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 .
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 101
35 U.S.C. 101 reads as follows:
Whoever invents or discovers any new and useful process, machine, manufacture, or composition of matter, or any new and useful improvement thereof, may obtain a patent therefor, subject to the conditions and requirements of this title.
Claims 1-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 101 because the claim(s) does/do not fall within at least one of the four categories of patent eligible subject matter because the claimed invention is directed to 1) a process (claims 1-7 and claims 8-15) and a computer program product (claims 16-20) without significantly more.
Claim 1-Step 1- Determining a Statutory Category
includes the following steps (process)-
“determining that a person is located within an area”; and “determining an identity of the person”, which can be performed by a human observing another person’s location.
“loading a local gallery with information for the person”; “generating a digital identification object for the person using identity information associated with the identity”; and “providing the digital identification object”, which can be a method of organizing human activity. Specifically, organizing and retrieving information; creating a credential or record; and delivering or transmitting information- all part of a general practice performed within businesses.
The claim recites a sequence of steps: determining location, loading data, determining identity, generating an object, and providing the object. These are performed by a computing system.
Step 2A, Prong 1: Identifying the Judicial Exception
Therefore, there is a combination of both mental processes and methods of organizing human activity, which recites a judicial exception.
Step 2A, Prong 2: Integration into a Practical Application
The claim does not recite any improvement to computer speed, memory utilization, network latency, data security, encryption, sensor fusion, or other computer-specific functionality.
The claim does not describe a novel algorithm, data structure, or processing technique that improves how computers operate.
Further, the claim recites generic computing infrastructure implied by terms like “loading,” “determining,” “generating,” and “providing” but does not explicitly claim a particular machine or hardware architecture.
The claim does not specify how location determination is performed (GPS, Bluetooth, RFID, etc.) or what hardware performs identity determination.
The claim does not tie the abstract steps to specific hardware improvements or constraints.
There is no transformation of an article; field of use limitations do not constitute meaningful integration; no meaningful extra-solution activity.
Therefore, the abstract idea is not integrated into a practical application.
Step 2B: Significantly More
All of the provided steps of claim 1 are done by a general computer, well-understood, routine, and conventional. The claim does not specify an mechanisms that go beyond the listed steps. Further, the specification does not provide technical details, performance metrics, implementation specifics, or comparisons to conventional systems.
Therefore, claim 1 does not include any limitations that amount to significantly more and claim 1 is ineligible under 35 U.S.C. 101.
Claims 2-7 perform steps that do not add to significantly more and are also rejected under 35 U.S.C. 101.
Claim 8-Step 1- Determining a Statutory Category
includes the following steps
“determining an identity of a person”; “generating a digital identification object for the person”; “ identity information in the digital identification object that is associated with the identity and corresponds to digital identification object information”; and “providing the digital identification object”. These are performed by a computing system.
Step 2A, Prong 1: Identifying the Judicial Exception
“determining an identity of a person” can be done by a mental process of evaluating the person.
“generating a digital identification object for the person”; “ identity information in the digital identification object that is associated with the identity and corresponds to digital identification object information”; “formatting the identity information according to a digital identification object format specified in at least one specification”; and “providing the digital identification object” can all be done by a method of organizing human activity. In other words a person creating a record to identify a person; organizing and structuring information; applying a standardized format as administrative practice, etc.
Therefore, there is a combination of mental processes and methods of organizing human activity.
Step 2A, Prong 2: Integration into a Practical Application
The claim does not include technological improvement; no particular machine (i.e., generic computer implementation implied). There does not appear to be a transformation of an article. Field-of-use limitations do not constitute meaningful integration. The claim recites only the abstract idea with no meaningful extra-solution activity.
Therefore, the abstract idea is not integrated into a practical application.
Step 2B: Significantly More
All of the limitations appear to be routine, well-known and conventional and therefore, do not add significantly more.
Therefore, claim 8 does not include any limitations that amount to significantly more and claim 1 is ineligible under 35 U.S.C. 101.
Claims 9-15 perform steps that do not add to significantly more and are also rejected under 35 U.S.C. 101.
Claim 16- Step 1- Determining a Statutory Category
Includes an abstract idea consisting of mental processes (identity determination using biometric comparison) and methods of organizing human activity (data retrieval, formatting, and information delivery).
Step 2A, Prong 2 –Integrated into a Practical Application:
The abstract idea is not integrated into a practical application because:
No technological improvement to computer functioning is claimed. No particular machine or specific hardware architecture is claimed (only generic “at least one processor” and “at least one non-transitory machine readable medium”). No transformation of an article is claimed. The claim contains only field-of-use limitations (applying the abstract idea in the context of digital identification formats), which do not constitute meaningful integration.
Therefore, the abstract idea is not integrated into a practical application.
Step 2B –“Significantly More”
All additional claim elements are well-understood, routine, and conventional (WURC):
Biometric matching is routine and conventional.
Database queries and data retrieval are routine and conventional.
Data formatting according to standardized specifications is routine and conventional.
Network transmission is routine and conventional.
Storage on a non-transitory medium is routine and conventional.
Therefore, claim 16 does not include any limitations that amount to significantly more.
Claims 7-20 perform steps that do not add to significantly more and are also rejected under 35 U.S.C. 101.
Double Patenting
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 § 2146 et seq. 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 filing of a terminal disclaimer by itself is not a complete reply to a nonstatutory double patenting (NSDP) rejection. A complete reply requires that the terminal disclaimer be accompanied by a reply requesting reconsideration of the prior Office action. Even where the NSDP rejection is provisional the reply must be complete. See MPEP § 804, subsection I.B.1. For a reply to a non-final Office action, see 37 CFR 1.111(a). For a reply to final Office action, see 37 CFR 1.113(c). A request for reconsideration while not provided for in 37 CFR 1.113(c) may be filed after final for consideration. See MPEP §§ 706.07(e) and 714.13.
The USPTO Internet website contains terminal disclaimer forms which may be used. Please visit www.uspto.gov/patent/patents-forms. The actual 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/apply/applying-online/eterminal-disclaimer.
Claims 1-20 are rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claims 1-20 of U.S. Patent No. 11,869,294 B2 and over claims 1-20 of U.S. Patent No. 12,118,843 B2. Although the claims at issue are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other because the subject matter of the instant claims is not patentably distinct from the referenced claims. Both sets of claims recite systems and/or methods for generating and providing digital identification objects for checkpoint validation based on biometric identification, wherein:
- Digital identities are maintained and used to generate identification objects;
- Biometric information is used to determine identity;
- Digital identification objects are formatted as required and provided to a checkpoint device;
- Wireless communication and local biometric galleries are utilized.
Therefore, the claims of the present application would have been obvious over the claims of the copending reference(s) and are rejected under the doctrine of obviousness-type double patenting.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
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 (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) 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.
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) 1-20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Trelin et al. US-10534956-B1 in view of Maiga et al. US-20250356705-A1
Regarding claims 1, 8, 13-16, Trelin discloses the following method steps:
determining that a person is located within an area, (Column 5, lines 6-41; determine presence of a person in an area, track movement of a person, predict and/or otherwise estimate where a person will go, and so on. Such an identity system may control access to the identity information using various identification information.);
loading a local gallery with information for the person; determining an identity of the person;(Column 6, lines 14-35; station 103 may be operable to provide one or more digital representations of one or more biometrics from one or more people to the identity system electronic device 102 and receive one or more responses from the identity system electronic device 102.);
Trelin does not specifically teach the method of generating a digital identification object for the person using identity information associated with the identity; and providing the digital identification object. As mentioned above, the reference does teach (Column 7, lines 23-51; the identity system electronic device 102 may receive a digital representation of a biometric for a person, use the digital representation of the biometric to determine and/or otherwise retrieve identity information associated with the person, and use the identity information to perform one or more actions related to the person's presence in the area 105.
The processor 114 may execute one or more sets of instructions stored in the non-transitory storage media 115 to perform various functions, such as storing biometric data for people and associated identity information (such as one or more names, addresses, telephone numbers, notification preferences and/or other notification information, social security numbers, frequent flyer numbers, financial data, financial account numbers, verified ages, boarding pass data, flight data, movement data, historic movement data, and so on), receive one or more digital representations of biometrics, match one or more received digital representations of biometrics to stored biometric data, retrieve identity information associated with stored biometric data matching one or more received digital representations of biometrics, provide retrieved identity information, communicate with the station 103 and/or one or more other electronic devices within and/or outside of the area 105 (such as one or more governmental or private biometric and/or identity databases, payment processing systems, identity document verification systems such as a passport and/or driver's license verification and/or other identity card system, no fly list databases, law enforcement databases, and so on) via the network 104 using the communication unit 116, and so on.)
In the same field of endeavor, Maiga discloses ([0088] Referring to FIG. 14, an electronic access key system 1400 is configured to utilize digital identifications 1490 (e.g., digital or mobile driver's license), which may be referred to as a digital IDs 1490. The digital IDs 1490 are issued by ID issuers 1412 via ID issuer computing systems 1420 to individual persons 1414. The digital IDs 1490 are received by the persons 1414 via personal computing systems 1440 associated therewith. Each of the persons 1414 may present their digital ID 1490 via their personal computing systems 1440 to physical asset operators 1416 via physical asset operator computing systems 1462 and access devices 1464 operated by the physical asset operator 1416 and associated with the physical assets 1466 thereof.)
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, at the time of the invention, to use the teaching of providing a user with the digital object, to allow the user easy access at different entrances/check-points wherein physical identification is typically used.
Regarding claim 2, the combination of Trelin and Maiga teach, wherein providing the digital identification object comprises transmitting the digital identification object to an electronic device. provide retrieved identity information, (Maiga, para 0088; communicate with the station 103 and/or one or more other electronic devices within and/or outside of the area 105).
Regarding claims 3, 4, 17, 18, Trelin teaches, wherein loading the local gallery with the information comprises obtaining the information from a backend; and the backend is located at a different location than the local gallery, (Column 7, lines 23051; communicate with the station 103 and/or one or more other electronic devices within and/or outside of the area 105 (such as one or more governmental or private biometric and/or identity databases, payment processing systems, identity document verification systems such as a passport and/or driver's license verification and/or other identity card system, no fly list databases, law enforcement databases, and so on) via the network 104 using the communication unit 116, and so on.)
Regarding claim 5, Trelin teaches wherein the identity information includes at least one of a name, an address, or an identifier¸ (Column 7, lines 23-51; the identity system electronic device 102 may be any kind of electronic device and/or cloud and/or other computing arrangement and may include one more processors 114, non-transitory storage media 115, communication units 116, and/or other components. The processor 114 may execute one or more sets of instructions stored in the non-transitory storage media 115 to perform various functions, such as storing biometric data for people and associated identity information (such as one or more names, addresses, telephone numbers, notification preferences and/or other notification information, social security numbers, frequent flyer numbers, financial data, financial account numbers, verified ages, boarding pass data, flight data, movement data, historic movement data, and so on), receive one or more digital representations of biometrics, match one or more received digital representations of biometrics to stored biometric data, retrieve identity information associated with stored biometric data matching one or more received digital representations of biometrics, provide retrieved identity information, communicate with the station 103 and/or one or more other electronic devices within and/or outside of the area 105 (such as one or more governmental or private biometric and/or identity databases, payment processing systems, identity document verification systems such as a passport and/or driver's license verification and/or other identity card system, no fly list databases, law enforcement databases, and so on) via the network 104 using the communication unit 116, and so on.)
Regarding claims 6, 12, Trelin teaches wherein providing the digital identification object comprises transmitting the digital identification object wirelessly, (Column 6, lines 53-67; The station 103 may be any kind of electronic device. Examples of such devices include, but are not limited to, one or more desktop computing devices, laptop computing devices, mobile computing devices (wirelessly), wearable devices, tablet computing devices, mobile telephones, smart phones, printers, displays, kiosks, vehicles, kitchen appliances, entertainment system devices, digital media players, and so on.)
Regarding claims 7, 10, Trelin teaches wherein determining the identity of the person is performed using biometric identification, (Column 7, lines 23-51; the identity system electronic device 102 may receive a digital representation of a biometric for a person, use the digital representation of the biometric to determine and/or otherwise retrieve identity information associated with the person, and use the identity information to perform one or more actions related to the person's presence in the area 105.
The processor 114 may execute one or more sets of instructions stored in the non-transitory storage media 115 to perform various functions, such as storing biometric data for people and associated identity information (such as one or more names, addresses, telephone numbers, notification preferences and/or other notification information, social security numbers, frequent flyer numbers, financial data, financial account numbers, verified ages, boarding pass data, flight data, movement data, historic movement data, and so on), receive one or more digital representations of biometrics, match one or more received digital representations of biometrics to stored biometric data, retrieve identity information associated with stored biometric data matching one or more received digital representations of biometrics, provide retrieved identity information, communicate with the station 103 and/or one or more other electronic devices within and/or outside of the area 105 (such as one or more governmental or private biometric and/or identity databases, payment processing systems, identity document verification systems such as a passport and/or driver's license verification and/or other identity card system, no fly list databases, law enforcement databases, and so on) via the network 104 using the communication unit 116, and so on.)
Regarding claims 9, 11, Trelin teaches wherein the digital identification object information is specified in the at least one specification, (Column 21, lines 51-60, The present disclosure further recognizes that the entities who collect, analyze, store, and/or otherwise use such biometric and/or other personal data should comply with well-established privacy policies and/or privacy practices.)
Regarding claims 19, Trelin teaches further comprising fifth instructions stored in the at least one non-transitory machine readable medium and executable by the at least one processor to determine whether to allow the person access via a checkpoint, (Column 9, lines 44-35, FIG. 3B illustrates a second example implementation of the system 100 of FIG. 1. In this example, a station 303B at an area 305B includes an integrated biometric reader device 313B configured as a fingerprint scanner. The biometric reader device 313B may obtain digital representation of one or more fingerprints from a person 320B. For example, the station 303B may be a check-in kiosk at a ticketing counter at an airport that may use the biometric reader device 313B to capture one or more digital representations of one or more fingerprints of the person 320B as the person 320B checks in for a flight, drops off check luggage, pays to upgrade flight options, and so on.)
Regarding claims 20, Trelin teaches wherein the digital representation of the biometric comprises at least one of a fingerprint, a palm print, a retina image, an iris image, or an image of at least a portion of a face, (Column 10, lines 49-63; FIG. 3E illustrates a fifth example implementation of the system 100 of FIG. 1. In this example, a station 303E may include an integrated biometric reader device 313E configured as a fingerprint scanner at an area 305E that controls entrance to a location, such as an airport lounge. A person 320E may provide one or more fingerprints via the fingerprint scanner to access identity information (such as a frequent flyer status) that may indicate whether or not the person is authorized to enter the airport lounge. If so, portions of the identity information that the person has authorized to be shared with the airport lounge may be provided to the airport lounge as the person enters. This may include age verification, food/drink and/or other preferences, payment information, flight data for order scheduling purposes, and so on.)
Relevant Prior Art
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
The following references, which deal with digital identification systems:
Dhanoa et al. (US 11432149 B1);
Prokupets (US 20030023874 A1);
Rodriguez et al. (US 20180173906 A1);
Szigeti (US 20230083426 A1); and
Trelin (US Pat. 11935057)
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to DAVETTA W GOINS whose telephone number is (571)272-2957. The examiner can normally be reached Monday thru Friday; 7:30 AM to 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.
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.
/DAVETTA W GOINS/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2689
Prosecution Insights