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 .
This action is responsive to communication filed on 6/8/2026.
Claims 1-20 are subject to examination.
This amendment and applicant’s arguments have been fully considered and entered by the Examiner.
Claim Objections
Claim 7 objected to because of the following informalities: typographical error/grammar. In claim 7, it states “…related to additional prompt are is displayed on the GUI”. The verb “is” should be deleted. Appropriate correction is required.
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) 1-3, 5-10, 12-17, 19-20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over McDougall et al. U.S. Patent # 11,316,830 (hereinafter McDougall) in view of Sharma et al. U.S. Patent Publication # 2023/0316806 (hereinafter Sharma)
With respect to claim 1, McDougall teaches an apparatus comprising: a processor that executes instructions stored in (column 7 lines 55-67) memory to configure (i.e. servers which have memory and processor)(column 7 lines 55-67) the processor to (i.e. servers which have memory and processor)(column 7 lines 55-67),
-receive application data in response to a prompt on an application form on a computing device wherein the application form is associated with an applicant(i.e. user pushing on apply now button which will start an application & also receive data associated with user interacting with an online application and receive data from a data source)(column 15 lines 49-62)(column 22 lines 39-47)
-receive device data from the computing device (i.e. receive data from a data source which can be a website, server, a mobile device a reporting system)(column 22 lines 39-47)
-execute an artificial intelligence (AI) model to predict an identity risk level(column 5 lines 11-34) based on the application data and the device data (column 10 lines 49-58) (column 22 lines 47-58)
receive the image (i.e. receive facial image/biometric data)(Fig. 5d)(column 18 lines 21-46); and
-validate the image (column 17 lines 1-10)(column 21 lines 62-67)(column 22 lines 1-11)
McDougall does not explicitly teach determine that an image of the applicant in a specific setting is required based on the identity risk level; augment the application form with an additional prompt for the image.
Sharma teaches determine that an image of the applicant in a specific setting (i.e. background descriptor because of home office or office area) is required based on the identity risk level (Paragraph 25, 30); augment the application form with an additional prompt for the image (i.e. user identity and face descriptor)(Paragraph 30). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to implement Sharma’s teaching in McDougall’s teaching to come up with determining that an image of the applicant in a specific setting and augmenting the application form with additional prompt for the image. The motivation for doing so would be to do validation which allows for validation of recognized or safe locals (Paragraph 25)
With respect to claim 2, McDougall and Sharma teaches the apparatus of claim 1, but McDougall further teaches wherein the specific setting is based on an amount the identity risk level exceeds a threshold (i.e. score above the threshold)(column 21 lines 62-67)(column 22 lines 1-11)
With respect to claim 3, McDougall and Sharma teaches the apparatus of claim 1, but Sharma further teaches wherein the specific setting includes one or more of: the image of the applicant with a specific background; an image of a specific foreground (Paragraph 25, 30); an image of an individual associated with the applicant (Paragraph 25, 30); or an image of the applicant and an image of an individual associated with the applicant with a specific background.
With respect to claim 5, McDougall and Sharma teaches the apparatus of claim 1, but Sharma further teaches wherein the processor is configured to: display an option in an area approximate to the application form, to communicate with an entity to assist when the image of the applicant cannot be validated (i.e. validation of face descriptor if the validation of user identity fails) (Paragraph 30-31); identify that at least one further needed detail is needed to collect further application data (Paragraph 29-31); collect the at least one further needed detail of the applicant by the entity (Paragraph 36-37) and validate the collected at least one further needed detail by the entity (paragraph 35-40))
With respect to claim 6, McDougall and Sharma teaches the apparatus of claim 1, but McDougall further teaches wherein the processor is further configured to: add a model feedback record to model feedback data, wherein the model feedback record includes the identity risk level and a final application identity check result (column 5 lines 11-34)(column 21 lines 62-67)(column 22 lines 1-11); and retrain the trained AI model with the model feedback data that includes the added model feedback record (column 21 lines 1-15).
With respect to claim 7, McDougall and Sharma teaches the apparatus of claim 1, but McDougall further teaches wherein the application form is displayed on a graphical user interface (GUI) on the computing device (Fig. 5C)(column 18 lines 1-20) and wherein the additional prompt for the image of the applicant (Fig. 5D)(column 18 lines 21-34), and an instruction related to the additional prompt are displayed on the GUI (Fig. 5D)(column 18 lines 21-34).
With respect to claims 8-10, 12-15 respectively, recite similar claim limitations as claim 1-3, 5-7 respectively, therefore rejected under same basis.
With respect to claims 15-17, 19-20 respectively, recite similar claim limitations as claim 1-3, 5-6 respectively, therefore rejected under same basis.
Claim(s) 4, 11, 18 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over McDougall et al. U.S. Patent # 11,316,830 (hereinafter McDougall) in view of Sharma et al. U.S. Patent Publication # 2023/0316806 (hereinafter Sharma) further in view of Bueche JR et al. U.S. Patent # 11,900,755 (hereinafter Bueche)
With respect to claim 4, McDougall and Sharma teaches the apparatus of claim 1, but fails to explicitly teach wherein the prompt includes an angle at which the image is to be taken.
Bueche teaches the prompt includes an angle at which the image is to be taken (column 19 lines 34-67)(column 20 lines 1-2). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to implement Bueche’s teaching in McDougall and Sharma’s teaching to come up with prompt including an angle at which the image is to be taken. The motivation for doing so would be make sure the image is properly taken so that validation can be performed correctly.
With respect to claim 11 and 18, they recite similar claim limitation as claim 4, therefore rejected under same basis.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to claim(s) 1-20 have been considered but are moot because applicant’s arguments are with respect to Agarwal reference which has withdrawn. Therefore, applicant’s arguments have been moot in view of new grounds of rejection.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
A). Izvekova et al. U.S. Patent Publication # 2021/0084028 which teaches about creating a multi-applicant account using unique link and one time password and also have ability for multi-applicant account profile and application.
B). Denning et al. U.S. Patent # 10,672,077 which teaches about proactive underwriting wherein evaluation, rating, offering, quoting and/or pricing of insurance for one or more entities using social data.
C). Welch et al. U.S. Patent Publication # 2012/0191594 which teaches about providing a financial service or product and using application form to obtain user identification and data.
D). Barth et al. U.S. Patent Publication # 2023/0164165.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to DHAIRYA A PATEL whose telephone number is (571)272-5809. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 7:30am-4:00pm.
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 B Divecha can be reached at 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 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.
DHAIRYA A. PATEL
Primary Examiner
Art Unit 2453
/DHAIRYA A PATEL/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2453
Prosecution Insights