DETAILED ACTION
Acknowledgements
This Office Action is in response to Applicant’s correspondence filed on 10/10/25.
The Examiner notes that citations to United States Patent Application Publication paragraphs are formatted as [####], #### representing the paragraph number.
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.
Status of Claims
Claims 1, 3-10 are currently pending.
Claims 1, 3-10 are rejected as set forth below.
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 .
Response to Arguments
Claim Rejections - 35 U.S.C. § 101
Applicant’s arguments with respect to claim(s) 1, 3-10 have been fully considered and are persuasive. The rejection (and corresponding rejections to its dependent claims, if applicable) is withdrawn.
Claim Rejections - 35 U.S.C. § 103
Applicant’s arguments with respect to claim(s) 1, 3-10 have been fully considered but are not persuasive. The rejection (and corresponding rejections to its dependent claims, if applicable) is maintained.
Applicant contends the cited art fails to teach or suggest storing multiple attributes and selecting the attributes to be transmitted based on a usage request. The Examiner respectfully disagrees. Freeman teaches the privilege record storing multiple types of tickets, e.g. flight tickets and Super Bowl tickets, associated with the individual, and selecting the ticket information to be transmitted to the requestor based on the type of usage request ([0035], [0042]).
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112(b)
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(b):
(b) CONCLUSION.—The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph:
The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the applicant regards as his invention.
Claims 1, 3-10 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor (or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the applicant), regards as the invention.
As per claims 1, 9-10, the limitation “store NFT (non-fungible token) biometric information associating biometric information corresponding to a characteristic of a person with a non-fungible token and attribute information including a plurality of attributes related to the person in association with each other” renders the scope of the claim indefinite because it is grammatically unclear. It is unclear what the phrase “in association with each other” is modifying, i.e. if it is modifying the biometric information and the attribute information or the plurality of attributes related to the person.
By virtue of their dependence, the dependent claims are similarly rejected.
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 1, 3-4, 6-10 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over United States Patent Application Publication No. 20040162984 to Freeman in view of United States Patent Application Publication No. 20220069996 to Xue and United States Patent Application Publication No. 20020112171 to Ginter.
As per claims 1, 9-10, Freeman teaches:
An information management apparatus comprising: at least one memory configured to store instructions; and at least one processor configured to execute the instructions to: store biometric information associating biometric information corresponding to a characteristic of a person and attribute information including a plurality of attributes related to the person in association with each other; ([0035], “This privilege certificate is stored (block 180) in a trusted privilege authority (TPA) database contained in a TPA computer 182 (FIG. 4), and incorporates information identifying the granted individual as well as information relating to the requested privilege. For example, if the agent were producing a travel itinerary for the requesting individual, the privilege certificate would include the travel information as well as a reference to the identity certificate that was retrieved from the TIA database and would incorporate a pointer to the stored data, including the encrypted signature, biometric(s) data, and any other data that might be included in the storage location of block 180. Each Trusted Privilege Authority may maintain one or more TPA databases as shown in block 180.”; [0042], “It is important to note that the loss of a privilege document presents no difficulty to the holder, for the privilege system of this invention will always have a record of the privileges granted, such as tickets for the Super Bowl, or for a particular aircraft flight.”, The Examiner notes that the privilege record stores multiple types of tickets, e.g. flight tickets and Super Bowl tickets, associated with the individual, and selects the ticket information to be transmitted to the requestor based on the type of usage request.)
accept a usage request from an external device, the usage request being a request for use of biometric information associating biometric information corresponding to a characteristic of a person; ([0033]-[0034], “The next step of the process, illustrated at block 150, occurs when a requester 152 (FIG. 4), who professes to be the individual who is participating in the system, requests a privilege from any agent or representative of any Trusted Privilege Authority authorized by the Trusted Identity Authority. In this situation, the identity of the requester would have to be established to the satisfaction of the TPA before the privilege, which, for example, may be the granting of a passport or the purchase of airline tickets, will be granted. The request is presented to the agent or representative (Trusted Privilege Authority, or TPA), who has access to the TIA database through the agent's local computer 154 (FIG. 4). Before granting a requested privilege, the TPA agent must validate the requester's right to the privilege, as shown in block 160. To do this, the agent securely obtains the requester's identity certificate with its included biometrics, from the TIA database (block 130) and computer 118.”)
select at least one attribute from the attribute information based on the usage request; transmit the biometric information and an attribute of the person to a sender of the accepted usage request based on the usage request, the attribute being managed in association with the biometric information and the at least one attribute selected from the attribute information to a sender of the accepted usage request; transmit the biometric information and the attribute of the person. ([0034]-[0035], “To do this, the agent securely obtains the requester's identity certificate with its included biometrics, from the TIA database (block 130) and computer 118. If desired, the trusted privilege authority may require identifying or other information in addition to the data provided by the retrieved identity certificate, to allow it to enforce more stringent identity checks, as shown in block 172. This privilege certificate is stored (block 180) in a trusted privilege authority (TPA) database contained in a TPA computer 182 (FIG. 4), and incorporates information identifying the granted individual as well as information relating to the requested privilege. For example, if the agent were producing a travel itinerary for the requesting individual, the privilege certificate would include the travel information as well as a reference to the identity certificate that was retrieved from the TIA database and would incorporate a pointer to the stored data, including the encrypted signature, biometric(s) data, and any other data that might be included in the storage location of block 180.”; [0042], “It is important to note that the loss of a privilege document presents no difficulty to the holder, for the privilege system of this invention will always have a record of the privileges granted, such as tickets for the Super Bowl, or for a particular aircraft flight.”, The Examiner notes that the privilege record stores multiple types of tickets, e.g. flight tickets and Super Bowl tickets, associated with the individual, and selects the ticket information to be transmitted to the requestor based on the type of usage request.)
wherein transmission of the biometric information and the attribute of the person is permitted by license information; ([0034], “Before granting a requested privilege, the TPA agent must validate the requester's right to the privilege, as shown in block 160. To do this, the agent securely obtains the requester's identity certificate with its included biometrics, from the TIA database (block 130) and computer 118. When this is retrieved and the identity of the requester is verified to the satisfaction of the agent, the agent, on behalf of the TPA, grants the requested privilege, as indicated at block 170. The verification of identity may, for example, be a comparison of the biometric(s), such as a photograph, received from the TIA database with the requester.”)
Freeman does not explicitly teach, but Xue teaches:
storing and associating biometric information corresponding to a characteristic of a person with a non-fungible token; ([0011], “The memory further includes an information encoder configured to encode customization information to obtain a non-fungible token (NFT) customized multimedia content and a non-fungible token (NFT) supplement metadata. The customization information comprises non-fungible token (NFT) owner specified footage related information (owner information, copyright information, intellectual property information, change instruction of the original work, etc.), personal information (include name, signature, address, phone number, place of birth, etc.), and/or personal biometric information (include a height, a weight, a blood type, an eye color, a fingerprint, iris patterns, DNA information, etc.).”)
One of ordinary skill in the art would have recognized that applying the known technique of Xue to the known invention of Freeman would have yielded predictable results and resulted in an improved invention. It would have been recognized that the application of the technique would have yielded predictable results because the level of ordinary skill in the art demonstrated by the references applied shows the ability to incorporate such database features into a similar invention. Further, it would have been recognized by those of ordinary skill in the art that modifying the invention to associate biometric information corresponding to a characteristic of a person with a non-fungible token results in an improved invention because applying said technique leverages the advantages of storing data in NFT’s, i.e. enhanced security through blockchain technology and verifiable ownership and authenticity, thus improving the overall security of the invention.
Freeman as modified does not explicitly teach, but Ginter teaches:
license information indicating a range of licensed use; ([1066]-[1069], “Alternatively, traveling object PERCs 808 may contain or reference budget records with, for example: (a) budget(s) reflecting previously purchased rights or credit for future licensing or purchasing and enabling at least one or more types of object content usage, and/or (b) budget(s) that employ (and may debit) available credit(s) stored on and managed by the local VDE node in order to enable object content use, and/or (c) budget(s) reflecting one or more maximum usage criteria before a report to a local VDE node (and, optionally, also a report to a clearinghouse) is required and which may be followed by a reset allowing further usage, and/or modification of one or more of the original one or more budget(s).”)
One of ordinary skill in the art would have recognized that applying the known technique of Ginter to the known invention of Freeman as modified would have yielded predictable results and resulted in an improved invention. It would have been recognized that the application of the technique would have yielded predictable results because the level of ordinary skill in the art demonstrated by the references applied shows the ability to incorporate such digital rights management features into a similar invention. Further, it would have been recognized by those of ordinary skill in the art that modifying the license information to indicate a range of licensed use results in an improved invention because applying said technique increases the granularity of the license information and how much control the license information has over the protected content, thus improving the overall security of the invention.
As per claim 3, Freeman teaches:
select the attribute according to a type of the sender of the usage request. ([0034]-[0035]; [0042])
As per claim 4, Xue teaches:
NFT biometric information; ([0011])
Freeman teaches:
accept information showing a purpose of the biometric information together with the usage request; and select the attribute according to the purpose of the biometric information. ([0034]-[0035])
As per claim 6, Freeman teaches:
wherein the biometric information is a feature value corresponding to a physical characteristic of the person calculated based on image data. ([0030], “In a preferred form of the invention, the biometric data is a photograph, but may also, or alternatively, include fingerprints, footprints, iris scans, retina scans, DNA information, or the like.”)
As per claim 7, Xue teaches:
NFT biometric information; ([0011])
Freeman teaches:
wherein the biometric information is image data corresponding to a physical characteristic of the person; calculate a feature value based on the image data; and transmit the biometric information including the calculated feature value; ([0030]-[0031], “If the submitted identity is a renewal, or is authenticated, a "signature" is added to the assembled data, and a new digital identity certificate is generated (block 120) using, for example, the X.509 standard. The added signature preferably is in the form of a cryptographic "hash" which is derived from, and corresponds to, the assembled data.”)
As per claim 8:
Applicant attempts to further limit the method by describing characteristics of the attribute. However, this is representative of non-functional descriptive material as characteristics of the attribute does not result in a functional relationship with the method and therefore cannot be used to differentiate Applicant's invention from the prior art invention. See MPEP 2111.05; In re Gulack, 217 USPQ 401 (Fed. Cir. 1983) (“When descriptive material is not functionally related to the substrate, the descriptive material will not distinguish the invention from the prior art in terms of patentability.”). Specifically, the steps transmitting/selecting the attribute is carried out the same way regardless of the type of attribute: there is no evidence the characteristics of the attribute changes the efficiency or the accuracy or any other characteristic of the transmitting/selecting. See Ex Parte Nehls, 88 USPQ2d 1883 (BPAI 2008) (“Here, the descriptive material (SEQ ID NOs) recited in the claims is not functional material like the data structures in Lowry. There is no evidence that SEQ ID NOs 9-1008 functionally affect the process of comparing a target sequence to a database by changing the efficiency or accuracy or any other characteristic of the comparison. Rather, the SEQ ID NOs are merely information being manipulated by a computer; the SEQ ID NOs are inputs used by a computer program that calculates the degree of similarity between a target sequence and each of the sequences in a database. The specific SEQ ID NOs recited in the claims do not affect how the method of the prior art is performed – the method is carried out the same way regardless of which specific sequences are included in the database (emphasis added).”)
Claim 5 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over United States Patent Application Publication No. 20040162984 to Freeman in view of United States Patent Application Publication No. 20220069996 to Xue and United States Patent Application Publication No. 20020112171 to Ginter, and further in view of United States Patent Application Publication No. 20200005284 to Vijayan.
As per claim 5, Freeman teaches:
NFT biometric information; ([0011])
Freeman as modified does not explicitly teach, but Vijayan teaches:
accept payment of a usage fee for the NFT information from the sender of the usage request; and pay a fee corresponding to the usage fee to an NFT market that creates the non-fungible token, thereby performing payment of the fee to a personal device having registered the information via the NFT market. ([0109], “The manner in which content creators that mint an NFT can receive residual royalty payments based upon a smart contract underlying an NFT can be appreciated with reference to FIG. 6. The process 600 commences when a content creator decides to issue an NFT based upon a piece of content 602. The NFT is created by defining a smart contract that includes programmatic digital right management 604 that determines the manner in which the NFT is to be used (e.g. collectible, entitles content access, digital ticket, exchangeable for a discount, etc.) and rules 606 related to residual payments in the event of particular transactions (e.g. change of ownership).”)
One of ordinary skill in the art would have recognized that applying the known technique of Vijayan to the known invention of Freeman as modified would have yielded predictable results and resulted in an improved invention. It would have been recognized that the application of the technique would have yielded predictable results because the level of ordinary skill in the art demonstrated by the references applied shows the ability to incorporate such NFT features into a similar invention. Further, it would have been recognized by those of ordinary skill in the art that modifying the invention to accept payment of a usage fee for the NFT information, i.e. NFT biometric information, from the sender of the usage request; and pay a fee corresponding to the usage fee to an NFT market that creates the non-fungible token, thereby performing payment of the fee to a personal device having registered the information via the NFT market, results in an improved invention because applying said technique ensures that the personal device that registered the biometric information via the NFT market is properly compensated, thus improving the overall usability of the invention.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure:
United States Patent Application Publication No. 20030177102 to Robinson discloses a system and method of biometric-based age verification for authorizing presenter access of age-restricted good or services between an age presenter and an age verifier. System presenters register at least one biometric identifier, at least one identification number, personal age-verifying data, and personal identity-verifying data. A presenter presents a biometric sample obtained from the presenter's person and the presenter's system ID number to conduct age verifications for purchase of or access to age-restricted goods or services. This data is used to authenticate the presenter's age and authorize access to purchase or obtain age-restricted goods or services by matching the presented transaction biometric with at least one registered biometric template and without the use of a man-made identity token.
Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP § 706.07(a). Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a).
A shortened statutory period for reply to this final action is set to expire THREE MONTHS from the mailing date of this action. In the event a first reply is filed within TWO MONTHS of the mailing date of this final action and the advisory action is not mailed until after the end of the THREE-MONTH shortened statutory period, then the shortened statutory period will expire on the date the advisory action is mailed, and any nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) pursuant to 37 CFR 1.136(a) will be calculated from the mailing date of the advisory action. In no event, however, will the statutory period for reply expire later than SIX MONTHS from the mailing date of this final action.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to JAY HUANG whose telephone number is (408)918-9799. The examiner can normally be reached 9:00a - 5:30p PT.
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, Anita Coupe can be reached at (571) 270-3614. 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.
/JAY HUANG/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3619