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 .
Application # 18/814,875 was filed on 12/9/2024.
Claims 1-10 are subject to examination.
Claim Interpretation
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(f):
(f) Element in Claim for a Combination. – An element in a claim for a combination may be expressed as a means or step for performing a specified function without the recital of structure, material, or acts in support thereof, and such claim shall be construed to cover the corresponding structure, material, or acts described in the specification and equivalents thereof.
The following is a quotation of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph:
An element in a claim for a combination may be expressed as a means or step for performing a specified function without the recital of structure, material, or acts in support thereof, and such claim shall be construed to cover the corresponding structure, material, or acts described in the specification and equivalents thereof.
The claims in this application are given their broadest reasonable interpretation using the plain meaning of the claim language in light of the specification as it would be understood by one of ordinary skill in the art. The broadest reasonable interpretation of a claim element (also commonly referred to as a claim limitation) is limited by the description in the specification when 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is invoked.
As explained in MPEP § 2181, subsection I, claim limitations that meet the following three-prong test will be interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph:
(A) the claim limitation uses the term “means” or “step” or a term used as a substitute for “means” that is a generic placeholder (also called a nonce term or a non-structural term having no specific structural meaning) for performing the claimed function;
(B) the term “means” or “step” or the generic placeholder is modified by functional language, typically, but not always linked by the transition word “for” (e.g., “means for”) or another linking word or phrase, such as “configured to” or “so that”; and
(C) the term “means” or “step” or the generic placeholder is not modified by sufficient structure, material, or acts for performing the claimed function.
Use of the word “means” (or “step”) in a claim with functional language creates a rebuttable presumption that the claim limitation is to be treated in accordance with 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph. The presumption that the claim limitation is interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is rebutted when the claim limitation recites sufficient structure, material, or acts to entirely perform the recited function.
Absence of the word “means” (or “step”) in a claim creates a rebuttable presumption that the claim limitation is not to be treated in accordance with 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph. The presumption that the claim limitation is not interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is rebutted when the claim limitation recites function without reciting sufficient structure, material or acts to entirely perform the recited function.
Claim limitations in this application that use the word “means” (or “step”) are being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, except as otherwise indicated in an Office action. Conversely, claim limitations in this application that do not use the word “means” (or “step”) are not being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, except as otherwise indicated in an Office action.
This application includes one or more claim limitations that do not use the word “means,” but are nonetheless being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, because the claim limitation(s) uses a generic placeholder that is coupled with functional language without reciting sufficient structure to perform the recited function and the generic placeholder is not preceded by a structural modifier. Such claim limitation(s) is/are: a server registration module configured to receive…a database configured to connect…a server verification module configured to receive…a server authorization module configured to connect… in claim 1. Furthermore, in claim 7, such claim limitations are a terminal connection module configured to connect…a terminal authorization module configured to connect….a terminal verification module configured to connect….
Because this/these claim limitation(s) is/are being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, it/they is/are being interpreted to cover the corresponding structure described in the specification in Fig. 1 & Paragraphs 21-29, 30-35 as performing the claimed function, and equivalents thereof.
If applicant does not intend to have this/these limitation(s) interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, applicant may: (1) amend the claim limitation(s) to avoid it/them being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph (e.g., by reciting sufficient structure to perform the claimed function); or (2) present a sufficient showing that the claim limitation(s) recite(s) sufficient structure to perform the claimed function so as to avoid it/them being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph.
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) 1-10 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Gomi et al. U.S. Patent Publication # 2022/0377063 (hereinafter Gomi) in view of Chin et al. U.S. Patent Publication # 2024/0121238 (hereinafter Chin)
With respect to claim 1, Gomi teaches a data verification server, comprising:
-a server registration module configured to receive a plurality pieces of registration data of a user and process the plurality pieces of registration data to generate at least one piece of aggregated data (i.e. terminal device of the user sets a password in the authentication server in advance, the terminal device sends the password and registers an ID of the user U and the password in a memory area) (Paragraph 33-34);
-a database configured to connect with the server registration module and store verification check data and the at least one piece of aggregated data (i.e. authentication server registers the ID and the password of the user U in the authentication information database)(Paragraph 34);
a server verification module (Fig. 6 element 133) configured to receive verification data (i.e. biometric information or challenge) from a data verification terminal (paragraph 38-40) and compare (i.e. matching) the received verification data and the verification check data stored in the database to determine whether the received verification data and the stored verification check data match (Paragraph 39, 56, 174); and
a server authorization module configured to connect with the server verification module and the database, wherein: when the received verification data and the verification check data stored in the database match (Paragraph 39-40, 56)
Gomi does not explicitly teach the server authorization module selectively obtains the at least one piece of aggregated data from the database and transmits the at least one piece of aggregated data obtained to a service platform server through a communication network.
Chin teaches a server authorization module (i.e. authorization server) configured to connect with the server verification module and the database (Paragraph 35, 32), wherein: when the received verification data and the verification check data stored in the database match (Paragraph 39), the server authorization module selectively obtains the at least one piece of aggregated data from the database and transmits the at least one piece of aggregated data obtained to a service platform server through a communication network (i.e. server obtaining username and then server sending back QR code including username, user code and URI) (Paragraph 32, 39, 44-45). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to implement Chin’s teaching in Gomi’s teaching to come up with having obtaining at least one piece of aggregate data from the database and transmitting the piece of aggregated to the service platform server. The motivation for doing so would be to authenticate the user using biometric information and not the password.
With respect to claim 2, Gomi and Chin teaches the data verification server of claim 1, but Chin further teaches wherein when the data verification terminal is verified to be operated by the user, the server authorization module is further configured to update a part of the at least one piece of aggregated data in the database based on one or more data aggregation instructions received from the data verification terminal (i.e. server obtaining username and then server sending back QR code including username, user code and URI) (Paragraph 32, 39, 44-45)
With respect to claim 3, Gomi and Chin teaches the data verification server of claim 1, but Gomi further teaches wherein the server authorization module is further configured to store in the database an authorization record regarding the at least one piece of aggregated data provided to the data verification terminal (Paragraph 156, 157, 160)
With respect to claim 4, Gomi and Chin teaches the data verification server of claim 3, but Gomi further teaches wherein the server authorization module, when receiving the one or more data aggregation instructions, determines whether one of the atleast one piece of aggregated data stored in the database correspond to the one or more data aggregation instructions to selectively update the part of the at least one piece of aggregated data in the database (Paragraph 155-160)
With respect to claim 5, Gomi and Chin teaches the data verification server of claim 1, but Gomi further teaches wherein the server verification module further includes a verification kernel that complies with Fast Identity Online 2 (FIDO2) project and uses an authentication standard of Universal 2nd Factor for verification (Paragraph 40)
With respect to claim 6, Gomi and Chin teaches the data verification server of claim 1, but Chin further teaches wherein the server authorization module transmits the at least one piece of aggregated data obtained to the service platform server through the communication network to complete authorization (i.e. server obtaining username and then server sending back QR code including username, user code and URI) (Paragraph 32, 39, 44-45)
With respect to claim 7, Gomi teaches a data verification terminal, comprising:
-a terminal connection module configured to connect with a data verification server (i.e. authentication server) and a service platform server (i.e. FIDO server) through a communication network (Paragraph 33, 34, 37, 42)
-a terminal authorization module configured to connect with the terminal connection module (i.e. terminal of the user U sends the challenge and the server information to the FIDO authenticator)(Paragraph 38) and receive an authorization request from the service platform server through the terminal connection module (i.e. FIDO authenticator performs user verifications on the basis of biometric information and verifies the identity of the user)(Paragraph 39); and
a terminal verification module configured to connect with the terminal connection module and the terminal authorization module, obtain biometric data, and generate verification data based on the obtained biometric data (I.e. biometric information which can be fingerprint, a vein) (Paragraph 39-41), wherein: when the terminal authorization module receives the authorization request (Paragraph 51), the terminal verification module is configured to transmit the verification data to the data verification server through the terminal connection module (Paragraph 67-68), so that the data verification server transmits at least one piece of aggregated data to the service platform server.
Gomi does not explicitly teach the data verification server transmits at least one piece of aggregated data to the service platform server
Chin teaches the data verification server transmits at least one piece of aggregated data to the service platform server (i.e. server obtaining username and then server sending back QR code including username, user code and URI) (Paragraph 32, 39, 44-45). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to implement Chin’s teaching in Gomi’s teaching to come up with having obtaining at least one piece of aggregate data from the database and transmitting the piece of aggregated to the service platform server. The motivation for doing so would be to authenticate the user using biometric information and not the password.
With respect to claim 8, Gomi and Chin teaches the data verification terminal of claim 7, but Gomi further teaches further comprising: a terminal registration module configured to connect with the terminal connection module and obtain one or more pieces of registration data of a user (Paragraph 33-34) and transmit the one or more pieces of registration data to the data verification server through the terminal connection module (Paragraph 33-34, 42-43)
With respect to claim 9, Gomi and Chin teaches the data verification terminal of claim 7, but Gomi further teaches wherein the terminal verification module is further configured to generate an authorization password based on time-based one- time password (TOTP) algorithm by using a verification time interval to obtain the verification data (Paragraph 40) encrypt the verification data with the authorization password (Paragraph 40, 26), and transmit the encrypted verification data to the data verification server through the terminal connection module (Paragraph 40-41)
With respect to claim 10, Gomi and Chin teaches the data verification terminal of claim 7, but Gomi further teaches wherein when the terminal connection module receives a piece of aggregated data from the data verification server, the terminal authorization module generate an authorization password based on time-based one-time password (TOTP) algorithm by using an authorization time interval to obtain the aggregated data (Paragraph 40), encrypt the aggregated data with the authorization password (Paragraph 40-41, 26) and transmit the encrypted aggregated data to a verification platform through the terminal connection module (Paragraph 40-41)
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
A). Reed et al. U.S. Patent Publication # 2024/0007461
B). Lee et al. U.S. Patent Publication # 2022/0337589
C). Vo et al. U.S. Patent # 10,461,942
E). Brown et al. U.S. Patent Publication # 2019/0279212
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