Prosecution Insights
Last updated: April 19, 2026
Application No. 18/795,254

PIN VERIFICATION

Non-Final OA §102§103
Filed
Aug 06, 2024
Examiner
KORSAK, OLEG
Art Unit
2492
Tech Center
2400 — Computer Networks
Assignee
Alarm.com Incorporated
OA Round
1 (Non-Final)
85%
Grant Probability
Favorable
1-2
OA Rounds
2y 8m
To Grant
94%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 85% — above average
85%
Career Allow Rate
804 granted / 941 resolved
+27.4% vs TC avg
Moderate +8% lift
Without
With
+8.5%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
2y 8m
Avg Prosecution
39 currently pending
Career history
980
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
6.6%
-33.4% vs TC avg
§103
35.0%
-5.0% vs TC avg
§102
25.8%
-14.2% vs TC avg
§112
12.2%
-27.8% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 941 resolved cases

Office Action

§102 §103
DETAILED ACTION This communication is responsive to the application # 18/795,254 filed on August 06, 2024. By preliminary amendment Claims 2-21 are pending and are directed toward PIN VERIFICATION. 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 . In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status. 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)(1) the claimed invention was patented, described in a printed publication, or in public use, on sale or otherwise available to the public before the effective filing date of the claimed invention. Claims 2-4, 6-14, and 16-21 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being unpatentable over Tussy (US 2016/0063235, Mar. 3, 2016), hereinafter referred to as Tussy. As per claim 2, Tussy teaches an access control system comprising one or more computers and one or more storage devices on which are stored instructions that are operable, when executed by the one or more computers, to cause the one or more computers to perform operations (the disclosed embodiments relate to a facial recognition authentication systems. Tussy, [0003]) comprising: receiving, through a mobile interface of the access control system presented in an application environment of a mobile device of a visitor to a property (authenticating a user in an authentication system via a user's a mobile computing device, Tussy, [0008]), a personal identification number (PIN) for the visitor (As shown in FIG. 15, in addition to or in place of the regions 1420, buttons 1520 may be displayed on a touchscreen 1510. Here, the user may initiate the authentication by pressing one or more of the buttons 1520 in a predetermined pattern. Tussy, [0185]) and a request to alter a status of the access control system of the property (the authentication using path parameters and image data may be implemented in any environment requiring verification of the user's identity before allowing access, such as auto access, room access, computer access, web site or data access, phone use, computer use, package receipt, event access, ticketing, courtroom access, airport security, retail sales transaction, IoT access, or any other type of situation. Tussy, [0204]); providing, to the mobile device and in response to the request to alter the status of the access control system of the property, an instruction to cause presentation in the application environment of the mobile interface of a request for biometrics data of the visitor (The authentication system may include feedback displayed on the mobile device to aid a user in learning and authentication with the system. For instance, an accuracy meter may provide feedback on a match rate of the authentication biometrics or movement. Tussy, [0012]); receiving, through the mobile interface and from the visitor, biometrics data of the visitor captured by a sensor of the mobile device (The data including either the image(s), biometric information, or both are sent over the network 116 to the server 120. Tussy, [0050]); comparing the received PIN to a stored PIN for a known person (In step 920, the authentication server 120 may then compare the login credentials with the information stored from the enrollment process. In step 920, the server 120 compares the identification of the device obtained during the login process to that stored during enrollment. Tussy, [0096]); comparing the received biometrics data to stored biometrics data that corresponds to the known person (In step 930, the authentication biometrics may be compared with the enrollment biometrics to determine whether they sufficiently correspond with the enrollment biometrics. Tussy, [0096]); determining, using results from the comparisons, a likelihood that the received biometrics data matches the stored biometrics data associated with the stored PIN for the known person (In step 940, the authentication movement may be compared with the enrollment movement to determine whether it sufficiently corresponds with the enrollment movement. Tussy, [0096]); and generating an alarm notification in response to determining that the likelihood that the visitor is the known person does not satisfy a threshold (For example, if a user unsuccessfully attempts to login via the authentication system a predetermined number of times, such as three times for example, than the authentication system locks the account and sends an email to the email address informing the user of the unsuccessful login attempts. Tussy, [0121]). As per claim 3, Tussy teaches the system of claim 2, wherein: the sensor comprises a camera of the mobile device, and receiving the biometrics data of the visitor captured by the sensor of the mobile device comprises: receiving one or more images of the visitor captured by the camera of the mobile device (Tussy, [0010]). As per claim 4, Tussy teaches the system of claim 3, wherein comparing the received biometrics data to stored biometrics data that corresponds to the known person comprises: comparing the one or more images of the visitor to one or more stored images associated with the received PIN using one or more facial recognition algorithms (Tussy, [0009]-[0010], FIG. 15). As per claim 6, Tussy teaches the system of claim 2, wherein the sensor comprises a speaker of the mobile device (Tussy, [0064]), and receiving the biometrics data of the visitor captured by the sensor of the mobile device comprises: receiving a voice recording spoken by the visitor into the speaker of the mobile device (Tussy, [0186]). As per claim 7, Tussy teaches the system of claim 6, wherein receiving the voice recording comprises: providing, to the mobile device, the instruction to the mobile device to cause presentation in the application environment of the mobile interface of the request for biometric data comprising a prompt to speak a word or phrase; and receiving the voice recording including the visitor speaking the word or phrase (Tussy, [0186]). As per claim 8, Tussy teaches the system of claim 7, wherein comparing the received biometrics data to stored biometrics data that corresponds to the known person comprises: comparing the voice recording from the visitor to one or more stored voice recording associated with the received PIN using voice recognition algorithms (Tussy, [0186]). As per claim 9, Tussy teaches the system of claim 2, wherein receiving the biometrics data of the visitor captured by the sensor of the mobile device comprises: receiving one or more images of the visitor captured by a camera of the mobile device (Tussy, [0209]) and receiving a voice recording spoken by the visitor into a speaker of the mobile device (Tussy, [0186]), and wherein determining, from the comparisons, the likelihood that the received biometrics data matches the stored biometrics data associated with the stored PIN for the known person comprises: determining whether the received voice recording matches a voice of a known person associated with the received PIN (Tussy, [0209]); and determining whether the one or more images of the visitor do not match stored images of the known person associated with the received PIN (Tussy, [0123]-[0127]). As per claim 10, Tussy teaches the system of claim 2, wherein receiving, through the mobile interface and from the visitor, the biometrics data of the visitor captured by a sensor of the mobile device comprises: providing, to the mobile device, the instruction to the mobile device to cause presentation in the application environment of the mobile interface of the request for biometric data comprising a prompt to capture biometrics data of the visitor; and receiving the biometrics data of the visitor captured by the sensor of the mobile device in response to the prompt for the biometrics data (Tussy, [0083]). As per claim 11, Tussy teaches the system of claim 2, further comprising: providing, to the mobile device, an instruction to the mobile device to cause presentation in the application environment of the mobile interface of a temporary mobile login interface; and receiving, through the mobile interface and from the visitor accessing the temporary mobile login, a selected PIN for the visitor (Tussy, [0013], [0094],[0104], [0109]). Claims 12-14 and 16-21 have limitations similar to those treated in the above rejection, and are met by the references as discussed above, and are rejected for the same reasons of anticipation as used above. 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 5 and 15 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Tussy (US 2016/0063235, Mar. 3, 2016), in view of Beenau et al. (US 2004/0232221, Nov. 25, 2004), hereinafter referred to as Tussy and Beenau. As per claim 5, Tussy teaches the system of claim 4, but does not teach encrypted version and/or decrypted version, Beenau however teaches wherein comparing the one or more images of the visitor to one or more stored images associated with the received PIN using facial recognition algorithms comprises: providing, to the mobile device, an encrypted version of the one or more stored images associated with the received PIN (Beenau, [0065], FIG. 6B); and receiving, from the mobile device, a result of a comparison that indicates the likelihood that the received one or more images matches a temporarily decrypted version of the encrypted version of the one or more stored images (Beenau, [0064], [0084], [0162]). Tussy in view of Beenau are analogous art to the claimed invention, because they are from a similar field of endeavor of systems, components and methodologies for providing secure communication between computer systems. It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Tussy in view of Beenau. This would have been desirable because this transfer of information may include use of encryption, decryption, security keys, digital certificates and/or other security devices to confirm the security of the sample (Beenau, [0168]). Claim 15 has limitations similar to those treated in the above rejection, and are met by the references as discussed above, and are rejected for the same reasons of obviousness as used above. Conclusion Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to OLEG KORSAK whose telephone number is (571)270-1938. The examiner can normally be reached on Monday-Friday 7:30am - 5:00pm EST. If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Rupal Dharia can be reached on (571) 272-3880. 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. /OLEG KORSAK/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2492
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Aug 06, 2024
Application Filed
Jan 26, 2026
Non-Final Rejection — §102, §103 (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12587555
METHODS FOR USING ORGANIZATIONAL BEHAVIOR FOR RISK RATINGS
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 24, 2026
Patent 12587572
MULTI-VENDOR WEB SECURITY CONTROL INTEGRATION AND MANAGEMENT PLATFORM
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 24, 2026
Patent 12572629
Secure Messaging Service with Digital Rights Management Using Blockchain Technology
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 10, 2026
Patent 12574365
METHOD,APPARATUS,STORAGE MEDIUM AND ELECTRONIC DEVICE FOR NETWORK AUTHENTICATION
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 10, 2026
Patent 12563042
Performing Security Protocol Transitions While Executing An Execution Environment Of A Virtual Cloud Network
2y 5m to grant Granted Feb 24, 2026
Study what changed to get past this examiner. Based on 5 most recent grants.

AI Strategy Recommendation

Get an AI-powered prosecution strategy using examiner precedents, rejection analysis, and claim mapping.
Powered by AI — typically takes 5-10 seconds

Prosecution Projections

1-2
Expected OA Rounds
85%
Grant Probability
94%
With Interview (+8.5%)
2y 8m
Median Time to Grant
Low
PTA Risk
Based on 941 resolved cases by this examiner. Grant probability derived from career allow rate.

Sign in with your work email

Enter your email to receive a magic link. No password needed.

Personal email addresses (Gmail, Yahoo, etc.) are not accepted.

Free tier: 3 strategy analyses per month