DETAILED ACTION
The present Office Action is in response to an application filed on 08/09/2024 wherein claims 1-15 are pending and ready for examination.
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 statements (IDSs) submitted on 08/09/2024 and 04/17/2025 are being considered by the examiner.
Drawings
The drawings are objected to because in FIG. 2, the second (reference #1) and fourth (reference #4) blocks present typographical errors: “CAMEAR” should be “CAMERA”, and “STIMULULATION APPARATUS” should be “STIMULATION APPARATUS”. Corrected drawing sheets in compliance with 37 CFR 1.121(d) are required in reply to the Office action to avoid abandonment of the application. Any amended replacement drawing sheet should include all of the figures appearing on the immediate prior version of the sheet, even if only one figure is being amended. The figure or figure number of an amended drawing should not be labeled as “amended.” If a drawing figure is to be canceled, the appropriate figure must be removed from the replacement sheet, and where necessary, the remaining figures must be renumbered and appropriate changes made to the brief description of the several views of the drawings for consistency. Additional replacement sheets may be necessary to show the renumbering of the remaining figures. Each drawing sheet submitted after the filing date of an application must be labeled in the top margin as either “Replacement Sheet” or “New Sheet” pursuant to 37 CFR 1.121(d). If the changes are not accepted by the examiner, the applicant will be notified and informed of any required corrective action in the next Office action. The objection to the drawings will not be held in abeyance.
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.
Regarding claim 12, in line 5 the use of "and/or" renders the claim indefinite because the intended scope of the claim is unclear.
Regarding claim 13, line 5 recites the limitation "the predetermined direction". There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim as the claim depends on claim 11, not 12.
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, 14 and 15 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kim et al. (US 20150294464 A1), hereinafter Kim, in view of Lowe et al. (US 10599934 B1), hereinafter Lowe.
Regarding claim 1, Kim discloses an information processing apparatus (see FIG. 1, [0048-49]) comprising:
at least one memory configured to store instructions; and at least one processor configured to execute the instructions (control program is stored in a memory equipped in a control unit of the iris recognition camera– see [0094]) to:
apply a stimulus including at least one of light, (“eye blinking” – see [0050]) of a target person (an external signal generator, such as an indicator LED and/or a voice guider configured to generate voice guidance, may be further mounted [on the iris recognition camera] to induce eye blinking of a user – see [0048-53]); and
determine whether or not the target person is a living body, on the basis of a correlation between the stimulus and the vital reaction that occurs in the target person to which the stimulus is applied (when captured for iris identification, a user may be induced to blink according to indicator LED flickering; if a user iris is captured while blinking in accordance with the indicator LED or voice guidance from the voice guider, the size of an iris area in the captured image changes, and it can be determined whether the iris is that of a living eye or a fake iris by measuring change in the iris area in the image – see {0081-0086] and FIG. 10; see also [0087-88] and FIG. 11; other eye measurement methods (e.g., vital reactions such as pupil/iris ratio due to reflection, gaze point) are discussed in Table 1 and [0097-0116]).
Kim fails to disclose using a picture as a stimulus.
However, Lowe discloses a system and method for preventing access to a secure system based on determining a captured video to be an alternative representation of a live person, the method including presenting a stimulus on a user interface of a device (see abstract) wherein the stimulus includes a picture (a stimulus can presented by playing back a pre-rendered video file; a stimulus may be a moving animation that includes high contrast; warping, convergence, waves, looming illusions, distortion, fading, blur, color, facial image, change in illumination intensity, or other aspects – see col. 6, line 45 through col. 8, line 28).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the apparatus in Kim to include a picture as stimulus, as taught by Lowe. One would have been motivated to make such a combination because stimuli can be presented in a way that is seamless to a user's other interactions and a stimuli type or approach can be selected based on usability or visual appearance concerns, with a goal of reducing visual jarring for the user, while still generating a detectable response, as recognized by Lowe (see col. 8, lines 18-28).
Regarding claim 2, Kim and Lowe disclose all the claimed subject matter recited in claim 1 above. Furthermore, Kim discloses the information processing apparatus, wherein the at least one processor is configured to execute the instructions to apply the stimulus to a first part (“iris”/”pupil”) of the target person, and the correlation includes a correlation between the stimulus and the vital reaction in a second part (“eye blinking”, which is a reaction of the eyelids) of the target person that is different from the first part to which the stimulus is applied (capturing an iris image while turning ON/OFF the light source mounted on the front side or one side of the camera with a predetermined cycle, measuring a ratio of pupil size to iris size in the captured iris image, determining that the iris is that of a living eye if there is a change in the ratio of pupil size to iris size, capturing an iris image while turning ON/OFF the IR LEDs mounted on the front side or one side of the camera with a predetermined cycle, recognizing IR LEDs reflected in the iris and/or the pupil in the captured iris image, determining whether the iris is that of a living eye by measuring a change in the number or location of IR LEDs reflected in the iris and/or the pupil, capturing an iris image while inducing eye blinking using the external signal generator such as the indicator LED and/or the voice guider, measuring a change in iris area in the captured iris image, and determining that the iris is that of a living eye if there is a change in the iris area – see [0108]; see also [0081-86]).
Regarding claim 3, Kim and Lowe disclose all the claimed subject matter recited in claim 1 above. Furthermore, Kim discloses the information processing apparatus, wherein the vital reaction includes an eye blink (generate voice guidance, so as to induce a user to blink during a predetermined cycle when capturing an iris image – see [0082]; when captured for iris identification, a user may be induced to blink according to indicator LED flickering – see [0083]).
Regarding claim 14, all limitations correspond to the method performed by the apparatus of claim 1. Therefore, claim 14 is being rejected on the same basis as claim 1.
Regarding claim 15, Kim discloses a non-statutory recording medium on which a computer program that allows a computer to execute an information processing method is recorded (a control program according to the present invention, and the control program is stored in a memory equipped in a control unit of the iris recognition camera – see [0094]). The remaining limitations of claim 15 are similar in scope to those of claim 1. Therefore, claim 15 is rejected for the same reasons as set forth in the rejection of claim 1 above.
Claim 4 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kim et al. (US 20150294464 A1), and Lowe et al. (US 10599934 B1), as applied to claim 3 above, and further in view of Kim et al. (US 20150324981 A1), hereinafter Kim’981, and Ravindran et al. (US 10311645 B1), hereinafter Ravindran.
Regarding claim 4, Kim and Lowe disclose all the claimed subject matter recited in claim 3 above.
Furthermore, Kim discloses the iris area of a living eye definitely changes when blinking for a predetermined time (see [0088] and FIG. 11).
Lowe discloses the information processing apparatus, wherein the at least one processor is configured to execute the instructions to apply the stimulus by outputting a picture [[animation/facial image]], toward the target person, and the correlation includes a correlation between the stimulus and at least one of a time of the eye blink (“blink event”) (presenting different types of stimuli including animations - see col. 6, lines 57-64; and facial images as they have higher tracking affinity than other types of stimuli - see col. 8, lines 11-17; and, blink events may be determined to be predictable with specific stimulus velocity and cycle configurations, and accordingly, blink events can be part of expected/observed responses, and used for comparison - see col. 9, line 48-51).
Kim and Lowe fail to disclose a picture of a living body blinking, toward the target person, and the correlation includes a correlation between the stimulus and a frequency of the eye blink.
Kim’981 discloses an electronic device for providing bioeffect image (see abstract) including outputting a picture of a , to induce blinking (a memory unit included in a display driver may store second image data BIO_RGB for a behavior inducing image for inducing a predetermined behavior of a user; the behavior inducing image may be a conformity image or a blinking inducing image that induces a user to blink eyes of the user based on a conformity effect – see [0132-0135], FIG. 7).
Kim’981 fails to disclose the blinking in the image is done by a living body.
However, Ravindran discloses a system and method for presenting subjects with images or video in a virtual or augmented reality system and monitoring in real time the behaviors and responses of the subject (see abstract) wherein the actions in the images are performed by a living body (the system may provide prompts including imitative model (e.g., a therapist or supervisor in real life, or alternatively as an avatar in the virtual environment, demonstrating a desired action so that the user can imitate – see col. 9, lines 33-36).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the apparatus in Kim to include the information processing apparatus, wherein the at least one processor is configured to execute the instructions to apply the stimulus by outputting a picture of an animation/facial image, toward the target person, and the correlation includes a correlation between the stimulus and at least one of a time of the eye blink, as taught by Lowe; outputting a picture of blinking, toward the target person, as taught by Kim’981; and, actions in the images are performed by a living body, as taught by Ravindran. One would have been motivated to make such a combination because a stimuli type or approach can be selected based on usability or visual appearance concerns, as recognized by Lowe (see col. 8, lines 18-28); to induce a behavior of the user, for example, eye-blinking of the user by the conformity effect or subliminal learning, as recognized by Kim’981 (see [0135]); and, to provide prompts of varying supportiveness, as recognized by Ravindran (col. 9, lines 24-25).
Claims 5-7 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kim et al. (US 20150294464 A1), and Lowe et al. (US 10599934 B1), as applied to claim 3 above, and further in view of Lemos (US 20070066916 A1), and Szymkowiak et al. (WO 2010136786 A2), hereinafter Szymkowiak.
Regarding claim 5, Kim and Lowe disclose all the claimed subject matter recited in claim 3 above.
Kim and Lowe fail to disclose the information processing apparatus, wherein the at least one processor is configured to execute the instructions to apply the stimulus by outputting toward the target person at least one of a picture and a sound that increases tension of the target person, and the correlation includes a correlation between the stimulus and at least one of a time of the eye blink, a speed of moving eyelids by the eye blink, and a frequency of the eye blink.
However, Lemos discloses a system and method for determining human emotion by analyzing a combination of eye properties of a user including, for example, pupil size, blink properties, eye position (or gaze) properties, or other properties (see abstract) including to apply the stimulus by outputting toward the target person at least one of a picture and a sound that [[produces “negative”/”unpleasant” response]] of the target person, and the correlation includes a correlation between the stimulus and at least one of a time of the eye blink, a speed of moving eyelids by the eye blink, and a frequency of the eye blink (stimuli may comprise any real stimuli, or any analog or electronic stimuli that can be presented to users; any combination of stimuli relating to any one or more of a user's five senses (sight, sound, smell, taste, touch) may be presented – see [0011]; various physiological data may be measured while the user is presented with images or other stimuli known to elicit a positive (e.g., pleasant), neutral, or negative (e.g., unpleasant) response based on known emotional models – see [0074]; collected blink data may include, for example, blink frequency, blink duration, blink potention, blink magnitude, or other blink data – see [0078]; see also [0082-83]; an unpleasant response may be manifested in quick, half-closed blinks and frequent surprise blinks; quicker blinks may occur when there is a stronger emotional reaction – see [0151]).
Lemos does not explicitly disclose the stimulus increasing tension (just causing a negative or unpleasant response).
However, Szymkowiak discloses a biometric identity verification and emotional stress state evaluation method (see page 1, lines 4-7) wherein the applied stimulus increases tension (the biometric security method comprises the step of manipulating an emotional state of the user; a higher stress state is induced by exposing the user to a one or more sounds rated as being both extremely arousing and extremely unpleasant (e.g. an argument, baby crying, bee-buzzing or sirens); the skilled person will understand that the biometric security method may use other mechanisms of inducing different stress states (e.g. variable lighting conditions <e.g. strobe frequencies>, temperature, galvanic stress etc.; the biometric security method may detect the induction of a particular stress state from other physiological variables, such as, altered pulse rate, blood pressure, pupil dilation, body temperature and respiration rate etc. - see page 13 line 17 through page 15, line 1).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the apparatus in Kim and Lowe to include the information processing apparatus, wherein the at least one processor is configured to execute the instructions to apply the stimulus by outputting toward the target person at least one of a picture and a sound that induces a negative/unpleasant response of the target person, and the correlation includes a correlation between the stimulus and at least one of a time of the eye blink, a speed of moving eyelids by the eye blink, and a frequency of the eye blink, as taught by Lemos; and, the applied stimulus increases tension, as taught by Szymkowiak. One would have been motivated to make such a combination to improve the accuracy of a determination of a user's emotions and leverage the potential value in interpreting eye blinks as emotional indicators, as recognized by Lemos (see [0006]); and, to provide another path of emotional processing of stimuli, as recognized by Szymkowiak (see page 13 line 17 through page 15, line 1).
Regarding claim 6, Kim and Lowe disclose discloses all the claimed subject matter recited in claim 3 above.
Kim and Lowe fail to disclose the information processing apparatus, wherein the at least one processor is configured to execute the instructions to apply the applying unit applies the stimulus by outputting toward the target person at least one of a picture and a sound that increases tension of the target person and at least one of a picture and a sound that relieves the tension of the target person, and the correlation includes a correlation between the stimulus and at least one of a time of the eye blink, a speed of moving eyelids by the eye blink, and a frequency of the eye blink.
However, Lemos discloses a system and method for determining human emotion by analyzing a combination of eye properties of a user including, for example, pupil size, blink properties, eye position (or gaze) properties, or other properties (see abstract) including to apply the applying unit applies the stimulus by outputting toward the target person at least one of a picture and a sound that [[produces “negative”/”unpleasant” response]] of the target person and at least one of a picture and a sound that relieves the tension of the target person, and the correlation includes a correlation between the stimulus and at least one of a time of the eye blink, a speed of moving eyelids by the eye blink, and a frequency of the eye blink (stimuli may comprise any real stimuli, or any analog or electronic stimuli that can be presented to users; any combination of stimuli relating to any one or more of a user's five senses (sight, sound, smell, taste, touch) may be presented – see [0011]; various physiological data may be measured while the user is presented with images or other stimuli known to elicit a positive (e.g., pleasant), neutral, or negative (e.g., unpleasant) response based on known emotional models; a soothing voice may address a user to place the user in a relaxed state of mind; the soothing voice may (or may not) be accompanied by pleasant visual or other stimuli – see [0074]; collected blink data may include, for example, blink frequency, blink duration, blink potention, blink magnitude, or other blink data – see [0078]; see also [0082-83]; an unpleasant response may be manifested in quick, half-closed blinks and frequent surprise blinks; quicker blinks may occur when there is a stronger emotional reaction – see [0151]).
Lemos does not explicitly disclose the stimulus increasing tension (just causing a negative or unpleasant response).
However, Szymkowiak discloses a biometric identity verification and emotional stress state evaluation method (see page 1, lines 4-7) wherein the applied stimulus increases tension (the biometric security method comprises the step of manipulating an emotional state of the user; a higher stress state is induced by exposing the user to a one or more sounds rated as being both extremely arousing and extremely unpleasant (e.g. an argument, baby crying, bee-buzzing or sirens); the skilled person will understand that the biometric security method may use other mechanisms of inducing different stress states (e.g. variable lighting conditions <e.g. strobe frequencies>, temperature, galvanic stress etc.; the biometric security method may detect the induction of a particular stress state from other physiological variables, such as, altered pulse rate, blood pressure, pupil dilation, body temperature and respiration rate etc. - see page 13 line 17 through page 15, line 1).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the apparatus in Kim and Lowe to include the information processing apparatus, wherein the at least one processor is configured to execute the instructions to apply the applying unit applies the stimulus by outputting toward the target person at least one of a picture and a sound that produces “negative”/”unpleasant” response of the target person and at least one of a picture and a sound that relieves the tension of the target person, and the correlation includes a correlation between the stimulus and at least one of a time of the eye blink, a speed of moving eyelids by the eye blink, and a frequency of the eye blink, as taught by Lemos; and, the applied stimulus increases tension, as taught by Szymkowiak. One would have been motivated to make such a combination to improve the accuracy of a determination of a user's emotions and leverage the potential value in interpreting eye blinks as emotional indicators, as recognized by Lemos (see [0006]); and, to provide another path of emotional processing of stimuli, as recognized by Szymkowiak (see page 13 line 17 through page 15, line 1).
Regarding claim 7, Kim and Lowe disclose all the claimed subject matter recited in claim 3 above.
Furthermore, Lowe discloses the information processing apparatus, wherein the at least one processor is configured to execute the instructions to apply the applying unit applies the stimulus by outputting a task (“blink event”), (a blank screen can be displayed in a post-stimulus phase – see col. 6, lines 33-34; presenting different types of stimuli including animations - see col. 6, lines 57-64; in response to moving high-contrast stimulus, a user's eye generally follows the stimulus with a smooth pursuit, loses interest, and then returns, via a saccade, to a previous gaze location - see col. 6, line 67 through col. 7, line 3; and, blink events may be determined to be predictable with specific stimulus velocity and cycle configurations, and accordingly, blink events can be part of expected/observed responses, and used for comparison - see col. 9, line 48-51; examiner’s note: in this case, the task is to follow the stimulus and by displaying a blank screen post-stimulus, the target person is effectively encourage to rest).
Kim and Lowe fail to disclose the task increasing tension and a correlation between the stimulus and at least one of a time of the eye blink (“blink event”), a speed of moving eyelids by the eye blink, and a frequency of the eye blink
However, Lemos discloses a system and method for determining human emotion by analyzing a combination of eye properties of a user including, for example, pupil size, blink properties, eye position (or gaze) properties, or other properties (see abstract) including to apply the applying unit applies the stimulus by outputting a[[stimuli that produces “negative”/”unpleasant” response]], and the correlation includes a correlation between the stimulus and at least one of a time of the eye blink, a speed of moving eyelids by the eye blink, and a frequency of the eye blink (stimuli may comprise any real stimuli, or any analog or electronic stimuli that can be presented to users; any combination of stimuli relating to any one or more of a user's five senses (sight, sound, smell, taste, touch) may be presented – see [0011]; various physiological data may be measured while the user is presented with images or other stimuli known to elicit a positive (e.g., pleasant), neutral, or negative (e.g., unpleasant) response based on known emotional models – see [0074]; collected blink data may include, for example, blink frequency, blink duration, blink potention, blink magnitude, or other blink data – see [0078]; see also [0082-83]; an unpleasant response may be manifested in quick, half-closed blinks and frequent surprise blinks; quicker blinks may occur when there is a stronger emotional reaction – see [0151]).
Lemos does not explicitly disclose the stimulus increasing tension (just causing a negative or unpleasant response).
However, Szymkowiak discloses a biometric identity verification and emotional stress state evaluation method (see page 1, lines 4-7) wherein the applied stimulus increases tension (the biometric security method comprises the step of manipulating an emotional state of the user; a higher stress state is induced by exposing the user to a one or more sounds rated as being both extremely arousing and extremely unpleasant (e.g. an argument, baby crying, bee-buzzing or sirens); the skilled person will understand that the biometric security method may use other mechanisms of inducing different stress states (e.g. variable lighting conditions <e.g. strobe frequencies>, temperature, galvanic stress etc.; the biometric security method may detect the induction of a particular stress state from other physiological variables, such as, altered pulse rate, blood pressure, pupil dilation, body temperature and respiration rate etc. - see page 13 line 17 through page 15, line 1).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the apparatus in Kim to include the information processing apparatus, wherein the at least one processor is configured to execute the instructions to apply the applying unit applies the stimulus by outputting a task of the target person and by encouraging the target person to take a rest to relieve the tension of the target person, and the correlation includes a correlation between the stimulus and at least one of a time of the eye blink (“blink event”), as taught by Lowe; to apply the applying unit applies the stimulus by outputting stimuli that produces “negative”/”unpleasant” response, and the correlation includes a correlation between the stimulus and at least one of a time of the eye blink, a speed of moving eyelids by the eye blink, and a frequency of the eye blink, as taught by Lemos; and, the applied stimulus increases tension, as taught by Szymkowiak. One would have been motivated to make such a combination to improve a stimulus-onset-based kinetic response, as recognized by Lowe (see col. 6, lines 25-26); to improve the accuracy of a determination of a user's emotions and leverage the potential value in interpreting eye blinks as emotional indicators, as recognized by Lemos (see [0006]); and, to provide another path of emotional processing of stimuli, as recognized by Szymkowiak (see page 13 line 17 through page 15, line 1).
Claims 8-10 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kim et al. (US 20150294464 A1), and Lowe et al. (US 10599934 B1), as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Itsuji et al. (US 20070030115 A1), hereinafter Itsuji.
Regarding claim 8, Kim and Lowe disclose all the claimed subject matter recited in claim 1 above. Furthermore, Lowe discloses that a stimulus can be designed so that a visual space in a user's field of view occupied by the stimulus (e.g., assuming the particular screen size and device-to-face distance) corresponds to a primary high visual acuity region of the user's retina known as the fovea, which is the most densely populated region of the retina (see col. 7, lines 17-22); and, that distance issues can be solved by adaptive stimulus velocity and visual scale adjustment based on a real time (e.g., frame-to-frame) viewing distance estimate (see col. 10, lines 10-13).
Kim and Lowe fail to disclose the information processing apparatus, wherein the vital reaction includes a reaction of adjusting focus of a crystalline lens of the target person, and the correlation includes a correlation between the stimulus and an emission direction of reflected light from at least one of a front surface and a back surface of the crystalline lens on which light is incident from a point light source or from a picture that imitates the point light source.
However, Itsuji discloses a method and apparatus for identification of a living body (see abstract) including wherein the vital reaction includes a reaction of adjusting focus of a crystalline lens (“eye lens”) of the target person, and the correlation includes a correlation between the stimulus and an emission direction of reflected light from at least one of a front surface and a back surface of the crystalline lens on which light is incident from a point light source or from a picture that imitates the point light source (an impulse wave of a pulse width of about 10 psec is employed as the electromagnetic wave; the retina pattern and eye lens shape of a person are utilized as the biological information; In FIG. 6, retina 601 is an inside wall of the eyeball, functioning like a film of a camera; eye lens 602 functions like a lens of a camera and adjusts the focus by adjusting the thickness of eye lens 602 – see {0068-69]; the reflected terahertz wave detected by electromagnetic wave-detecting section 101 contains information on a retina pattern obtained from difference of a blood vessel pattern on retina 601 from other living tissues, and additional information in superposition on terahertz wave absorption/reflection characteristics obtained from the thickness shape B of the eye lens existing in the transmission route of the terahertz wave as variation of the terahertz wave reaching electromagnetic wave-detecting section 101 – see [0070]; electromagnetic wave-detecting section 101 projects a terahertz wave onto retina 602; the intensity of the reflected terahertz wave from the scanning spot on retina 601 is changed by the difference in the living tissues (difference between the blood vessel pattern and other living tissue) in the retina pattern, and transmission path length of the terahertz wave caused by the thickness change of eye lens 602 – see [0071]; a larger thickness of the eye lens gives a smaller signal intensity of the obtained electromagnetic wave; with a certain signal processing method, a smaller thickness of the eye lens gives a smaller signal intensity of the obtained electromagnetic wave – see [0072-73]; see also [0074-80]).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the apparatus in Kim and Lowe to include wherein the vital reaction includes a reaction of adjusting focus of a crystalline lens of the target person, and the correlation includes a correlation between the stimulus and an emission direction of reflected light from at least one of a front surface and a back surface of the crystalline lens on which light is incident from a point light source or from a picture that imitates the point light source, as taught by Itsuji. One would have been motivated to make such a combination because the combined use of the eye lens information in retina identification improves real-time detectableness in the identification, thereby preventing effectively pretension to be the subject person by collection and imitating a retina pattern, or direct cutting-out of the pattern, thus improving the security in identification, as recognized by Itsuji.
Regarding claim 9, Kim, Lowe and Itsuji disclose all the claimed subject matter recited in claim 8 above.
Furthermore, Lowe discloses wherein the at least one processor is configured to execute the instructions to apply the stimulus by outputting to the target person a picture of at least one of an object that is gradually enlarged and an object that is gradually reduced (a stimulus can be designed so that a visual space in a user's field of view occupied by the stimulus (e.g., assuming the particular screen size and device-to-face distance) corresponds to a primary high visual acuity region of the user's retina known as the fovea, which is the most densely populated region of the retina - see col. 7, lines 17-22; distance issues can be solved by adaptive stimulus velocity and visual scale adjustment based on a real time (e.g., frame-to-frame) viewing distance estimate - see col. 10, lines 10-13).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the apparatus in Kim, Lowe and Itsuji to include wherein the at least one processor is configured to execute the instructions to apply the stimulus by outputting to the target person a picture of at least one of an object that is gradually enlarged and an object that is gradually reduced, as taught by Lowe. One would have been motivated to make such a combination to provide fast localization and approximation of eye position, as recognized by Lowe (see col. 10, lines 9-10).
Regarding claim 10, Kim, Lowe and Itsuji disclose all the claimed subject matter recited in claim 8 above.
Furthermore, Lowe discloses wherein the at least one processor is configured to execute the instructions to apply the applying unit applies the stimulus by outputting to the target person a picture of an object that is enlarged or reduced and then becomes out of focus (a stimulus can be designed so that a visual space in a user's field of view occupied by the stimulus (e.g., assuming the particular screen size and device-to-face distance) corresponds to a primary high visual acuity region of the user's retina known as the fovea, which is the most densely populated region of the retina - see col. 7, lines 17-22; distance issues can be solved by adaptive stimulus velocity and visual scale adjustment based on a real time (e.g., frame-to-frame) viewing distance estimate - see col. 10, lines 10-13; stimulus types can be stimuli that include warping, convergence, waves, looming illusions, distortion, fading, blur, color, facial image, change in illumination intensity, or other aspects – see col. 7, lines 57-61).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the apparatus in Kim, Lowe and Itsuji to include wherein the at least one processor is configured to execute the instructions to apply the applying unit applies the stimulus by outputting to the target person a picture of an object that is enlarged or reduced and then becomes out of focus (a stimulus can be designed so that a visual space in a user's field of view occupied by the stimulus, as taught by Lowe. One would have been motivated to make such a combination because a stimuli type or approach can be selected based on usability or visual appearance concerns, with a goal of reducing visual jarring for the user, while still generating a detectable response, as recognized by Lowe (see col. 8, lines 25-28).
Claims 11-13 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kim et al. (US 20150294464 A1), and Lowe et al. (US 10599934 B1), as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Sakai (US20210073364A1).
Regarding claim 11, Kim and Lowe disclose all the claimed subject matter recited in claim 1 above.
Kim and Lowe fail to disclose the information processing apparatus, wherein the vital reaction includes a movement of a face of the target person and a movement of a line of sight of the target person.
However, Sakai discloses a biometric authentication device, method and recording medium
That detects, from a face image, a line-of-sight position; determines that the subject of the face image is a living body when one or more prescribed conditions including a case in which the line-of-sight position matches a display position of the symbol at the image-capturing timing are all satisfied; and outputs an authentication result indicating success of the authentication when the subject is determined to be a living body and the biometric authentication is successful (see abstract) wherein the vital reaction includes a movement of a face of the target person and a movement of a line of sight of the target person (the biometric authentication device 10 detects a line-of-sight position of the subject from the face image, determines that the subject is a living body when the line-of-sight position coincides with a display position of the symbol at the image capturing timing, and performs biometric authentication, based on the face image – see [0033]; see also [0015-17]).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the apparatus in Kim and Lowe to include wherein the vital reaction includes a movement of a face of the target person and a movement of a line of sight of the target person, as taught by Sakai. One would have been motivated to make such a combination to improve reliability of biometric authentication by a method having a lower processing load, as recognized by Sakai (see [0018]).
Regarding claim 12, Kim, Lowe and Sakai disclose all the claimed subject matter recited in claim 11 above. Furthermore, Kim discloses the information processing apparatus, wherein the at least one processor is configured to execute the instructions to apply the stimulus by irradiating the target person with light from a predetermined direction, examiner’s note: the stimuli (light and sound) are generated from the light source, IR LED and voice guider, all mounted on the camera and thus being irradiated/outputted from a predetermined direction (that of the camera)).
Kim fails to disclose outputting a picture from a predetermined direction to the target person.
However, Lowe discloses outputting a picture from a predetermined direction to the target person (a stimulus can be presented by playing back a pre-rendered video file; a stimulus may be a moving animation that includes high contrast; warping, convergence, waves, looming illusions, distortion, fading, blur, color, facial image, change in illumination intensity, or other aspects – see col. 6, line 45 through col. 8, line 28; stimuli are presented on a display to a user in a device, generally in front of the user as illustrated in FIGs. 1 and 2, thus outputted from a predetermined direction).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the apparatus in Kim to include outputting a picture from a predetermined direction to the target person, as taught by Lowe. One would have been motivated to make such a combination because stimuli can be presented in a way that is seamless to a user's other interactions and a stimuli type or approach can be selected based on usability or visual appearance concerns, as recognized by Lowe (see col. 8, lines 18-28).
Regarding claim 13, Kim, Lowe and Sakai disclose all the claimed subject matter recited in claim 11 above.
Furthermore, Lowe discloses the information processing apparatus, wherein the at least one processor is configured to execute the instructions to authenticate further comprising an authentication unit that authenticates the target person by using an image generated by an imaging apparatus imaging the target person, wherein the predetermined direction is a direction in which the imaging apparatus exists when viewed from the target person (a stimulus can be presented by playing back a pre-rendered video file; a stimulus may be a moving animation that includes high contrast; warping, convergence, waves, looming illusions, distortion, fading, blur, color, facial image, change in illumination intensity, or other aspects – see col. 6, line 45 through col. 8, line 28; stimuli are presented on a display to a user in a device, generally in front of the user as illustrated in FIGs. 1 and 2, thus outputted from a predetermined direction; the stimuli can be presented as part of an authentication process – see col. 6, lines 58-59; an authentication engine can determine, by comparing the second set of ocular data to the one or more reference patterns, that the second subject is a live person; responsive to determining that the second subject is a live person, the authentication engine can initiate an authentication process for determining if the live person is authorized to access the secured system; if the gathered ocular data matches reference data for a particular user, access to the secured system as the particular user can be granted; if the gathered ocular data does not match any known reference data, access to the secured system as a particular user can be denied (e.g., and another type of authentication process can be performed). – col. 11, lines 41-67).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the apparatus in Kim to include the information processing apparatus, wherein the at least one processor is configured to execute the instructions to authenticate further comprising an authentication unit that authenticates the target person by using an image generated by an imaging apparatus imaging the target person, wherein the predetermined direction is a direction in which the imaging apparatus exists when viewed from the target person, as taught by Lowe. One would have been motivated to make such a combination because an optokinetic response can generally be consistent and characterizable and can therefore be used for biometric authentication, as a passive approach that does not rely on user compliance, as recognized by Lowe (see col. 4, lines 25-29).
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure:
Pan et al. (2007, October) - Eyeblink-based anti-spoofing in face recognition from a generic web camera.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to DORIANNE ALVARADO DAVID whose telephone number is (571)272-4228. The examiner can normally be reached 9:00am-5:00pm ET.
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, Philip Chea can be reached at (571) 272-3951. 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.
/DORIANNE ALVARADO DAVID/Examiner, Art Unit 2499 /PHILIP J CHEA/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2499
Prosecution Insights