: para. 0091], andinputs the facial image to the deep learning model to determine the user's pronunciation according to the output result ((The detected facial movement may include one or more of blinking, smiling, speaking, mouthing (moving the mouth to make certain shapes), head tilting, head shaking, nodding, yawning, and so on) [Irwin: para. 0091]; (DQ) In any of the facial-movement tracking methods denoted as (DN)-(DP), the facial movement including one or more of blinking, smiling, speaking, mouthing, head tilting, head shaking, nodding, and yawning) [Irwin: para. 0239, claim 25]).
Irwin and Medina do not explicitly disclose the following claim limitations (Emphasis added).
a deep learning model.
In the same field of endeavor Centeno further discloses the claim limitations as follows:
a deep learning model (The feature extraction process is based on a deep learning
technique called autoencoder) [Centeno: page 147].
It would have been obvious to one with an ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the teachings of Irwin and Medina with Centeno to program the system to implement of Centeno’s method.
Therefore, the combination of Irwin and Medina with Centeno will enable the system to improve the feature accuracy [Centeno: page 147].
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 4 and 9 are objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, but would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims. This objection is given with a condition that all objections and rejections of related claims are addressed.
11. The above-identified claims recite several components that are arranged in specific manners and operate in an explicit way. There is no articulate reasoning to combine the prior arts to arrive in the context of the claim inventions.
Reference Notice
Additional prior arts, included in the Notice of Reference Cited, made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Contact Information
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Philip Dang whose telephone number is (408) 918-7529. The examiner can normally be reached on Monday-Thursday between 8:30 am - 5:00 pm (PST).
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, Sath Perungavoor can be reached on 571-272-7455. 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./Philip P. Dang/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2488