Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status
The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
DETAILED ACTION
Response to Amendment
Claims 1 and 9-10 have been amended.
Claims 11-13 have been newly added.
Claim 8 has been canceled.
Claims 1-7 and 9-13 are pending.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to the pending claims have been considered but are moot because the new ground of rejection does not rely on any reference applied in the prior rejection of record for any teaching or matter specifically challenged in the argument.
CLAIM REJECTIONS - 35 USC § 103
II. 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.
III. CLAIMS 1-7 and 9-13 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over MATSUDA et al (US 2015/0379254) in view of VAN OS et al (US 2022/0083199).
Per claim 1, MATSUDA et al teach an authentication apparatus comprising:
at least one memory storing instructions (paras 0053, 0056, 0059); and
at least one processor (para 0214) configured to execute the instructions to:
acquire authentication information that is second biometric information of a user who has succeeded in biometric authentication using first biometric information, and second biometric information (paras 0055, 0060-67, 0074, 0114, 0131—successful biometric authentication of a user using first biometric and second biometric information);
compare collation information registered in advance with the authentication information (paras 0007, 0012-14, 0023-25, 0029-32, 0040, 0055, 0059—comparing collation of registered users with the biometric information of the authentication-requesting person); and
perform personal authentication of the user on the basis of a result of the comparison (paras 0007-8, 0010-13, 0208-209—performing biometric authentication of the authentication-requesting person).
MATSUDA et al teach the claim limitations, as applied above, yet fail to explicitly teach “second biometric information being biometric information of a type predetermined by the user and capable of being acquired by an instrument that has acquired the first biometric information”. VAN OS et al teach enrolling a second biometric feature that is a different type than the first biometric feature (paras 0016-17, 0427-429, 0433-435, 0440, 0465).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed the invention to combine the teachings of MATSUDA et al with VAN OS et al for the purpose of provisioning a second biometric information that is different from the first biometric information type, which is well-known in the art for allowing multiple and various types of biometric data to be collected from a user for authentication purposes.
Claims 9 and 10 contain limitations that are substantially equivalent to the limitations of claim 1 and are therefore rejected under the same basis.
Per claim 2, MATSUDA et al with VAN OS et al teach the authentication apparatus according to claim 1, MATSUDA et al further teach wherein the at least one processor is further configured to execute the instructions to perform the authentication means performs the personal authentication on the basis of a plurality of the results of the comparison (paras 0064, 0079-82, 0090-91, 0085-86, 0108, 0168, 0173, 0177—individual authentication performed on the basis of biometric modality information for the authentication-requested person using multiple pattern results of the comparison; VAN OS et al: Figures 6A-AY, paras 0044, 0047, 0054, 0215—authentication means for authenticating user’s personal biometric input).
Per claim 3, MATSUDA et al with VAN OS et al teach the authentication apparatus according to claim 2, MATSUDA et al further teach wherein the at least one processor is further configured to execute the instructions to determine that the personal authentication has succeeded when the number of times of matching between the collation information and the authentication information is equal to or larger than a threshold value (paras 0063, 0091, 0114, 0121, 0131, 0167—person is matched with image patterns of biometric modality of persons and determining that the authentication is successful based on a threshold value; VAN OS et al: paras 0011-12, 0219, 0299—detecting that fingerprint sensor matches user’s fingerprint input).
Per claim 4, MATSUDA et al with VAN OS et al teach the authentication apparatus according to claim 3, MATSUDA et al further teach wherein the threshold value is set in correspondence with the number of the registered collation information (paras 0074-75, 0114-115, 0131-132, 0141-143, 0151-153, 0167, 0196—threshold value set based on registered data, authentical threshold value of registered data for collation, collation score, number of times of collation; VAN OS et al: paras 0006, 0009-10, 0015, 0054—time threshold and input threshold for receiving biometric input).
Per claim 5, MATSUDA et al with VAN OS et al teach the authentication apparatus according to claim 3, MATSUDA et al further teach wherein the threshold value is set in correspondence with a determination condition of the biometric authentication using the first biometric information (paras 0014, 0055, 0074-76, 0086, 0114-115, 0126, 0131, 0165—authentication threshold value set based on determined authentication condition using biometric modality information; VAN OS et al: paras 0054, 0063, 0091—disambiguating between inputs that are more or less than an input threshold, measurements for contact force or pressure are used directly to determine whether an intensity threshold has been exceeded).
Per claim 6, MATSUDA et al with VAN OS et al teach the authentication apparatus according to claim 5, MATSUDA et al further teach wherein the threshold value is set to be smaller as the determination condition of the biometric authentication using the first biometric information becomes stricter (paras 0131-132, 0135-136, 0144, 0164, 0168-169, 0173, 0182, 0192, 0196—threshold value lowered as determined condition is increased; VAN OS et al: paras 0091, 0205, 0208-211—adjusting plurality of intensity thresholds for biometric information input).
Per claim 7, MATSUDA et al with VAN OS et al teach the authentication apparatus according to any one of claim 1, MATSUDA et al further teach wherein the collation information includes order information indicating an authentication order, and the at least one processor is further configured to execute the instructions to perform the comparison according to the order information (paras 0132-133, 0178, 0190—order to perform authentication, order of collation and increasing speed of authentication; VAN OS et al: paras 0205, 0211—detected input intensity is compared to the intensity threshold).
Per claim 11, MATSUDA et al with VAN OS et al teach the authentication apparatus according to claim 1, VAN OS et al further teach wherein the authentication information includes any one or any combination of: state information indicating a state of a face region of a user who has succeeded in face authentication; word information included in a voice of a user who has succeeded in voiceprint authentication; and finger information indicated by second fingerprint information of a user who has succeeded in fingerprint authentication using first fingerprint information (paras 0118, 0219, 0280-281, 0483—voice recognition, facial recognition authentication using facial attributes to detect match for authorization, fingerprint sensor for detecting fingerprint information to determine a match).
Claims 12 and 13 contain limitations that are substantially equivalent to the limitations of claim 11 and are therefore rejected under the same basis.
Conclusion
IV. The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to Applicant's disclosure: US 2022/0237274; US 2020/0366671; US 2019/0080072; US 2022/0391482.
V. Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP § 706.07(a). 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.
VI. Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to KRISTIE D SHINGLES whose telephone number is (571)272-3888. The examiner can normally be reached on Monday-Thursday 10am-7pm.
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, Kamal Divecha can be reached on 571-272-5863. 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.
/KRISTIE D SHINGLES/
Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2453