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 .
Double Patenting
The nonstatutory double patenting rejection is based on a judicially created doctrine grounded in public policy (a policy reflected in the statute) so as to prevent the unjustified or improper timewise extension of the “right to exclude” granted by a patent and to prevent possible harassment by multiple assignees. A nonstatutory double patenting rejection is appropriate where the conflicting claims are not identical, but at least one examined application claim is not patentably distinct from the reference claim(s) because the examined application claim is either anticipated by, or would have been obvious over, the reference claim(s). See, e.g., In re Berg, 140 F.3d 1428, 46 USPQ2d 1226 (Fed. Cir. 1998); In re Goodman, 11 F.3d 1046, 29 USPQ2d 2010 (Fed. Cir. 1993); In re Longi, 759 F.2d 887, 225 USPQ 645 (Fed. Cir. 1985); In re Van Ornum, 686 F.2d 937, 214 USPQ 761 (CCPA 1982); In re Vogel, 422 F.2d 438, 164 USPQ 619 (CCPA 1970); In re Thorington, 418 F.2d 528, 163 USPQ 644 (CCPA 1969).
A timely filed terminal disclaimer in compliance with 37 CFR 1.321(c) or 1.321(d) may be used to overcome an actual or provisional rejection based on nonstatutory double patenting provided the reference application or patent either is shown to be commonly owned with the examined application, or claims an invention made as a result of activities undertaken within the scope of a joint research agreement. See MPEP § 717.02 for applications subject to examination under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA as explained in MPEP § 2159. See MPEP § 2146 et seq. for applications not subject to examination under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA . A terminal disclaimer must be signed in compliance with 37 CFR 1.321(b).
The filing of a terminal disclaimer by itself is not a complete reply to a nonstatutory double patenting (NSDP) rejection. A complete reply requires that the terminal disclaimer be accompanied by a reply requesting reconsideration of the prior Office action. Even where the NSDP rejection is provisional the reply must be complete. See MPEP § 804, subsection I.B.1. For a reply to a non-final Office action, see 37 CFR 1.111(a). For a reply to final Office action, see 37 CFR 1.113(c). A request for reconsideration while not provided for in 37 CFR 1.113(c) may be filed after final for consideration. See MPEP §§ 706.07(e) and 714.13.
The USPTO Internet website contains terminal disclaimer forms which may be used. Please visit www.uspto.gov/patent/patents-forms. The actual filing date of the application in which the form is filed determines what form (e.g., PTO/SB/25, PTO/SB/26, PTO/AIA /25, or PTO/AIA /26) should be used. A web-based eTerminal Disclaimer may be filled out completely online using web-screens. An eTerminal Disclaimer that meets all requirements is auto-processed and approved immediately upon submission. For more information about eTerminal Disclaimers, refer to www.uspto.gov/patents/apply/applying-online/eterminal-disclaimer.
Claims 1-20 are rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claims 1-6, 8-13, 15-18 and 20 of U.S. Patent No. 12,067,824. Although the claims at issue are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other because U.S. Patent No. 12,067,824 claim 1 meets all the limitations of instant claim 1, similarly for claims 8 and 15. An obvious broader version of the parent with the exception of "…request to exit…", all of the limitations that are recited are fully met by U.S. Patent No. 12,067,824, and is narrower and thus teaches all the limitations of the instant claim 1.
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.
Claims 1, 3, 5-9, 12-16 and 18-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Danielsen (US Patent No. 20200201968A1), in view of Venetianer (US Patent No. 20210358250 A1).
In re claim 1, Danielsen teaches A method of secure access comprising:
collecting environment information (Abstract: “Present teachings relate to a method for initiating an authentication process on an electronic device, the method comprising transmitting an ultrasound signal from an ultrasound transmitter, generating a measured signal by receiving at an ultrasound receiver an echo of the ultrasound signal being reflected by an object, analyzing the echo by processing the measured signal, and initiating the authentication process on the electronic device based on the processing of the measured signal.”) by a first reader device configured to control access to a first secure area and/or asset (Para [0009]: “The electronic device may be any device, mobile or stationary, which is required to authenticate the user… In addition, devices such as… gates, doors, home appliances, and other kinds of electronic access systems that require electronic authentication also fall within the ambit of the term.”) via first ultrasound communications (Para [0015]: “The characteristics of the movement include the speed of the object, the direction of the object, and the size of the object. In some cases, different reflections may be received from different parts of the object. If the object is the user, the ultrasound receiver may receive reflections from different parts of the user's body, for example, the user's hand and the user's face. Accordingly, the method may comprise measuring the relative position and/or movement of the different parts of the object for computing the confidence value, or improving a previously computed confidence value. If required, the method can also comprise tracking the relative movements of different parts of the object.”);
determining first input information based on the environment information, the first input information including power information (Para [0010]: “Accordingly, the range the and/or sensitivity may be adjusted in one or more scenarios such as: adapting to input objects of different sizes, received signal strength or quality of the signal received by one or more receivers…”), foot information (Para [0015]: “In some cases, different reflections may be received from different parts of the object. If the object is the user, the ultrasound receiver may receive reflections from different parts of the user's body… Accordingly, the method may comprise measuring the relative position and/or movement of the different parts of the object for computing the confidence value, or improving a previously computed confidence value. If required, the method can also comprise tracking the relative movements of different parts of the object…”), infrared (IR) information (Para [0019]: “According to another embodiment, the method comprises receiving data from at least one of the other sensors or modules in the electronic device for improving the robustness of the initiation of the authentication process. The other sensors or modules may include, accelerometer, inertial sensor, IR sensor, or any other sensor or modules related to a sensor fusion module in the electronic device.”);
[determining], [access intention information] identifying the first secure area and/or asset or a second secure area and/or asset as an object of interest based on the first input information and second input information, wherein the second input information is associated with a second reader device that controls access to the second secure area and/or asset and is co-located with the first reader device (Para [0031]: “In cases when the electronic device is a part of a functionally linked plurality of electronic devices of the same or different type, a successful authentication of the another user performed by an another electronic device in the plurality of electronic devices may be used to validate the another user for access and/or controlling privacy settings on the electronic device, as the another user moves from the user range distance or even secure range distance of the another electronic device towards the electronic device. Accordingly, the authenticated another user, who has already been authenticated by a first electronic device having a first user range, may move from the first user range into a second user range associated with a second electronic device without requiring to be authenticated by the second electronic device. It will be appreciated that the authenticated another user should be trackable during transitioning from the first user range into the second user range. It may be done, e.g., by the first user range being at least partially overlapping the second user range. It will be understood that the first user range and the second user range represent the free space surrounding the first electronic device and second electronic device respectively, within which space the probability value associated with a sole authenticated user present in that space is higher than the first probability threshold value.”); and
providing, based on the access intention information, access to one of the first secure area and/or asset or the second secure area and/or asset (Para [0031]: “In cases when the electronic device is a part of a functionally linked plurality of electronic devices of the same or different type, a successful authentication of the another user performed by an another electronic device in the plurality of electronic devices may be used to validate the another user for access and/or controlling privacy settings on the electronic device, as the another user moves from the user range distance or even secure range distance of the another electronic device towards the electronic device.”).
Danielsen fails to teach and/or exit information;
[determining], via a machine learning model, [access intention information].
However, in the same field of endeavor, Venetianer teaches and/or exit information (Para [0098]: “In some embodiments, a personal statistical model 130 may include exit information indicating when a given person exits a particular access-controlled location associated with the personal statistical model 130. In some such embodiments, detecting patterns in the given person's behavior may be based on both this exit information and access logs stored as result data in the personal statistical model 130. For example, a detected pattern may indicate that the given person typically exits the access-controlled location for lunch or a coffee break on a fairly consistent schedule and typically returns from such breaks within a fairly consistent window of time after exiting. In this example, if the given person approaches the access-controlled location after exiting at a break time associated with this detected pattern, returning within the window of time associated with this detected pattern, the intent prediction processing unit may calculate a relatively high intent score for the current approach.”);
[determining], via a machine learning model, [access intention information] (Para [0077]: “In at least some embodiments, the techniques described herein for personalized intent prediction may be applied in systems that implement intent prediction using unsupervised machine learning. In other embodiments, these techniques may be applied in intent prediction systems that employ supervised machine learning or other artificial intelligence techniques…a particular person who is authorized to enter an access-controlled location and who is determined to be on approach toward the access-controlled location…Machine learning techniques that may be used in the personalized intent prediction systems described herein may include, but are not limited to… Convolutional Neural Networks...”).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Danielsen to incorporate the teachings of Venetianer to provide and/or exit information; [determining], via a machine learning model, [access intention information] with the USER AUTHENTICATION CONTROL USING ULTRASOUND of Danielsen. Doing so enables intent prediction to be personalized using machine learning techniques and intent prediction processing to calculate relatively high intent scores for the current approach of detecting patterns in the given person's behavior based on exit information, as recognized by Venetianer (Paras [0077] and [0098]).
Non-transitory computer-readable device claim 8 and system claim 15 are rejected for the same reasons as method claim 1 for having similar limitations and being similar in scope.
In re claim 3, Danielsen and Venetianer teach all of the limitations of claim 1 stated above where Danielsen further teaches wherein the environment information includes first audio information captured at the first reader device (Para [0015]: “The characteristics of the movement include the speed of the object, the direction of the object, and the size of the object. In some cases, different reflections may be received from different parts of the object.”), first infra-red sensor readings captured at the first reader device (Para [0019]: “According to another embodiment, the method comprises receiving data from at least one of the other sensors or modules in the electronic device for improving the robustness of the initiation of the authentication process. The other sensors or modules may include, accelerometer, inertial sensor, IR sensor, or any other sensor or modules related to a sensor fusion module in the electronic device.”).
The combination fails to teach and first exit sensor readings captured at a door of the first secure area and/or asset.
However, Venetianer teaches and first exit sensor readings captured at a door of the first secure area and/or asset (Para [0098]: “In some embodiments, a personal statistical model 130 may include exit information indicating when a given person exits a particular access-controlled location associated with the personal statistical model 130. In some such embodiments, detecting patterns in the given person's behavior may be based on both this exit information and access logs stored as result data in the personal statistical model 130. For example, a detected pattern may indicate that the given person typically exits the access-controlled location for lunch or a coffee break on a fairly consistent schedule and typically returns from such breaks within a fairly consistent window of time after exiting. In this example, if the given person approaches the access-controlled location after exiting at a break time associated with this detected pattern, returning within the window of time associated with this detected pattern, the intent prediction processing unit may calculate a relatively high intent score for the current approach.”).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the combination of Danielsen and Venetianer to further incorporate the teachings of Venetianer to provide and first exit sensor readings captured at a door of the first secure area and/or asset with the USER AUTHENTICATION CONTROL USING ULTRASOUND of Danielsen as modified by Venetianer. Doing so enables intent prediction to be personalized using machine learning techniques and intent prediction processing to calculate relatively high intent scores for the current approach of detecting patterns in the given person's behavior based on exit information, as recognized by Venetianer (Paras [0077] and [0098]).
Non-transitory computer-readable device claim 9 and system claim 16 are rejected for the same reasons as method claim 3 for having similar limitations and being similar in scope.
In re claim 5, Danielsen and Venetianer teach all of the limitations of claim 1 stated above where Danielsen further teaches wherein determining the first input information based on the environment information comprises generating the foot information from audio information captured at the first reader device, the foot information indicating a foot step direction (Para [0052]: “FIG. 1 shows a flowchart 100 illustrating a method for initiating an authentication process on an electronic device. Upon start 101, as a first step 102, an ultrasound signal is transmitted by an ultrasound transmitter. In a following step 103, an echo signal of the ultrasound signal is received by an ultrasound receiver. If an object is present in the field of view of the ultrasound transmitter and receiver, the echo signal will comprise at least one echo reflected by the object. The ultrasound receiver generates a measured signal relative to the received echo signal. In a following step 104, the echo signal is analyzed by processing the measured signal. The processing is performed by a computer processor. During processing, the processor extracts parameters related to the object. The parameters include one or more of: distance, position, speed, direction, movement, or type or gesture performed by the object.”).
Non-transitory computer-readable device claim 12 and system claim 18 are rejected for the same reasons as method claim 5 for having similar limitations and being similar in scope.
In re claim 6, Danielsen and Venetianer teach all of the limitations of claim 1 stated above where Danielsen further teaches wherein the environment information includes a plurality of IR sensor readings captured at the first reader device (SEE BELOW) and determining the first input information based on the environment information comprises:
deriving IR information based on the plurality of IR sensor readings at the first reader device (Para [0018]: “According to another embodiment, the method also comprises transmitting data related to the object to another electronic module of the electronic device. The object related data may include one or more of: object position, distance, speed, estimated trajectory, and projected trajectory. Another electronic module may be a hardware or software module, and may include any one or more of, application programming interface (“API”), and sensor fusion module.” and para [0019]: “According to another embodiment, the method comprises receiving data from at least one of the other sensors or modules in the electronic device for improving the robustness of the initiation of the authentication process. The other sensors or modules may include, accelerometer, inertial sensor, IR sensor, or any other sensor or modules related to a sensor fusion module in the electronic device.”).
The combination fails to teach and a plurality of exit sensor readings captured at the first reader device,
or deriving the exit information based on the plurality of exit sensor readings at the first reader device.
However, Venetianer teaches and a plurality of exit sensor readings captured at the first reader device (SEE BELOW),
or deriving the exit information based on the plurality of exit sensor readings at the first reader device (Para [0098]: “In some embodiments, a personal statistical model 130 may include exit information indicating when a given person exits a particular access-controlled location associated with the personal statistical model 130. In some such embodiments, detecting patterns in the given person's behavior may be based on both this exit information and access logs stored as result data in the personal statistical model 130. For example, a detected pattern may indicate that the given person typically exits the access-controlled location for lunch or a coffee break on a fairly consistent schedule and typically returns from such breaks within a fairly consistent window of time after exiting. In this example, if the given person approaches the access-controlled location after exiting at a break time associated with this detected pattern, returning within the window of time associated with this detected pattern, the intent prediction processing unit may calculate a relatively high intent score for the current approach.”).
Non-transitory computer-readable device claim 13 and system claim 20 are rejected for the same reasons as method claim 6 for having similar limitations and being similar in scope.
In re claim 7, Danielsen and Venetianer teach all of the limitations of claim 1 stated above where Venetianer further teaches wherein the machine learning model includes a convolutional neural network (Para [0077]: “In at least some embodiments, the techniques described herein for personalized intent prediction may be applied in systems that implement intent prediction using unsupervised machine learning. In other embodiments, these techniques may be applied in intent prediction systems that employ supervised machine learning or other artificial intelligence techniques…a particular person who is authorized to enter an access-controlled location and who is determined to be on approach toward the access-controlled location…Machine learning techniques that may be used in the personalized intent prediction systems described herein may include, but are not limited to… Convolutional Neural Networks...”).
Non-transitory computer-readable device claim 14 and system claim 19 are rejected for the same reasons as method claim 7 for having similar limitations and being similar in scope.
Claims 2 and 10 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Danielsen (US Patent No. 20200201968A1), in view of Venetianer (US Patent No. 20210358250 A1) and further in view of Zhu (US Patent No. 20190349758).
In re claim 2, Danielsen and Venetianer teach all of the limitations of claim 1 stated above but fails to teach wherein collecting the environment information comprises receiving an ultrasound authentication message generated by an application of a mobile device.
However, in the same field of endeavor, Zhu teaches wherein collecting the environment information comprises receiving an ultrasound authentication message generated by an application of a mobile device (Para [0051]: “In one or more embodiments, a device (e.g., the user device 126 of the one or more user devices 120 of FIG. 1) periodically may broadcast a Wi-Fi authentication message (e.g., the one or more ultrasound frames 152 of FIG. 1) using an ultrasound radio (e.g., the acoustic sensor 164 of FIG. 1). Nearby devices, such as the user device 150, may receive the Wi-Fi authentication message (e.g., using the acoustic sensor 158 of FIG. 1), may translate the ultrasound-based message to one or more electric signals, may identify the password included in the password field 212, and may use the password to connect to a device (e.g., the AP 102 of FIG. 1).”).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the combination of Danielsen and Venetianer to further incorporate the teachings of Zhu to provide wherein collecting the environment information comprises receiving an ultrasound authentication message generated by an application of a mobile device with the USER AUTHENTICATION CONTROL USING ULTRASOUND of Danielsen as modified by Venetianer. Doing so enables translating an ultrasound-based message to one or more electric signals to identify a password included in a password field to use the password to connect to a device, as recognized by Zhu (Para [0051]).
Non-transitory computer-readable device claim 10 is rejected for the same reasons as method claim 2 for having similar limitations and being similar in scope.
Claims 4, 11 and 17 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Danielsen (US Patent No. 20200201968A1), in view of Venetianer (US Patent No. 20210358250 A1) and further in view of Mahadevan (US Patent No. 20220319525).
In re claim 4, Danielsen and Venetianer teach all of the limitations of claim 1 stated above but fails to teach wherein determining the first input information based on the environment information comprises generating the power information from an ultrasonic root mean square level detected within audio information captured at the first reader device.
However, in the same field of endeavor, Mahadevan teaches wherein determining the first input information based on the environment information comprises generating the power information from an ultrasonic root mean square level detected within audio information captured at the first reader device (Para [0098]: “In an exemplary embodiment, the data in the form of an audio signal in the ultrasonic range may be received via a smart computing device integrated with a microphone to receive the audio data being transmitted. Once received, the audio may be sent for processing”, para [0115]: “In an exemplary embodiment, the frequency and temporal voting may include the steps of assigning a sign to the confidence score based on the bit (0 or 1), using root mean square (RMS) of confidence score to judge integrity of the signal in a frame, getting the signed mean square root to get the temporal confidence score (voting) bit-wise, getting the weighted sum of bit-wise confidence scores weighted channel-wise after de-randomizing the bits which may be randomized independently and use the resultant confidence score array to determine the bytes including the ECC.” and para [0119]: “As illustrated, the proposed system can be thus summarised through a system block flow diagram that can include a block 902 data input that may be sent to block 904 to binarize the data, apply error correction code, modulate data into sound waves, and apply a plurality of frequency transmission. The audio signal thus generated at block 906 may be then transmitted and then received via a smart device at block 908. The received audio data may be then decoded at block 910. The decoded data may be then pre-processed to reduce sound artifacts, demodulate the sound signals into data, apply error correction code and de-binarize data at block 912 and get data at block 914.”).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the combination of Danielsen and Venetianer to further incorporate the teachings of Mahadevan to provide wherein determining the first input information based on the environment information comprises generating the power information from an ultrasonic root mean square level detected within audio information captured at the first reader device with the USER AUTHENTICATION CONTROL USING ULTRASOUND of Danielsen as modified by Venetianer. Doing so enables assigning a sign to the confidence score based on the bit (0 or 1), using root mean square (RMS) of confidence score to judge integrity of the signal in a frame, as recognized by Mahadevan (Para [0115]).
Non-transitory computer-readable device claim 11 and system claim 17 are rejected for the same reasons as method claim 4 for having similar limitations and being similar in scope.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to JAMES EDWARD MUNION whose telephone number is (571)270-0437. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 7:30-5:00.
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, Curtis Kuntz can be reached at (571) 272-7499. 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.
/JAMES E MUNION/Examiner, Art Unit 2687 09/29/2025