DETAILED ACTION
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 .
Priority
The Offices attempt to electronically retrieve the foreign priority documents failed on 2/11/2025, at this time no foreign priority documents have been received.
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) 1-7, 11-17 and 19-20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over U.S. Patent Application Publication 2015/0286854 A1 to Raducan et al.
With respect to claim 1 Raducan discloses, in Fig. 1-6, an electronic device (10) (paragraph 28) comprising: an image sensor (12) (paragraph 28); an image pre-processor comprising circuitry (Fig. 1 where it can be seen there is an image processing pipeline that eventually gets to the “primary device” processing); memory storing instructions (paragraph 86); and at least one processor comprising processing circuitry (paragraph 86); wherein the instructions, when executed by at least one processor, individually and/or collectively, cause the electronic device to (paragraph 86): obtain data including biometric data using the image sensor (paragraph 31 and 52), store, in a first buffer, the data as first image data (paragraph 53), store, in a second buffer, second image data generated by applying a change operation to the raw data using the image pre-processor (paragraph 33-34 and 77-78; where the BAU masks biometric data if present and then sends it to the normal memory in the primary device to normal use), forward the first image data stored in the first buffer to a first application included in a secure area and apply a first algorithm for biometric authentication to the first image data (paragraph 77-78), and forward the second image data stored in the second buffer to a second application included in a non-secure area and apply a second algorithm different from the first algorithm to the second image data (paragraph 33-34; where the second algorithm appears to include at least a transmission process but one of ordinary skill in the art would recognize there are numerous other uses for the image by the primary device).
Raducan does not expressly disclose the first image data is raw image data.
However, Official Notice (MPEP § 2144.03) is taken that both the concepts and advantages of performing biometric identification on raw image data are well known and expected in the art. Before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, it would have been obvious to one with ordinary skill in the art to have used raw image data for the first image data of Raducan as doing so would merely be used of a known technique for analyzing biometric information to improve a similar device in the same way. NOTE: U.S. 2020/0311305 to Kim et al discloses using raw image information for biometric analysis.
With respect to claim 2 Raducan in view of Official Notice discloses, in Fig. 1-6, the electronic device of claim 1, wherein the instructions, when executed by at least one processor, individually and/or collectively, cause the electronic device to: forward the second image data stored in the second buffer to the second application during a period at least partially overlapping a period of forwarding the first image data stored in the first buffer to the first application (paragraph 43 and 62; where the process is done in real time and repeatedly by Raducan).
With respect to claim 3 Raducan in view of Official Notice discloses, in Fig. 1-6, the electronic device of claim 1, wherein the change operation includes performing image processing on the raw data, and wherein the image processing includes at least one of blanking, blurring, or hatching (paragraph 57-58; where the iris is replaced which is considered to be a form of blanking, blurring or hatching).
With respect to claim 4 Raducan in view of Official Notice discloses, in Fig. 1-6, the electronic device of claim 3 (see above), wherein the image processing includes at least one of the blanking, the blurring, or the hatching for just the iris portion of the raw data (paragraph 57-58).
Raducan does not expressly disclose the blanking, blurring or hatching is done for the entire image.
However, Official Notice (MPEP § 2144.03) is taken that both the concepts and advantages of blanking, blurring or hatching and entire image to secure data instead of just the portion with the data are well known and expected in the art. Before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, it would have been obvious to one with ordinary skill in the art to have masked the entire image of Raducan instead of just the portion with the iris for doing so would merely be a simple substitution of one known masking technique for another to obtain predictable results.
With respect to claim 5 Raducan in view of Official Notice discloses, in Fig. 1-6, the electronic device of claim 3, wherein the image processing includes at least one of the blanking, the blurring, or the hatching for an area corresponding to the biometric data included in the raw data (paragraph 57-58).
With respect to claim 6 Raducan in view of Official Notice discloses, in Fig. 1-6, the electronic device of claim 5, wherein the instructions, when executed by at least one processor, individually and/or collectively, cause the electronic device to: identify location of a designated area based on a characteristic of the electronic device, and perform the image processing on the area corresponding to the biometric data, wherein the area corresponding to the biometric data corresponds to the location of the designated area (paragraph 38).
With respect to claim 7 Raducan in view of Official Notice discloses, in Fig. 1-6, the electronic device of claim 1, wherein the instructions, when executed by at least one processor, individually and/or collectively, cause the electronic device to: obtain, using the image sensor, first raw data among the raw data during a first period, store, in the first buffer, at least a portion of the first image data identified by performing the image pre-processing on the first raw data using the image pre-processor, obtain, using the image sensor, second raw data among the raw data during a second period after the first period, and store, in the second buffer, at least a portion of the second image data identified by performing the image pre-processing and the change operation on the second raw data using the image pre-processor (paragraph 62; where the process is repeated which would create the second period with another rate data).
Claims 11-15 and 17 are rejected for similar reasons as claims 1-5 and 7 above as they are corresponding method claims to those of apparatus claims 1-5 and 7 respectively.
With respect to claim 16 Raducan in view of Official Notice discloses, in Fig. 1-6, the method of claim 15 (see above), wherein the change operation includes: identifying a location of a designated area based on a characteristic of the electronic device in the raw data; and performing the image processing on the area corresponding to the biometric data corresponding to the location of the designated area (paragraph 38). Raducan further discloses the electronic device is a camera (paragraph 28).
Raducan does not expressly disclose wherein obtaining the raw data includes obtaining the raw data while the electronic device is worn on a head of a user.
However, Official Notice (MPEP § 2144.03) is taken that both the concepts and advantages of wearing a camera in operation on your head are well known and expected in the art. Before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, it would have been obvious to one with ordinary skill in the art to have used Raducan’s as part of a head mounted camera as it would merely be used of a known technique (Raducan’s) to improve similar devices in the same way.
Claims 19-20 are rejected for similar reasons as claims 1-2 above as they are corresponding program claims to those of apparatus claims 1-2 respectively.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 8-10 and 18 are objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, but would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to DANIEL M PASIEWICZ whose telephone number is (571)272-5516. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 9 AM - 5:30 PM EST.
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, George Eng can be reached at (571)272-7495. 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.
/DANIEL M PASIEWICZ/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2699
February 13, 2026
Prosecution Insights