DETAILED ACTION
The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
Claims 6-10 are pending.
Claims 1-5 are canceled.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 101
35 U.S.C. 101 reads as follows:
Whoever invents or discovers any new and useful process, machine, manufacture, or composition of matter, or any new and useful improvement thereof, may obtain a patent therefor, subject to the conditions and requirements of this title.
Claims 6-8 and 10 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 101 because the claimed invention is directed to an abstract idea without significantly more.
Regarding claims 6 and 8, the following 2-step analysis is applied for analyzing the 35 U.S.C. § 101 subject matter eligibility of the claims.
Step 1: The Statutory Categories
Claims 6 and 8 recite a method and a machine (a motor vehicle comprising various parts), respectively, which are statutory categories of invention.
Step 2A: The Judicial Exceptions
Prong 1: do the claims recite an exception?
Claims 6 and 8 are directed to the abstract idea of authenticating a user. Authentication, recognizing a user based on visual data, is a concept that can be performed in the human mind as a mental process or broadly represents an abstract mathematical/computational concept of collecting and comparing data.
Prong 2: is the exception integrated into a practical application?
The claims do not integrate the abstract idea into a practical application. The physical elements recited, a motor vehicle, a driver's door, a generic camera, and a generic control/regulation device, are merely used as an environment (field of use) and as generic data-gathering tools.
Step 2B: The Inventive Concept
Do the claims amount to "significantly more" than the exception?
The additional elements in the claims (a motor vehicle, interior/exterior regions, a camera, and a control device) are well-understood, routine, and conventional components. Implementing the abstract idea of authentication using a generic camera and control device within the standard environment of a motor vehicle does not add an inventive concept.
Conclusion: Claims 6 and 8 are directed to an abstract idea and lack an inventive concept. Claims 6 and 8 are rejected as ineligible subject matter under 35 U.S.C. § 101.
Regarding dependent claims 7 and 10: limitations in these dependent claims have been examined in a similar way as to the above independent claims. It was found that claims 7 and 10 are ineligible subject matter under 35 U.S.C. § 101:
Claim 7: Ineligible: Merely adds generic data comparison ("facial recognition" by "comparing a face... with stored reference images"), which is a standard abstract mathematical or mental process without a specific, non-conventional algorithm.
Claim 10: Ineligible: Adds a generic, vaguely defined computer component ("vehicle assistance system") performing non-specific "further processing" of the data.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
The following is a quotation of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 103(a) which forms the basis for all obviousness rejections set forth in this Office action:
(a) A patent may not be obtained though the invention is not identically disclosed or described as set forth in section 102 of this title, if the differences between the subject matter sought to be patented and the prior art are such that the subject matter as a whole would have been obvious at the time the invention was made to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which said subject matter pertains. Patentability shall not be negatived by the manner in which the invention was made.
Claim(s) 6-10 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Son (WO2003002387 Son) in view of Babala et al (US20200193005).
Regarding claims 6 and 8, Son teaches a motor vehicle comprising:
a vehicle interior partially delimited by a driver's door;
(Son, Figs. 1 and 8; “The present invention (10) discloses an optical recognition vehicular security access system that will unlock the vehicles doors (20)”, [abstract]; “The driver positions themselves behind the wheel and engages a start button 40. The system determines that the driver 12 is positioned within the driver's seat 42”, p9; a motor vehicle with an interior containing a driver's seat and delimited by doors, specifically a driver's door utilized for access)
a camera configured to capture an image of a user of the motor vehicle,
(Son, Figs. 1 and 3; “The optical recognition vehicular security access system camera 16 will capture in real time an iris image of the potential operator 12”, p6; a camera configured to capture images (specifically iris images) of the user/operator)
wherein the camera has a field of view comprising an internal region adjoining the driver's door in the vehicle interior and an external region adjoining the driver's door outside the motor vehicle;
(Son, Figs. 4 and 6; “camera 16 will pivot to capture an iris image of the individual 12”, p8; “camera having means for pivoting said camera across a predetermined field of view outside of said vehicle”, [claim 1]; “While the vehicle 14 is in motion the optical recognition vehicular security access system continuously scans the face 48 and iris of the driver 12 to determine the alertness of the driver”, p9; a camera that pivots to view the external region (when the handle is grasped) and the internal region (to scan the driver's face while driving). Under 103, it would be obvious to configure the camera's operational field of view to comprise both regions to facilitate the disclosed dual functions of access entry and fatigue monitoring)
a control/regulation device, coupled to the camera by a data link, configured to obtain data relating to the image captured by the camera,
(Son, Fig. 3; “The camera 16 captures an iris image pattern which is sent to a computer central processing unit 28 for comparative analysis”, p8; “means for appropriately electrically connecting said camera, said computer”, [claim 1])
wherein the user is located in the external region and the control/regulation device is configured to authenticate the user based on at least the captured image.
(Son, Fig. 3; “Shown is the optical recognition vehicular security access system having a camera 16 that detects the approaching individual 12. The camera 16 captures an iris image pattern which is sent to a computer central processing unit 28 for comparative analysis with previously stored image patterns. Upon confirmation of image pattern recognition the system will unlock the vehicles doors 20”, p7-8; authenticating the user located in the external region (at the door handle) using the captured image to unlock the door; Babala, Figs. 3-4; “the facial recognition module 130 analyzes the signals from the camera 112 and identifies the facial features of the person 180. The controller 110 then compares the identified facial features to the facial features stored in the database 144 to see if a match exists”, [0021]; “the controller 110 proceeds to step 300 and analyzes whether the determined gait and facial features belong to the same authorized user of the vehicle 80 based on the stored identities in the database 140. If the answer is “yes”, the controller proceeds to step 310 and actuates the door lock module 150 to unlock the vehicle door(s) 36, 38”, [0032]; “The database 140 includes stored identities of persons authorized to access and operate the vehicle 80”, [0017]; the hardware is capable of capturing images of the side/exterior; using acquired images of a user in the external region ("approaching the vehicle") to authenticate ("selectively unlocking," "facial recognition") the user)
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention was made to incorporate the facial recognition authentication techniques of Babala into the vehicular security system of Son in order to enhance the system's security and resistance to spoofing. While Son utilizes a camera capable of viewing both internal and external regions to capture iris images for access, Babala teaches determining facial features to verify authorized users and prevent bypass attempts using photographs or masks. Integrating Babala 's facial feature analysis would complement Son 's optical system, providing a more robust authentication protocol for users located in the external region. The combination of Son and Babala also teaches other enhanced capabilities.
Regarding claim 7, the combination of Son and Babala teaches its/their respective base claim(s).
The combination further teaches the method of claim 6, wherein the authenticating of the user involves facial recognition using image analysis by comparing a face of the user in the capture image by with stored reference images of the face of the user.
(Babala, “matching the determined facial features to stored facial features in a second data set”, [claim 1]; “the facial recognition module 130 analyzes the signals from the camera 112 ... compares the identified facial features to the facial features stored in the database 144 to see if a match exists”, [0021]; using facial recognition image analysis to compare the user's face from the captured image against stored reference images/features)
Regarding claim 9, the combination of Son and Babala teaches its/their respective base claim(s).
The combination further teaches the motor vehicle of claim 8, wherein the driver's door comprises a light-permeable windowpane configured so that the external region is recordable by the camera without distortion.
(Son, Fig. 3; “Shown is the optical recognition vehicular security access system having a camera 16 that detects the approaching individual 12. The camera 16 captures an iris image pattern which is sent to a computer central processing unit 28 for comparative analysis with previously stored image patterns. Upon confirmation of image pattern recognition the system will unlock the vehicles doors 20”, p7-8; camera 16 sees face 12 through door 22 (with window) and recognizes the face, indicating the window does not cause large distortions to the captured images from the camera 16 for face recognition)
Regarding claim 10, the combination of Son and Babala teaches its/their respective base claim(s).
The combination further teaches the motor vehicle of claim 8, further comprising:
at least one vehicle assistance system configured to further process the internal region of the vehicle interior captured in the image.
(Son, “system has an interior audible alarm (24) that will be triggered by comparative analysis of real time images of the driver (12) ... to determine if the driver is falling asleep”, [abstract]; “While the vehicle 14 is in motion the optical recognition vehicular security access system continuously scans the face 48 and iris of the driver 12 to determine the alertness of the driver”, p9; a vehicle assistance system (drowsiness monitor) that processes the image of the internal region (the driver's face while driving) using the same system)
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to JIANXUN YANG whose telephone number is (571)272-9874. The examiner can normally be reached on MON-FRI: 8AM-5PM Pacific Time.
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, Amandeep Saini can be reached on (571)272-3382. 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.
/JIANXUN YANG/
Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2662 3/27/2026
Prosecution Insights