Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status
1. The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
Objection to the Specification
2. Applicant is requested to update status of related applications cited in page 1 of the specification, i.e., providing patent numbers where appropriate.
Non-Art Rejection
3. 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 §§ 706.02(l)(1) - 706.02(l)(3) 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 USPTO Internet website contains terminal disclaimer forms which may be used. Please visit www.uspto.gov/patent/patents-forms. The 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/process/file/efs/guidance/eTD-info-I.jsp.
4. Claims 1-21 are rejected under the judicially created doctrine of double patenting as being unpatentable over prior U.S. Patent No. 12,057,788.
Although the conflicting claims are not identical, they are not patentable distinct from each other because the patent claims comprise all limitations required in the present claims. The present claims are merely broader in scope than that of the patent claims.
Art Rejection
5. 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 of this title, 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.
6. This application currently names joint inventors. In considering patentability of the claims the examiner presumes that the subject matter of the various claims was commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the claimed invention(s) absent any evidence to the contrary. Applicant is advised of the obligation under 37 CFR 1.56 to point out the inventor and effective filing dates of each claim that was not commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the later invention in order for the examiner to consider the applicability of 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(C) for any potential 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) prior art against the later invention.
7. Claims 1-5 and 7-21 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Fan, U.S. pat. Appl. Pub. No. 2014/0282972, in view of Dintenfass, U.S. pat. Appl. Pub. No. 2017/0323398.
Per claims 1 and 4, Fan discloses a computer implemented method in a computing system, comprising:
a) for a user, at a first time, receiving sign-in name or user ID to authenticate the user for accessing network applications or services (see par 0063, 0069-0070);
b) in response to the receiving at the first time:
i) expanding the received sign-in name to include text identifying a service or an application instance, i.e., generating a token comprising user ID and a service nonce (see par 0072); and
ii) creating persistent state for the user comprising the expanded sign-in name and an identifier by which the user is known to the application instance, e.g., storing/mapping user ID with service identifier (see par 0078);
c) at a second time later than the first time, receiving from the user the sign-in name (see par 0073);
d) verifying the user by:
i) expanding the sign-in name received at the second time to include text identifying an application instance, i.e., identifying a user/service nonce (see par 0075); and
ii) verifying that the expanded sign-in name matches the persistent state created for the user, i.e., matching the extracted user/service nonce with stored user/service nonce (see par 0076); and
e) in response to the verifying, using the identifier by which the user is known to the application instance to authenticate the user to the application instance (see par 0077).
Fan does not explicitly teach using an externally created (or User ID) and a password to authenticate the user for the first time. However such use sign-in name and password externally created by the user for authenticating the user is well known in the art as disclosed by Dintenfass (see Dintenfass, par 0040).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention
Per claims 2-3, Dintenfass teaches that sign-in name can be created by the application (see Dintenfass, par 0040). It would have been further obvious to one skilled in the art to recognize that Fan invention can be practiced with any type of application including medical record application.
Per claim 5, Fan teaches storing/mapping user ID with many service or application instances that user is allowed to access in an authorization table, wherein one of the table entries can be identified/selected to authenticate the user to the application instance (see par 0077).
Claims 7-19 and 21 are similar in scope as that of claims 1-5.
Per claim 20, Fan teaches discerning the identified service/application from referrer field within a HTTP request (see par 0045).
8. Claim 6 is not rejected on art.
Conclusion
9. Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Viet Vu whose telephone number is 571-272-3977. The examiner can normally be reached on Monday through Thursday from 8:00am to 6:00pm. The Group general information number is 571-272-2400. The Group fax number is 571-273-8300.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner's supervisor, Emmanuel Moise, can be reached at 571-272-3865.
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).
/Viet D Vu/
Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2455
10/1/25