DETAILED ACTION
This office action is in response to the correspondence filed on 08/05/2024. Claims 1-16 are pending and are examined.
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
Applicant's claim for the benefit of a prior-filed application under 35 U.S.C. 119(e) or under 35 U.S.C. 120, 121, 365(c), or 386(c) is acknowledged.
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement (IDS) was submitted on 08/05/2024. The submission is in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statement is being considered by the examiner.
Claim Objections
Claims 1-4, 712, and 14 are objected to because of the following informalities:
Claims 1-4, 712, and 14, all the limitations with “when…” should be changed to “in response to” to avoid conditional claim interpretation.
Appropriate correction is required.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
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 1-8, 14, and 16 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 pre-AIA the applicant regards as the invention.
Regarding claims 1-8 and 16, specifically independent claims 1 and 16, taking claim 1 as exemplary, “the input identification information” was never recited before. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
Examiner suggests that “the identification information” can be used instead.
Regarding claim 14, “display display data similar to display data displayed on a display apparatus of an information terminal”, it is unclear what “similar” in this context mean. Please further clarify the specifics on how “similar” is defined.
Appropriate correction is required.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
The following is a quotation of the appropriate paragraphs of 35 U.S.C. 102 that form the basis for the rejections under this section made in this Office action:
A person shall be entitled to a patent unless –
(a)(1) the claimed invention was patented, described in a printed publication, or in public use, on sale or otherwise available to the public before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
(a)(2) the claimed invention was described in a patent issued under section 151, or in an application for patent published or deemed published under section 122(b), in which the patent or application, as the case may be, names another inventor and was effectively filed before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claims 1-3, 5-11, and 13-15 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) as being anticipated by Caffey (US Pat No. 12,223,069 B1, referred to as Caffey).
Regarding claims 1 and 9, taking claim 1 as exemplary, Caffey anticipates,
[Claim 1] (Currently Amended) A monitoring system comprising:
at least one memory storing instructions, and (Caffey: Coln. 18, ls. 23-38)
at least one processor configured to execute the instructions to; (Caffey: Coln. 18, ls. 23-38)
receive an instruction to access data including confidential information and identification information that is used to identify a user who uses the data; (Caffey: Claim 1; Coln. 13, ls. 44-55; when a new face is detected in the camera's field of view or frame (receive data access instruction), the invention checks and tracks the new face (identification information) to determine if it is a registered user of the present invention.)
display the data when the input identification information on the user matches identification information associated with a user who is permitted to view the data; and (Caffey: Claim 1; if the person is identified as the authorized user (permitted user), activating the display to allow the authorized user to perform the functions that the authorized user can perform on the file.)
perform security processing in accordance with a confidential level associated with the data in advance while the data is being displayed. (Caffey: Coln. 2, ls. 51-59; a secure environment must be protected at all times because identifying a person in the beginning of a document viewing/editing is not enough. A solution according to the present invention is that during the viewing/editing of the document, the identification process (security processing) must run in the back ground and yet provide the highest possible level of security by performing an identification screening every X seconds. In addition, a backup identification is offered as a precaution in the event that the continuous identification fails. Coln. 1, ls. 55-59; several secure profiles-to control the security level of the documents, for example in a public place, a person may use the most secure setting and at the home least secure. Secure profiles may vary depending on location.)
Regarding claims 2 and 10, taking claim 2 as exemplary, Caffey anticipates,
[Claim 2] (Currently Amended) The monitoring system according to claim 1, wherein the at least one processor is further configured to execute the instructions to change a timing when a warning operation is executed in accordance with the confidential level associated with the data in advance. (Caffey: Coln. 15, ls. 40-43; after the user defined time (e.g. 5 seconds) (timing) has elapsed, the devices shows a warning on the screen that notifies the owner that someone else is looking at his phone and shows an alert on the screen. Coln. 1, ls. 55-59; several secure profiles-to control the security level of the documents, for example in a public place, a person may use the most secure setting (less time) and at the home least secure (more time). Secure profiles may vary depending on location. Coln. 14, ls. 41-47; different documents typically need different levels of security. For this purpose, secure profiles can be used. They will determine the security level of each document and of all secure environments; for example, in a public place the security level may be the highest, whereas at home it may be the lowest.)
Regarding claims 3 and 11, taking claim 3 as exemplary, Caffey anticipates,
[Claim 3] (Currently Amended) The monitoring system according to claim 2, wherein the at least one processor is further configured to execute the instructions to output a warning message when the data is first displayed and regularly outputs the warning message while the data is being displayed. (Caffey: Fig. 17.16; Fig. 17.33; Coln. 2, ls. 51-59; a secure environment must be protected at all times because identifying a person in the beginning of a document viewing/editing is not enough. A solution according to the present invention is that during the viewing/editing of the document, the identification process must run in the back ground and yet provide the highest possible level of security by performing an identification screening every X seconds (regularly screen and can output a warning message). In addition, a backup identification is offered as a precaution in the event that the continuous identification fails. Coln. 15, ls. 40-43; after the user defined time (e.g. 5 seconds) has elapsed, the devices shows a warning on the screen that notifies the owner that someone else is looking at his phone and shows an alert on the screen.)
Regarding claims 5 and 13, taking claim 5 as exemplary, Caffey anticipates,
[Claim 5] (Currently Amended) The monitoring system according to claim 3, wherein the at least one processor is further configured to execute the instructions to output the warning message in a case where a person has been detected by a sensor after the data is first displayed. (Caffey: Fig. 17.16; this screen displays when an unauthorized viewer looks at a document that a user has open inside of the Smart Eye app. Coln. 13, ls. 46-49: when a new face is detected in the camera's (sensor) field of view or frame, the invention checks and tracks the new face to determine if it is a registered user of the present invention.)
Regarding claim 6, Caffey anticipates,
[Claim 6] (Original) The monitoring system according to claim 5,
wherein the sensor is at least one of a camera, a voice sensor, a motion sensor, or a carbon dioxide detection sensor. (Caffey: Coln. 13, ls. 46-49: when a new face is detected in the camera's field of view or frame, the invention checks and tracks the new face to determine if it is a registered user of the present invention.)
Regarding claim 7, Caffey anticipates,
[Claim 7] (Currently Amended) The monitoring system according to claim 1,
wherein the at least one processor is further configured to execute the instructions to display a screen for enabling the identification information to be input when a place where the data is stored or address information of the data matches predetermined information. (Caffey: Coln. 20, ls. 24-29; the user can select a location where the selects the address of the receiver's employer, then the receiver can only open the document at that address.)
Regarding claim 8, Caffey anticipates,
[Claim 8] (Currently Amended) The monitoring system according to claim 1, wherein the at least one processor is further configured to execute the instructions to conceal the data until when it is determined that the identification information matches the identification information associated with the user who is permitted to view the data. (Caffey: Claim 1; if the person is identified as the authorized user, activating the display to allow the authorized user to perform the functions that the authorized user can perform on the file (data is not activated/concealed before the match).)
Regarding claim 14, Caffey anticipates,
[Claim 14] (Currently Amended) A communication apparatus comprising:
at least one memory storing instructions, and (Caffey: Coln. 18, ls. 23-38)
at least one processor configured to execute the instructions to; (Caffey: Coln. 18, ls. 23-38)
receive an instruction to access data; and (Caffey: Claim 1; Coln. 13, ls. 44-55; when a new face is detected in the camera's field of view or frame (receive data access instruction), the invention checks and tracks the new face to determine if it is a registered user of the present invention.)
display display data similar to display data displayed on a display apparatus of an information terminal, (Caffey: Claim 1; if the person is identified as the authorized user, activating the display to allow the authorized user to perform the functions that the authorized user can perform on the file. Coln. 18, ls. 28-32; a desktop computer 1502, or any other type of device may have an associated display device or screen, through which a document or any other information may be displayed to a user.)
display, when the data is confidential information, a warning message, and the timing of displaying the warning message on the display apparatus of the information terminal being varied in
accordance with a confidential level associated with the data. (Caffey: Coln. 15, ls. 40-43; after the user defined time (e.g. 5 seconds) (timing) has elapsed, the devices shows a warning on the screen that notifies the owner that someone else is looking at his phone and shows an alert on the screen. Coln. 17, ls. 15-19; the owner will have the option to pause "confidentiality" and "continuous identification" to show the document to the companion. User will be able to change the delay and related options.)
Regarding claim 15, Caffey anticipates,
[Claim 15] (Currently Amended) The communication apparatus according to claim 14, wherein the at least one processor is further configured to execute the instructions to receive the display data transmitted from the information terminal and displays the received display data. (Caffey: Claim 1; if the person is identified as the authorized user (permitted user), activating the display to allow the authorized user to perform the functions that the authorized user can perform on the file. Coln. 18, ls. 28-32; a desktop computer 1502, or any other type of device may have an associated display device or screen, through which a document or any other information may be displayed to a user.)
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 16 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Caffey, in view of Erofeev et al. (US Pub No. 20140281516 A1, referred to as Erofeev).
Regarding claim 16, Caffey discloses,
[Claim 16] (Original) A monitoring method comprising:
receiving an instruction to access data; (Caffey: Claim 1; Coln. 13, ls. 44-55; when a new face is detected in the camera's field of view or frame (receive data access instruction), the invention checks and tracks the new face to determine if it is a registered user of the present invention.)
…receiving, in a case where the data is the confidential information, identification information for identifying a user who uses the data; (Caffey: Claim 1; Coln. 13, ls. 44-55; when a new face is detected in the camera's field of view or frame (receive data access instruction), the invention checks and tracks the new face (identification information) to determine if it is a registered user of the present invention.)
displaying the data in a case where the input identification information on the user matches identification information associated with a user who is allowed to view the data; and (Caffey: Claim 1; if the person is identified as the authorized user (permitted user), activating the display to allow the authorized user to perform the functions that the authorized user can perform on the file.)
performing security processing in accordance with a confidential level associated with the data in advance while the data is being displayed. (Caffey: Coln. 2, ls. 51-59; a secure environment must be protected at all times because identifying a person in the beginning of a document viewing/editing is not enough. A solution according to the present invention is that during the viewing/editing of the document, the identification process (security processing) must run in the back ground and yet provide the highest possible level of security by performing an identification screening every X seconds. In addition, a backup identification is offered as a precaution in the event that the continuous identification fails. Coln. 1, ls. 55-59; several secure profiles-to control the security level of the documents, for example in a public place, a person may use the most secure setting and at the home least secure. Secure profiles may vary depending on location.)
Caffey does not explicitly disclose, however Erofeev teaches,
…determining whether or not the data is confidential information; (Erofeev: Claim 1; receiving a request to access a file stored in primary storage; determining based, at least in part, on a file extension of the file whether the file is an encrypted file (confidential information).)
It would have been obvious to one ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to implement the teachings of Erofeev into the teachings of Caffey with a motivation to provide users with access to decrypted file in more efficient manner by determining whether the user is authorized to access a file based on authentication information without prompting the user for authentication information in response to the request to access the file.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claim 12 is objected to as being dependent upon rejected base claims, but would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
The following is an examiner’s statement of reasons for allowance:
Although prior arts Caffey and Erofeev above disclose all the limitations of the prior claims (see rejections above), none of the prior arts of record alone or in combination discloses outputting a warning message when the data that has been non-activated is activated after an elapse of a predetermined period of time since the data was first displayed.as described in the claims.
At the effective filing date of the application, the above limitations would not have been obvious over the prior arts of record.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Pantazelos; George US-PGPUB US 20180083978 A1 Conditional delivery of content over a communication network including social sharing and video conference applications using facial recognition
Duffy; David Michael et al. US-PGPUB US 20210294926 A1 User interface manipulation in a foldable screen device
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to KA SHAN CHOY whose telephone number is (571) 272-1569. The examiner can normally be reached on MON - FRI: 9AM-5:30PM EST Alternate Fridays.
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, Joseph Hirl can be reached on (571) 272-3685. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300.
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). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative or access to the automated information system, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000.
/KA SHAN CHOY/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2435