DETAILED ACTION
Summary
This Office Action is responsive to Applicant submission filed 08/12/2025.
Claims 1-20 are currently pending.
Response to Arguments
Applicant argues that JIANG does not qualify as prior art according to 35 USC 102(a)(1) as JIANG was published after the filing date of the present invention. The examiner acknowledges JIANG does not qualify as prior art under 102(a)(1), however, notes that use of 102(a)(1) was a minor clerical error. JIANG qualifies as prior art under 102(a)(2) rather than 102(a)(1).
The MPEP states that “If the issue date of the U.S. patent or publication date of the U.S. patent application publication or WIPO published application is not before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, it may be applicable as prior art under AIA 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) if it was “effectively filed” before the effective filing date of the claimed invention in question with respect to the subject matter relied upon to reject the claim” (see MPEP §2154.01). The AIA defines the term “effective filing date” for a claimed invention in a patent or application for patent (other than a reissue application or reissued patent) as the earlies of: (1) the actual filing date of the patent or the application for the patent containing the claimed invention; or (2) the filing date of the earliest application for which the patent or application is entitled, as to such invention, to a right of priority or the benefit of an earlier filing date under 35 U.S.C. 119, 120, 121, 365, or 386 (see MPEP §2152.01).
The effective filing date of JIANG is 03/03/2023, which is before the effective filing date of the present application. As such, the JIANG qualifies as prior art under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2). The rejection is therefore proper.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
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) 1, 2, 5-7, 9, 10, 13, 15, 16, 19 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) as being anticipated by JIANG et al, US 2024/0296232
Re claim 1:
JIANG discloses a computer-implemented method for analyzing QR codes, comprising:
Scanning, via a computing device, a QR code with a camera, wherein the camera is connected to the computing device [0002] [0015] [0041];
Determining, via the computing device, metadata associated with the QR code matches a QR code metadata type [0042] [0043];
Enriching, via the computing device, the metadata associated with the QR code [0043]-[0045];
Synthetically testing, by the computing device, one or more downstream resources identified by the enriching [0050] [0051];
Assigning, via the computing device, a safety rating to the QR code [0052] [0053]; and
Presenting, via the computing device, the safety rating [0053].
Re claims 9 and 15:
JIANG teaches a system for analyzing QR codes, comprising:
At least one non-transitory computer-readable medium configured to store instructions [0064];
A camera [0002] [0015]; and
At least one processor [0024] configured to execute the instructions to perform operations comprising:
Scanning a QR code with a camera, wherein the camera is connected to the at least one processor [0002] [0015] [0041];
Determining metadata associated with the QR code matches a QR code metadata type [0042] [0043];
Enriching the metadata associated with the QR code [0043]-[0048];
Synthetically testing one or more downstream resources identified by the enriching [0050] [0051];
Assigning a safety rating to the QR code [0052] [0053]; and
Presenting the safety rating [0053].
Re claims 2, 10, and 16:
JIANG teaches the computer-implemented method, system, and non-transitory computer readable medium of claims 1, 9, and 15, wherein enriching the metadata associated with the QR code further comprises:
Checking raw data associated with the QR code [0044]-[0048];
Checking linked data associated with the QR code [0044]-[0048]; and
Checking processed data associated with the QR code [0044]-[0048].
Re claims 5-7, 13, and 19:
JIANG teaches the computer-implemented method, system, and non-transitory computer readable medium of claims 1, 9, and 15, wherein enriching the metadata further comprises:
Testing for one or more signatures of malware [0047]; testing for one or more privacy threats [0047]; and testing for one or more tracking threats [0047].
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.
Claim(s) 3-4, 11-12, and 17-18 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over JIANG et al, US 2024/0296232 in view of HERREN et al, US 2023/0394151.
Re claims 3-4, 11-12, and 17-18:
JIANG teaches the computer-implemented method, system, and non-transitory computer readable medium of claims 1, 9, and 15, further comprising testing the one or more downstream resources for one or more signatures of malware [0047].
JIANG does not explicitly teach checking for one or more redirects, wherein the one or more redirects are associated with the one or more downstream resources.
HERREN teaches a method of checking processed data associated with a QR code, comprising checking for one or more redirects, wherein the one or more redirects are associated with the one or more downstream resources [0026] [0063]; and testing the one or more downstream resources for one or more signatures of malware [0063] [0064].
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date the further incorporate the teachings of HERREN in the method, system, and non-transitory computer readable medium of JIANG such that processed data is checked for one or more redirects associated with the one or more downstream resources. Such incorporation would be for the purpose of detecting malicious redirect commands so as to warn users of potential threats behind the URL obtained from the QR code (HERREN [0063] [0065]). Further, while HERREN does not specify what type of redirects are checked, server redirects, code redirects, and cookie redirects are merely common types of redirects known in the art.
Claim(s) 8, 14, and 20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over JIANG et al, US 2024/0296232 in view of ROZHNOV, US 2023/0262078.
Re claim 8, 14, and 20:
JIANG teaches the computer-implemented method, system, and non-transitory computer readable medium of claims 1, 9, and 15, but does not teach building a redirection chain, wherein the redirection chain lists each of the one or more downstream resources; and presenting, via the computing device, the redirection change.
ROZHNOV teaches a method and computing device for identifying malicious web resources, including building a redirection chain, wherein the redirection chain lists each of the one or more downstream resources [0100]-[0103] [Figure 3A]; and presenting, via the computing device, the redirection chain (i.e., the processor presents the redirection chain as a redirect graph and analyzes the redirect graph to determine a plurality of user redirect rules [0031] [0125] [0126] [Figure 3A]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to further incorporate the teachings of ROZHNOV in the method, system, and non-transitory computer readable medium of JIANG such that a redirection chain is built and presented via the computing device. Such incorporation would be for the purpose of identifying templates that are commonly encountered when interacting with malicious web pages (ROZHNOV [0010]).
Conclusion
THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. 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 LAURA A GUDORF whose telephone number is (571)270-7607. If the Examiner cannot be reached by telephone, she can be reached through the following e-mail address: laura.gudorf@uspto.gov. The examiner can normally be reached on M-F 6:00-4:00 PM.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Michael Lee, can be reached at telephone number (571)272-2398. 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 Patent Center. Status information for published applications may be obtained from Patent Center. Status information for unpublished applications is available through Patent Center for authorized users only. Should you have questions about access to Patent Center, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free).
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) Form at https://www.uspto.gov/patents/uspto-automated- interview-request-air-form.
/LAURA A GUDORF/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2876