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 .
Response to Amendment
The amendment filed November 25, 2025 has been entered. Claims 1-12 remain pending in the application. Applicant’s amendments to the Claims have overcome each and every 102 rejections previously set forth in the Non-Final Office Action mailed August 25, 2025.
Claim Objections
Claims 1-7 are objected to because of the following informalities:
In claim 1, line 9, “a virtual terminal” should read --the virtual terminal--.
Claims 2-7 are further objected due to their dependency.
Appropriate correction is required.
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.
This application currently names joint inventors. In considering patentability of the claims the examiner presumes that the subject matter of the various claims was commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the claimed invention(s) absent any evidence to the contrary. Applicant is advised of the obligation under 37 CFR 1.56 to point out the inventor and effective filing dates of each claim that was not commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the later invention in order for the examiner to consider the applicability of 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(C) for any potential 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) prior art against the later invention.
The factual inquiries for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized as follows:
1. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art.
2. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue.
3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art.
4. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness.
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) 1-12 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Keith, JR. (US 20210173907 A1) in view of Nathan (US 20150143487 A1).
Regarding Claim 1, Keith, JR. teaches A multi-factor authenticated virtual transaction method of an intermediary processor, comprising (Keith, JR.: Abstract; Paragraph(s) 0042):
receiving, into the intermediary processor, a transaction initiation signal … (Keith, JR.: Paragraph(s) 0067 teach(es) Once a transaction is initiated (e.g., Facebook login where Facebook password is pulled from the TPM), the transaction with all of the required information is stored as an encrypted file which is sent to a secure server proxy which is able to decrypt the file and then make the transaction); generating a biometric challenge signal in response to the receiving of the transaction initiation signal; transmitting, towards a virtual terminal, the biometric challenge signal (Keith, JR.: Paragraph(s) 0109, 0136-0139 teach(es) a challenge is implemented to verify/re-authorize the user. The challenge is able to include biometrics, a password request, a question challenge, favorite image selection, facial recognition, 3D facial recognition and/or voice recognition); receiving, from the virtual terminal, a biometric input signal including biometric input … including a biometric token (Keith, JR.: Paragraph(s) 0125, 0127-0128, 0136-0139); comparing the received biometric input and the biometric token to determine whether a match occurs (Keith, JR.: Paragraph(s) 0138, 0141 teach(es) The biometric/behavioral analysis is able to include comparing acquired information (e.g., fingerprints) with stored information (e.g., previously acquired fingerprints) and determining how close the information is and whether there is a match); when the match does not occur: transmitting a biometric match fail signal to the virtual terminal (Keith, JR.: Paragraph(s) 0109, 0134); when the match does occur: generating an authorization request signal (Keith, JR.: Paragraph(s) 0109, 0134); transmitting the authorization request signal towards an authorization processor … (Keith, JR.: Paragraph(s) 0109); and receiving a response to the authorization request signal (Keith, JR.: Paragraph(s) 0109, 0119, 0124).
However, Keith, JR. does not explicitly teach …from a virtual terminal provided inworld within a virtual world, the virtual world being a multi-dimensional computer-based online community environment experienced by physical users through representative avatars, …from an avatar associated with an avatar credential, the avatar credential, and …through an inworld/physical-world intersection gateway, the gateway including a secure connection between the virtual terminal provided inworld and the intermediary processor.
Nathan from same or similar field of endeavor teaches receiving, into the intermediary processor, a transaction initiation signal from a virtual terminal provided inworld within a virtual world, the virtual world being a multi-dimensional computer-based online community environment experienced by physical users through representative avatars (Nathan: Paragraph(s) 0008, 0012-0013, 0165, 0176 teach(es) such a system enables secure communications between individuals that are inhibiting separate virtual worlds by verifying identity of the individuals within each virtual environment. Systems for authenticating an avatar's end users' identity and supplying reputation information in this manner do not currently exist; Redirection by the user agent is done in-world if the virtual environment supports user agent protocol; otherwise the user is redirected out of world), receiving, from the virtual terminal, a biometric input signal including biometric input from an avatar associated with an avatar credential, the avatar credential (Nathan: Paragraph(s) 0176, 0074, 0081 teach(es) providing an authentication for a Persistent Avatar a or any virtual entity; the Enabler encodes current conversation, position, owner credentials, attribute data and any other data necessary to drive the Avatars a to 221 t, into a transaction request for use by the Server), and transmitting the authorization request signal towards an authorization processor through an inworld/physical-world intersection gateway, the gateway including a secure connection between the virtual terminal provided inworld and the intermediary processor (Nathan: Paragraph(s) 0056, 0013, 0165 teach(es) a persistent avatar management system; Network connections are made through 10/100/1000 Megabit/sec Ethernet cable, although other network wiring technologies, such as high speed optical cable, may also be used; Redirection by the user agent is done in-world if the virtual environment supports user agent protocol; otherwise the user is redirected out of world).
It would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the teachings of Keith, JR. to incorporate the teachings of Nathan for …from a virtual terminal provided inworld within a virtual world, the virtual world being a multi-dimensional computer-based online community environment experienced by physical users through representative avatars, …from an avatar associated with an avatar credential, the avatar credential, and …through an inworld/physical-world intersection gateway, the gateway including a secure connection between the virtual terminal provided inworld and the intermediary processor.
There is motivation to combine Nathan into Keith, JR. because Nathan’s teachings of virtual world, avatar, and inworld/physical-world intersection would facilitate virtual transactions (Nathan: Paragraph(s) 0008, 0012-0013, 0056, 0074, 0081, 0165, 0176).
Regarding Claim 8, Keith, JR. teaches A multi-factor authenticated virtual transaction method of a virtual terminal …, comprising (Keith, JR.: Abstract; Paragraph(s) 0042):
generating a transaction initiation signal; transmitting, towards an intermediary processor, the transaction initiation signal … (Keith, JR.: Paragraph(s) 0067 teach(es) Once a transaction is initiated (e.g., Facebook login where Facebook password is pulled from the TPM), the transaction with all of the required information is stored as an encrypted file which is sent to a secure server proxy which is able to decrypt the file and then make the transaction); receiving, from the intermediary processor, a biometric challenge signal; receiving, from the avatar, a biometric input (Keith, JR.: Paragraph(s) 0109, 0136-0139, 0127-0128 teach(es) a challenge is implemented to verify/re-authorize the user. The challenge is able to include biometrics, a password request, a question challenge, favorite image selection, facial recognition, 3D facial recognition and/or voice recognition); generating a biometric input signal including the biometric input; and transmitting the biometric input signal toward the intermediary processor … (Keith, JR.: Paragraph(s) 0125, 0127-0128, 0136-0139).
However, Keith, JR. does not explicitly teach …provided inworld within a virtual world, the virtual world being a multi-dimensional computer-based online community environment experienced by physical users through representative avatars, …by an avatar associated with an avatar credential, the avatar credential, and …for comparison with the biometric token through an inworld/physical-world intersection gateway, the gateway including a secure connection between the virtual terminal provided inworld and the intermediary processor.
Nathan from same or similar field of endeavor teaches a virtual terminal provided inworld within a virtual world, the virtual world being a multi-dimensional computer-based online community environment experienced by physical users through representative avatars (Nathan: Paragraph(s) 0008, 0012-0013, 0165, 0176 teach(es) such a system enables secure communications between individuals that are inhibiting separate virtual worlds by verifying identity of the individuals within each virtual environment. Systems for authenticating an avatar's end users' identity and supplying reputation information in this manner do not currently exist; Redirection by the user agent is done in-world if the virtual environment supports user agent protocol; otherwise the user is redirected out of world), the transaction initiation signal by an avatar associated with an avatar credential, the avatar credential, including a biometric token (Nathan: Paragraph(s) 0176, 0074, 0081 teach(es) providing an authentication for a Persistent Avatar a or any virtual entity; the Enabler encodes current conversation, position, owner credentials, attribute data and any other data necessary to drive the Avatars a to 221 t, into a transaction request for use by the Server), and …for comparison with the biometric token through an inworld/physical-world intersection gateway, the gateway including a secure connection between the virtual terminal provided inworld and the intermediary processor (Nathan: Paragraph(s) 0056, 0013, 0165 teach(es) a persistent avatar management system; Network connections are made through 10/100/1000 Megabit/sec Ethernet cable, although other network wiring technologies, such as high speed optical cable, may also be used; Redirection by the user agent is done in-world if the virtual environment supports user agent protocol; otherwise the user is redirected out of world).
It would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified the teachings of Keith, JR. to incorporate the teachings of Nathan for …provided inworld within a virtual world, the virtual world being a multi-dimensional computer-based online community environment experienced by physical users through representative avatars, …by an avatar associated with an avatar credential, the avatar credential, and …for comparison with the biometric token through an inworld/physical-world intersection gateway, the gateway including a secure connection between the virtual terminal provided inworld and the intermediary processor.
There is motivation to combine Nathan into Keith, JR. because Nathan’s teachings of virtual world, avatar, and inworld/physical-world intersection would facilitate virtual transactions (Nathan: Paragraph(s) 0008, 0012-0013, 0056, 0074, 0081, 0165, 0176).
Regarding Claims 2 and 9, the combination of Keith, JR. and Nathan teaches all the limitations of claims 1 and 8 above; and Keith, JR. further teaches wherein the biometric input is a voice input (Keith, JR.: Paragraph(s) 0064, 0066, 0068, 0085).
Regarding Claim 3, the combination of Keith, JR. and Nathan teaches all the limitations of claim 1 above; and Keith, JR. further teaches wherein the biometric token comprises a unique alphanumeric or numeric representation created based on the biometric input (Keith, JR.: Paragraph(s) 0066, 0128 teach(es) the device is able to perform additional tests of the user to increase their trust score (e.g., ask the user to say a word to determine a voice match)).
Regarding Claim 4, the combination of Keith, JR. and Nathan teaches all the limitations of claim 1 above; and Keith, JR. further teaches wherein at least one of the generating of the authorization request signal and the transmitting of the authorization request signal include providing data for use with a payment token (Keith, JR.: Paragraph(s) 0073, 0083 teach(es) The user is then able to use his mobile device to scan/acquire an image of the CyberEye, and then based on the ID proofing described herein, the user's device is able to authenticate payment or perform other transactions with the gas station pump, ATM or other device).
Regarding Claim 5, the combination of Keith, JR. and Nathan teaches all the limitations of claim 1 above; and Keith, JR. further teaches wherein the response to the authorization request signal comprises an authorization denied signal or a transaction completed signal (Keith, JR.: Paragraph(s) 0083, 0119).
Regarding Claim 6, the combination of Keith, JR. and Nathan teaches all the limitations of claim 5 above; and Keith, JR. further teaches wherein the response to the authorization request signal comprises the authorization denied signal, and the multi-factor authenticated virtual transaction method further comprises: generating a transaction denied signal; and transmitting the transaction denied signal toward the virtual terminal (Keith, JR.: Paragraph(s) 0083, 0119).
Regarding Claim 7, the combination of Keith, JR. and Nathan teaches all the limitations of claim 5 above; and Keith, JR. further teaches wherein: the response to the authorization request signal comprises the transaction completed signal, and the multi-factor authenticated virtual transaction method further comprises: generating a transaction successful signal; and transmitting the transaction successful signal toward the virtual terminal (Keith, JR.: Paragraph(s) 0075, 0083, 0119).
Regarding Claim 10, the combination of Keith, JR. and Nathan teaches all the limitations of claim 8 above; and Keith, JR. further teaches further comprising: receiving a biometric match fail signal (Keith, JR.: Paragraph(s) 0064-0066, 0109, 0133-0135).
Regarding Claim 11, the combination of Keith, JR. and Nathan teaches all the limitations of claim 8 above; and Keith, JR. further teaches further comprising: receiving a transaction denied signal (Keith, JR.: Paragraph(s) 0064-0065).
Regarding Claim 12, the combination of Keith, JR. and Nathan teaches all the limitations of claim 8 above; and Keith, JR. further teaches further comprising: receiving a transaction successful signal; and performing completion operations for the multi-factor authenticated virtual transaction (Keith, JR.: Paragraph(s) 0075, 0109).
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed November 25, 2025 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
Regarding applicant’s argument under Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102 that “Keith fails to disclose a virtual terminal provided inworld within a virtual world, the virtual world being a multi-dimensional computer-based online community environment experienced by physical users through representative avatars.. an avatar credential including a biometric token.. an inworld/physical-world intersection gateway including a secure connection between the virtual terminal provided inworld and the intermediary processor,” examiner respectfully argues that Nathan teaches the features as stated above with respect to the 103 rejections (Nathan: Paragraph(s) 0008, 0012-0013, 0056, 0074, 0081, 0165, 0176).
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Yee (US 20230143628 A1) teaches Systems And Methods Of Classifying Movements For Virtual Reality Activities, including in-world, avatar, character, virtual, authenticate, and biometric.
Winold (US 20210349529 A1) teaches Avatar Tracking And Rendering In Virtual Reality, including in-world, avatar, virtual, and game.
Falchuk (WO 2018057921 A1) teaches System And Method For Situation Awareness In Immersive Digital Experiences, including avatar, in-world, and game.
THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. 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 CLAY LEE whose telephone number is (571)272-3309. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 8-5pm 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.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Neha Patel can be reached at (571)270-1492. 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.
/CLAY C LEE/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3699