DETAILED ACTION
This Office Action is in response to the preliminary amendment filed on 02/03/2025 having claims 1-13 pending.
Claims 1-13 are examined and being considered on the merits.
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
Acknowledgment is made of applicant’s claim for foreign priority under 35 U.S.C. 119 (a)-(d). The certified copy has been filed in parent Application No. JP2022094623, filed on 06/10/2022.
Oath/Declaration
The applicant’s oath/declaration has been reviewed by the examiner and is found to conform to the requirements prescribed in 37 C.F.R. 1.63.
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted on 03/03/2025, 09/09/2025 and 04/30/2026 were filed after the mailing date. The submission is in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statement is being considered by the examiner.
Specification
The Specification filed on 02/03/2025 is accepted for examination purpose.
Drawings
The Drawings filed on 02/03/2025 are accepted for examination purpose.
Claim Objection
Independent claims 1 and 13 are objected for the recited term, “preferentially”. It is unclear as how the claimed execution order for executing the plurality of types of biometric authentication on a person is done preferentially. It appears that the term, “preferentially”, intends to imply the execution order for executing the types of biometric authentication on the person is based on specific types of biometric information acquired/collected. Appropriate correction/clarification is required.
Claim Interpretation
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(f):
(f) Element in Claim for a Combination. – An element in a claim for a combination may be expressed as a means or step for performing a specified function without the recital of structure, material, or acts in support thereof, and such claim shall be construed to cover the corresponding structure, material, or acts described in the specification and equivalents thereof.
The following is a quotation of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph:
An element in a claim for a combination may be expressed as a means or step for performing a specified function without the recital of structure, material, or acts in support thereof, and such claim shall be construed to cover the corresponding structure, material, or acts described in the specification and equivalents thereof.
The claims in this application are given their broadest reasonable interpretation using the plain meaning of the claim language in light of the specification as it would be understood by one of ordinary skill in the art. The broadest reasonable interpretation of a claim element (also commonly referred to as a claim limitation) is limited by the description in the specification when 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is invoked.
As explained in MPEP § 2181, subsection I, claim limitations that meet the following three-prong test will be interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph:
(A) the claim limitation uses the term “means” or “step” or a term used as a substitute for “means” that is a generic placeholder (also called a nonce term or a non-structural term having no specific structural meaning) for performing the claimed function;
(B) the term “means” or “step” or the generic placeholder is modified by functional language, typically, but not always linked by the transition word “for” (e.g., “means for”) or another linking word or phrase, such as “configured to” or “so that”; and
(C) the term “means” or “step” or the generic placeholder is not modified by sufficient structure, material, or acts for performing the claimed function.
Use of the word “means” (or “step”) in a claim with functional language creates a rebuttable presumption that the claim limitation is to be treated in accordance with 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph. The presumption that the claim limitation is interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is rebutted when the claim limitation recites sufficient structure, material, or acts to entirely perform the recited function.
Absence of the word “means” (or “step”) in a claim creates a rebuttable presumption that the claim limitation is not to be treated in accordance with 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph. The presumption that the claim limitation is not interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is rebutted when the claim limitation recites function without reciting sufficient structure, material or acts to entirely perform the recited function.
Claim limitations in this application that use the word “means” (or “step”) are being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, except as otherwise indicated in an Office action. Conversely, claim limitations in this application that do not use the word “means” (or “step”) are not being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, except as otherwise indicated in an Office action.
This application includes one or more claim limitations that do not use the word “means,” but are nonetheless being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, because the claim limitation(s) uses a generic placeholder that is coupled with functional language without reciting sufficient structure to perform the recited function and the generic placeholder is not preceded by a structural modifier. Such claim limitation(s) is/are: acquisitions units configured to, guide determination unit configured to and guide display unit configured to in claim 1.
Because this/these claim limitation(s) is/are being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, it/they is/are being interpreted to cover the corresponding structure described in the specification as performing the claimed function, and equivalents thereof. In parag. [0036]-[0039] of the Specification, the claimed acquisition unit is described as “the system condition setting unit 51 (an example of an acquisition unit) has a built- in memory such as a flash memory, and sets the system condition information of the biometric authentication system 1 in the built-in memory at the time of initial installation of the biometric authentication system 1. … The environment condition setting unit 52 (an example of the acquisition unit) has a built-in memory such as a flash memory, and acquires the environment condition information, which is information (for example, brightness, sound pressure of a noise signal) indicating the environment surrounding a person to be authenticated at the time of acquiring the biometric information of the person to be authenticated, from the output from the sensor group 20 as it is, or calculates the environment condition information based on the output and sets the environment condition information in the built-in memory. … The usage condition setting unit 53 (an example of the acquisition unit) has a built-in memory such as a flash memory, acquires the usage condition information input by a person to be authenticated through operation on the input device 25, and sets the usage condition information in the built-in memory. … The user selection setting unit 54 (an example of the acquisition unit) has a built-in memory such as a flash memory, acquires the user information input by a person to be authenticated through operation on the input device 25, and sets the user information in the built-in memory.”
Accordingly, the claimed guide determination unit, in parag. [0110-0111], [0113] and [0118], is recited as “a guide determination unit (for example, the guide method determination unit 55) configured to determine, based on the ambient condition information, a guide method for presenting an execution order for preferentially executing the plurality of types of biometric authentication on the person. … The guide determination unit (for example, the guide method determination unit 55) determines the guide method based on at least one of the system condition information, the environment condition information, and the usage condition information. … The guide determination unit (for example, the guide method determination unit 55) determines the guide method based on at least two of system condition information related to installation of the authentication guide device (for example, the multimodal authentication device 10), environment condition information around the person (for example, a person to be authenticated), usage condition information of the biometric authentication, and user information having a preference or a characteristic of the person. … The guide determination unit (for example, the guide method determination unit 55) determines a switching condition for switching the execution order in the guide method”.
Finally, the claimed guide display unit, in parag. [0041], is recited as “the guide display unit 56 outputs and displays on the display 21 the guide method determined by the guide method determination unit 55. Further, the guide display unit 56 outputs and displays on the display 21 a screen (see Fig. 8 or Fig. 9) indicating a result of the biometric authentication determined by the overall control unit 50 based on a processing result of each of the modal biometric authentication units 601 to 60n”. Additionally, parags. [0027] and [0035] of the Specification describe a processor comprising a control unit to control the operations described through each of these units.
If applicant does not intend to have this/these limitation(s) interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, applicant may: (1) amend the claim limitation(s) to avoid it/them being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph (e.g., by reciting sufficient structure to perform the claimed function); or (2) present a sufficient showing that the claim limitation(s) recite(s) sufficient structure to perform the claimed function so as to avoid it/them being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph.
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.
Claim 1 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as failing to set forth 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.
Claim limitations, such as “acquisitions units”, “guide determination unit” and “guide display unit”, invoke 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph. However, the written description fails to sufficiently disclose or describe the corresponding structure, material, or acts for performing the entire claimed function and to clearly link the structure, material, or acts to the function. Review of the specification shows that the corresponding structural support or description for the recited “acquisitions units”, “guide determination unit” and “guide display unit”, as follows:
in parag. [0007], the acquisition unit is described as “one or more acquisition units configured to acquire ambient condition information at a time of acquisition of one or more pieces of biometric information of a person to be used for a plurality of types of biometric authentication”. Furthermore, parags. [0036]-[0039] of the Specification of the instant application describe the acquisition unit as either a system condition setting unit having a built-in memory, such as a flash memory, an environment condition setting unit having a built-in memory, such as a flash memory, OR an usage condition setting unit having a built-in memory, such as a flash memory;
in parag. [0007], the guide determination unit is described as , “… determine, based on the ambient environment information, a guide method for presenting an execution order for preferentially executing the plurality of types of biometric authentication on a person”. Furthermore, parags. [0110-0111], [0113] and [0118] of the Specification of the instant application describe the guide determination unit as a guide method determination unit determines the guide method based on at least one of the system condition information, the environment condition information, and the usage condition information, OR based on at least two of system condition information related to installation of the authentication guide device, OR a switching condition for switching the execution order in the guide method; and
in parag. [0007], the guide display unit is described as “guide display unit configured to display the guide method on a display unit”. Furthermore, parag. [0025] of the Specification of the instant application describes “the display 21 (an example of a display unit) is a display device implemented using, for example, a liquid crystal display (LCD) or an organic electroluminescence (EL)”.
It is noted that the guide determination unit is only described as a guide method determination unit, but without providing the sufficient corresponding structural support or description about the guide method determination unit. In addition, the acquisition unit is described as either a system condition setting unit, environment condition setting unit environment condition setting unit, OR usage condition setting unit. While the various condition setting units are described as having a built-in memory, such as a flash memory, it is unclear as how a flash memory can acquire ambient condition information, as recited in the claim.
Based on the above, the claim is found indefinite and rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, second paragraph.
Applicant may:
(a) Amend the claim so that the claim limitation will no longer be interpreted as a limitation under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph;
(b) Amend the written description of the specification such that it expressly recites what structure, material, or acts perform the entire claimed function, without introducing any new matter (35 U.S.C. 132(a)); or
(c) Amend the written description of the specification such that it clearly links the structure, material, or acts disclosed therein to the function recited in the claim, without introducing any new matter (35 U.S.C. 132(a)).
If applicant is of the opinion that the written description of the specification already implicitly or inherently discloses the corresponding structure, material, or acts and clearly links them to the function so that one of ordinary skill in the art would recognize what structure, material, or acts perform the claimed function, applicant should clarify the record by either:
(a) Amending the written description of the specification such that it expressly recites the corresponding structure, material, or acts for performing the claimed function and clearly links or associates the structure, material, or acts to the claimed function, without introducing any new matter (35 U.S.C. 132(a)); or
(b) Stating on the record what the corresponding structure, material, or acts, which are implicitly or inherently set forth in the written description of the specification, perform the claimed function. For more information, see 37 CFR 1.75(d) and MPEP §§ 608.01(o) and 2181.
Claims 2-12 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, second paragraph, based on their dependency of Claim 1.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 101
35 U.S.C. 101 reads as follows:
Whoever invents or discovers any new and useful process, machine, manufacture, or composition of matter, or any new and useful improvement thereof, may obtain a patent therefor, subject to the conditions and requirements of this title.
Claim 1 (similar for claim 13) is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 101 because the claimed invention is directed to an abstract idea without significantly more. The claimed method is directed to an abstract idea. Specifically, the recited steps are: “acquiring ambient condition information at a time of acquisition of one or more pieces of biometric information of a person …”, “determining, based on the ambient condition information, a guide method for presenting an execution order …”, and “displaying the guide method …”. Specifically, these recited steps of the claim do not go beyond requiring the collection, analysis, and display of available information in a particular field and merely mirror the abstract pattern found in Electric Power Group, LLC v. Alstom S.A., 830 F.3d 1350, 1353–54 (Fed. Cir. 2016). The abstract idea of collecting/obtaining and analyzing data, and displaying a result. The claim recites steps of collecting data, analysis and presenting a result in a display unit. The recited operations are performed on data and merely process data based on a contextual input without any meaningful limitation to a particular technological environment or improvement to computer functionality. The claim recites additional elements, such as “acquisitions units”, “guide determination unit” and “guide display unit”, in the claim. However, these additional elements, whether considered individually or combined, merely perform generic computer functions including collecting data, analyzing/determining data for execution, and presenting the result of the analysis result as guide. Therefore, the claim, as a whole, amounts to no more than instructions to apply the abstract idea using generic computer technology, and does not integrate the abstract idea into a practical technological improvement to a computer or network architecture. Accordingly, the claim is directed to an abstract idea and does not amount to significantly more, and is therefore rejected under 35 U.S.C 101.
Dependent claims 2-12 are rejected because it is directed to a judicial exception of an abstract idea under 35 U.S.C. 101 in view of Alice Corp. vs. CLS Bank International. The claims do not include additional elements that are sufficient to amount to significantly more than the judicial exception and share the same or similar deficiencies as independent claim 1.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status.
The following is a quotation of 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, 4, 8-10 and 13 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102 (a)(1) as being unpatentable over Cho et al. (US 11,397,598), hereinafter Cho.
As per Claim 1, Cho teaches an authentication guide device (Cho, Col. 3, lines 23-26; “FIG. 20 is a flowchart illustrating a procedure in which an electronic device outputs guide information for improving authentication suitability according to various embodiments of the disclosure” … Col. 20, lines 57-61; “Further, the electronic device 101 may output a screen displaying guide information for guiding an object to be authenticated (e.g., a face, a finger, or an eye) to a predetermined position (e.g., the range of an angle of view (FOV) of the biometric recognition sensor).”) comprising:
one or more acquisition units configured to acquire ambient condition information at a time of acquisition of one or more pieces of biometric information of a person to be used for a plurality of types of biometric authentication (Cho, Col. 13, lines 5-10; “For example, the determination module 402 may collect context information associated with at least one of external illuminance information of the electronic device, a movement of the electronic device, and the orientation of the electronic device in order to determine the authentication suitability of a face authentication method.” … Col. 13, lines 36-41; “In another example, the determination module 402 may collect context information associated with at least one of illuminance information, movement information about the electronic device, and orientation information about the electronic device in order to determine the authentication suitability of an iris authentication method.” … Col. 13, lines 57-67; “In still another example, the determination module 402 may collect context information associated with a state where a fingerprint sensor is damaged or the fingerprint sensor is stained with foreign material in order to determine the authentication suitability of a fingerprint authentication method. For example, when the processor 400 uses the fingerprint authentication method in the state where the fingerprint sensor is damaged or the fingerprint sensor is stained with foreign material, a distorted fingerprint image may be obtained or a fingerprint image may not be obtained through the fingerprint sensor.” … Col. 28, lines 53-60; “According to one embodiment, the context information may be associated with at least one of external environment information of the electronic device, movement information of the electronic device, orientation information of the electronic device, and an operation state of the first biometric sensor and the second biometric sensor. For example, the environment information may include illuminance information.”);
a guide determination unit configured to determine, based on the ambient condition information, a guide method for presenting an execution order for preferentially executing the plurality of types of biometric authentication on the person (Cho, Col. 14, lines 17-24; “According to various embodiments, the determination module 402 may determine guide information for improving the recognition rate for at least one biometric recognition method by which user authentication has failed. According to one embodiment, the determination module 402 may determine guide information for removing or reducing a negative environmental factor that has affected an authentication operation during the authentication operation.” … Col. 20, lines 57-61; “Further, the electronic device 101 may output a screen displaying guide information for guiding an object to be authenticated (e.g., a face, a finger, or an eye) to a predetermined position (e.g., the range of an angle of view (FOV) of the biometric recognition sensor).” … Col. 22, lines 12-20; “For example, when it is determined that authentication information unsuitable for authentication is obtained due to ambient illuminance, the electronic device 101 may output guide information indicating a move to a place brighter or darker than a current brightness. When it is determined that authentication information unsuitable for authentication is obtained due to the presence of foreign material on an object or the biometric recognition sensor, as illustrated in FIG. 13, the electronic device 101 may output (1300) guide information indicating removal of foreign material.” … Col. 28, lines 53-60; “According to one embodiment, the context information may be associated with at least one of external environment information of the electronic device, movement information of the electronic device, orientation information of the electronic device, and an operation state of the first biometric sensor and the second biometric sensor. For example, the environment information may include illuminance information.”); and
a guide display unit configured to display the guide method on a display unit (Cho, Col. 5, lines 10-14; “Referring to FIG. 1, an electronic device 101 within a network environment 100 in various embodiments is described. The electronic device 101 may include a bus 110, a processor 120, a memory 130, an input output interface 150, a display 160, and a communication interface 170. In some embodiment, the electronic device 101 may omit at least one of the constituent elements or additionally have another constituent element.” … Col. 20, lines 57-61; “Further, the electronic device 101 may output a screen displaying guide information for guiding an object to be authenticated (e.g., a face, a finger, or an eye) to a predetermined position (e.g., the range of an angle of view (FOV) of the biometric recognition sensor).”).
As per claim 4, Cho teaches the authentication guide device according to claim 1. Cho further teaches wherein the guide determination unit is configured to determine the guide method based on at least two of system condition information related to installation of the authentication guide device, environment condition information around the person, usage condition information of the biometric authentication, and user information having a preference or a characteristic of the person (Cho, Col. 14, lines 17-24; “According to various embodiments, the determination module 402 may determine guide information for improving the recognition rate for at least one biometric recognition method by which user authentication has failed. According to one embodiment, the determination module 402 may determine guide information for removing or reducing a negative environmental factor that has affected an authentication operation during the authentication operation.” … Col. 20, lines 57-61; “Further, the electronic device 101 may output a screen displaying guide information for guiding an object to be authenticated (e.g., a face, a finger, or an eye) to a predetermined position (e.g., the range of an angle of view (FOV) of the biometric recognition sensor).” … Col. 22, lines 12-20; “For example, when it is determined that authentication information unsuitable for authentication is obtained due to ambient illuminance, the electronic device 101 may output guide information indicating a move to a place brighter or darker than a current brightness. When it is determined that authentication information unsuitable for authentication is obtained due to the presence of foreign material on an object or the biometric recognition sensor, as illustrated in FIG. 13, the electronic device 101 may output (1300) guide information indicating removal of foreign material.” … Col. 22, lines 55-66; “When authentication is required, the electronic device 101 (e.g., the processor 400, the determination module 402, or the output control module 406) may recommend a biometric recognition method on the basis of the security level of the executed application in operation 1403. According to one embodiment, as illustrated in FIG. 15A, when an application (e.g., a web browser) having a first security level (e.g., a low security level) is executed, the electronic device 101 may recommend (1500) a biometric recognition method (e.g., an iris recognition method 1502, a fingerprint recognition method 1504, and a face recognition method 1506) (i.e., characteristics of a person) corresponding to a first group as an authentication method.” … Col. 28, lines 53-60; “According to one embodiment, the context information may be associated with at least one of external environment information of the electronic device, movement information of the electronic device, orientation information of the electronic device, and an operation state of the first biometric sensor and the second biometric sensor. For example, the environment information may include illuminance information.”).
As per claim 8, Cho teaches the authentication guide device according to claim 1. Cho teaches wherein the plurality of types of biometric authentication include at least two of face authentication, fingerprint authentication, or voice authentication of the person, and wherein the biometric information is, for the face authentication, a face image of the person or a feature based on the face image, for the fingerprint authentication, a fingerprint image of the person or a feature based on the fingerprint image, and for the voice authentication, a voice of the person or a feature based on the voice (Cho, Col. 1, lines 29-36; “An electronic device may authenticate a user on the basis of authentication information obtained using at least one biometric recognition sensor. For example, the electronic device may obtain a face image, a fingerprint image, an iris image, or the like as the authentication information and may compare the authentication information with a reference template as reference information used for authentication, thereby authenticating the user.” … Col. 20, lines 57-61; “Further, the electronic device 101 may output a screen displaying guide information for guiding an object to be authenticated (e.g., a face, a finger, or an eye) to a predetermined position (e.g., the range of an angle of view (FOV) of the biometric recognition sensor).”).
As per claim 9, Cho teaches the authentication guide device according to claim 1, Cho teaches wherein the guide determination unit is configured to determine a switching condition for switching the execution order in the guide method, and wherein the guide display unit is configured to, when the switching condition is satisfied, switch the execution order in the guide method being displayed on the display unit when the switching condition is satisfied and display the execution order on the display unit (Cho, Col. 20-21, lines 64-1; “In this case, as illustrated in FIG. 11, the electronic device 101 may output guide information 1104 for guiding the object to be authenticated to a sensing area 1102 easy for authentication among sensing areas of the biometric recognition sensor included in the screen.” … Col. 22, line 55 to Col. 23, line 16; “When authentication is required, the electronic device 101 (e.g., the processor 400, the determination module 402, or the output control module 406) may recommend a biometric recognition method on the basis of the security level of the executed application in operation 1403. According to one embodiment, as illustrated in FIG. 15A, when an application (e.g., a web browser) having a first security level (e.g., a low security level) is executed, the electronic device 101 may recommend (1500) a biometric recognition method (e.g., an iris recognition method 1502, a fingerprint recognition method 1504, and a face recognition method 1506) corresponding to a first group as an authentication method. For example, the biometric recognition method corresponding to the first group may be any biometric recognition method supported by the electronic device 101. As illustrated in FIG. 15B, an application (e.g., a banking application) having a second security level (e.g., a high security level) is executed, the electronic device 101 may recommend (1510) a biometric recognition method (e.g., an iris recognition method 1512 or a fingerprint recognition method 1514) corresponding to a second group as an authentication method. For example, the biometric recognition method corresponding to the second group may include a biometric recognition method having a certain security level. For example, the electronic device 101 may provide the biometric recognition method corresponding to the second group excluding a biometric recognition method (e.g., a face recognition method) having a security level lower than the certain level as a recommended authentication method.” Col. 20, lines 57-61; “Further, the electronic device 101 may output a screen displaying guide information for guiding an object to be authenticated (e.g., a face, a finger, or an eye) ….”. Examiner submits that the cited portions teach determining whether increased security is required and, in response, changing from a first group to a second group of biometric authentication methods and constitutes a switching condition because it causes the system to alter or selecting different groups of biometric acquisition operations that are subsequently to be performed.).
As per claim 10, Cho teaches the authentication guide device according to claim 1. Cho teaches further comprising: one or more authentication units configured to execute at least one biometric authentication of the plurality of types of biometric authentication during display of the guide method on the display unit (Cho. Col. 19, lines 11-14; “In operation 607, the electronic device 101 (e.g., the authentication module 404) may perform an authentication operation on the basis of the at least one selected biometric recognition method.” … Col. 20, lines 57-61; “Further, the electronic device 101 may output a screen displaying guide information for guiding an object to be authenticated (e.g., a face, a finger, or an eye) to a predetermined position (e.g., the range of an angle of view (FOV) of the biometric recognition sensor).”).
As per claim 13, it is a method claim that recites similar feature limitations as of the device claim 1. Therefore, claim 13 is rejected based on the same rationale applied against the independent claim 1.
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 for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 103 which forms the basis for all obviousness rejections set forth in this Office action:
A patent for a claimed invention may not be obtained, notwithstanding that the claimed invention is not identically disclosed as set forth in section 102, if the differences between the claimed invention and the prior art are such that the claimed invention as a whole would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which the claimed invention pertains. Patentability shall not be negated by the manner in which the invention was made.
Claims 2-3 and 5-7 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Cho et al. (US 11,397,598), hereinafter Cho, as applied to claim 1, and in view of Fukuda et al. (US 2010/0085152), hereinafter Fukuda.
As per claim 2, Cho teaches authentication guide device according to claim 1, wherein the ambient condition information includes [system condition information related to installation of the authentication guide device], environment condition information around the person, and [usage condition information of the biometric authentication] (Cho, Col. 13, lines 5-10; “For example, the determination module 402 may collect context information associated with at least one of external illuminance information of the electronic device, a movement of the electronic device, and the orientation of the electronic device in order to determine the authentication suitability of a face authentication method.” … Col. 13, lines 36-41; “In another example, the determination module 402 may collect context information associated with at least one of illuminance information, movement information about the electronic device, and orientation information about the electronic device in order to determine the authentication suitability of an iris authentication method.” … Col. 28, lines 53-60; “According to one embodiment, the context information may be associated with at least one of external environment information of the electronic device, movement information of the electronic device, orientation information of the electronic device, and an operation state of the first biometric sensor and the second biometric sensor. For example, the environment information may include illuminance information.”), and
wherein the guide determination unit is configured to determine the guide method based on at least one of the system condition information, the environment condition information, and the usage condition information (Cho, Col. 14, lines 17-24; “According to various embodiments, the determination module 402 may determine guide information for improving the recognition rate for at least one biometric recognition method by which user authentication has failed. According to one embodiment, the determination module 402 may determine guide information for removing or reducing a negative environmental factor that has affected an authentication operation during the authentication operation.” … Col. 20, lines 57-61; “Further, the electronic device 101 may output a screen displaying guide information for guiding an object to be authenticated (e.g., a face, a finger, or an eye) to a predetermined position (e.g., the range of an angle of view (FOV) of the biometric recognition sensor).” … Col. 22, lines 12-20; “For example, when it is determined that authentication information unsuitable for authentication is obtained due to ambient illuminance, the electronic device 101 may output guide information indicating a move to a place brighter or darker than a current brightness. When it is determined that authentication information unsuitable for authentication is obtained due to the presence of foreign material on an object or the biometric recognition sensor, as illustrated in FIG. 13, the electronic device 101 may output (1300) guide information indicating removal of foreign material.” … Col. 28, lines 53-60; “According to one embodiment, the context information may be associated with at least one of external environment information of the electronic device, movement information of the electronic device, orientation information of the electronic device, and an operation state of the first biometric sensor and the second biometric sensor. For example, the environment information may include illuminance information.”).
Cho does not teach:
… system condition information related to installation of the authentication guide device, …, and usage condition information of the biometric authentication.
However, Fukuda teaches:
… system condition information related to installation of the authentication guide device, …, and usage condition information of the biometric authentication (Fukuda, Parag. [0032]; “FIG. 1 is a diagram illustrating a structure of an authentication system according to the first embodiment.” … Parags. [0033]-[0034]; “An authentication system 2 has three security areas 4, 6, and 8 to which targets are setted in advance, for setting the security levels according to the targets. Specifically, a security area 4 has a low level set for allowing an in-mode to the site, the security area 6 has an intermediate level for allowing an in/out-mode to the site, and the security areas 8 has a high level for allowing in/out-mode only to a person having a predetermined right at a computer room in a building. 0034. Then, biometrical devices 10, 20, and 30 for determining whether or not a person is the person having the right for the in/out-mode (i.e., usage condition information) are disposed to the security areas 4, 6, and 8.” Examiner submits that Fig 1 shows an authentication system/device that is installed/set at the entrance of a room, therefore is fixed to a structure as described according to the Specification of the instance application.)
Cho and Fukuda are from similar field of technology. Prior to the instant application’s effective filling date, there was a need for providing a guide and a method for biometric authentication.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the teachings of Fukuda system into Cho system, with a motivation to provide system and usage information as ambient conditions to be considered by the authenticating guide device (Fukuda, Parag. [0032-0034]).
As per claim 3, the combination of Cho and Fukuda teaches the authentication guide device according to claim 2. Cho additionally teaches wherein the ambient condition information (Cho, Col. 14, lines 17-24; “According to various embodiments, the determination module 402 may determine guide information for improving the recognition rate for at least one biometric recognition method by which user authentication has failed. According to one embodiment, the determination module 402 may determine guide information for removing or reducing a negative environmental factor that has affected an authentication operation during the authentication operation.” … Col. 20, lines 57-61; “Further, the electronic device 101 may output a screen displaying guide information for guiding an object to be authenticated (e.g., a face, a finger, or an eye) to a predetermined position (e.g., the range of an angle of view (FOV) of the biometric recognition sensor).” … Col. 22, lines 12-20; “For example, when it is determined that authentication information unsuitable for authentication is obtained due to ambient illuminance, the electronic device 101 may output guide information indicating a move to a place brighter or darker than a current brightness. When it is determined that authentication information unsuitable for authentication is obtained due to the presence of foreign material on an object or the biometric recognition sensor, as illustrated in FIG. 13, the electronic device 101 may output (1300) guide information indicating removal of foreign material.” … Col. 28, lines 53-60; “According to one embodiment, the context information may be associated with at least one of external environment information of the electronic device, movement information of the electronic device, orientation information of the electronic device, and an operation state of the first biometric sensor and the second biometric sensor. For example, the environment information may include illuminance information.”) further includes user information having a preference or a characteristic of the person (Cho, Col. 22, lines 55-66; “When authentication is required, the electronic device 101 (e.g., the processor 400, the determination module 402, or the output control module 406) may recommend a biometric recognition method on the basis of the security level of the executed application in operation 1403. According to one embodiment, as illustrated in FIG. 15A, when an application (e.g., a web browser) having a first security level (e.g., a low security level) is executed, the electronic device 101 may recommend (1500) a biometric recognition method (e.g., an iris recognition method 1502, a fingerprint recognition method 1504, and a face recognition method 1506) (i.e., characteristics of a person) corresponding to a first group as an authentication method.”).
As per claim 5, the combination of Cho and Fukuda teaches the authentication guide device according to claim 2. Cho teaches wherein the environment condition information has a characteristic that changes over time, and is a measurement value of an environmental parameter around the authentication guide device (Cho, Col. 14, lines 17-24; “According to various embodiments, the determination module 402 may determine guide information for improving the recognition rate for at least one biometric recognition method by which user authentication has failed. According to one embodiment, the determination module 402 may determine guide information for removing or reducing a negative environmental factor that has affected an authentication operation during the authentication operation.” … Col. 20, lines 57-61; “Further, the electronic device 101 may output a screen displaying guide information for guiding an object to be authenticated (e.g., a face, a finger, or an eye) to a predetermined position (e.g., the range of an angle of view (FOV) of the biometric recognition sensor).” … Col. 22, lines 12-20; “For example, when it is determined that authentication information unsuitable for authentication is obtained due to ambient illuminance, the electronic device 101 may output guide information indicating a move to a place brighter or darker than a current brightness. When it is determined that authentication information unsuitable for authentication is obtained due to the presence of foreign material on an object or the biometric recognition sensor, as illustrated in FIG. 13, the electronic device 101 may output (1300) guide information indicating removal of foreign material.” … Col. 28, lines 53-60; “According to one embodiment, the context information may be associated with at least one of external environment information of the electronic device, movement information of the electronic device, orientation information of the electronic device, and an operation state of the first biometric sensor and the second biometric sensor. For example, the environment information may include illuminance information.” … Table 1 and Col. 21, 65-67; “… define guide information corresponding to a negative environmental factor as shown in Table 1.
PNG
media_image1.png
241
508
media_image1.png
Greyscale
).
As per claim 6, the combination of Cho and Fukuda teaches the authentication guide device according to claim 2, wherein the system condition information has a characteristic that does not change over time, and is fixed equipment condition information that is determined when the authentication guide device is installed (Fukuda, Parag. [0032]; “FIG. 1 is a diagram illustrating a structure of an authentication system according to the first embodiment.” … Parag. [0033-0034]; “An authentication system 2 has three security areas 4, 6, and 8 to which targets are setted in advance, for setting the security levels according to the targets. Specifically, a security area 4 has a low level set for allowing an in-mode to the site, the security area 6 has an intermediate level for allowing an in/out-mode to the site, and the security areas 8 has a high level for allowing in/out-mode only to a person having a predetermined right at a computer room in a building. 0034. Then, biometrical devices 10, 20, and 30 for determining whether or not a person is the person having the right for the in/out-mode are disposed to the security areas 4, 6, and 8.” Examiner submits that Fig 1 shows an authentication system/device that is installed at the entrance of a room, therefore is fixed to a structure and do not change over time, as described according to the Specification of the instance application.).
As per claim 7, the combination of Cho and Fukuda teaches the authentication guide device according to claim 2. Fukuda teaches wherein the usage condition information is information indicating a usage of biometric authentication by the authentication guide device (Fukuda, Parag. [0032]; “FIG. 1 is a diagram illustrating a structure of an authentication system according to the first embodiment.” … Parag. [0033-0034]; “An authentication system 2 has three security areas 4, 6, and 8 to which targets are setted in advance, for setting the security levels according to the targets. Specifically, a security area 4 has a low level set for allowing an in-mode to the site, the security area 6 has an intermediate level for allowing an in/out-mode to the site, and the security areas 8 has a high level for allowing in/out-mode only to a person having a predetermined right at a computer room in a building. 0034. Then, biometrical devices 10, 20, and 30 for determining whether or not a person is the person having the right for the in/out-mode (i.e., usage condition information) are disposed to the security areas 4, 6, and 8.” Examiner submits that Fig 1 shows an authentication system/device that is installed at the entrance of a room, therefore is fixed to an structure as described at the description of the instance application.).
Claim 11 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Cho et al. (US 11,397,598) hereinafter Cho, as applied to claim 10, and in view of Novik et al. (US 2021/0286870) hereinafter Novik.
As per claim 11, Cho teaches the authentication guide device according to claim 10. Cho teaches wherein the guide determination unit (Cho, Col. 14, lines 17-24; “According to various embodiments, the determination module 402 may determine guide information for improving the recognition rate for at least one biometric recognition method by which user authentication has failed. According to one embodiment, the determination module 402 may determine guide information for removing or reducing a negative environmental factor that has affected an authentication operation during the authentication operation.” … Col. 20, lines 57-61; “Further, the electronic device 101 may output a screen displaying guide information for guiding an object to be authenticated (e.g., a face, a finger, or an eye) to a predetermined position (e.g., the range of an angle of view (FOV) of the biometric recognition sensor).” … Col. 22, lines 12-20; “For example, when it is determined that authentication information unsuitable for authentication is obtained due to ambient illuminance, the electronic device 101 may output guide information indicating a move to a place brighter or darker than a current brightness. When it is determined that authentication information unsuitable for authentication is obtained due to the presence of foreign material on an object or the biometric recognition sensor, as illustrated in FIG. 13, the electronic device 101 may output (1300) guide information indicating removal of foreign material.” … Col. 28, lines 53-60; “According to one embodiment, the context information may be associated with at least one of external environment information of the electronic device, movement information of the electronic device, orientation information of the electronic device, and an operation state of the first biometric sensor and the second biometric sensor. For example, the environment information may include illuminance information.”) is [configured to change the execution order based on a score of the biometric authentication].
Cho does not teach:
configured to change the execution order based on a score of the biometric authentication
However, Novik teaches:
configured to change the execution order based on a score of the biometric authentication (Novik, Parag. [0004]; “According to a first aspect there is provided a method for identifying and/or authenticating a user on a device, the method comprising: requesting identification or authentication of the user for a first task; determining a first threshold in dependence on the first task; selecting a first authentication process from a plurality of authentication processes; determining a confidence score in dependence on a performance of the selected first authentication process, wherein the confidence score indicates a level of confidence in the user's identity; determining whether the confidence score is above or below the first threshold; and if the confidence score is below the first threshold, selecting a second authentication process from the plurality of authentication processes (i.e., changing the execution order based on score), otherwise identifying or authenticating the user for the first task.”).
Cho and Novik are from similar field of technology. Prior to the instant application’s effective filling date, there was a need for providing a guide and a method for biometric authentication.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the teachings of Novik system into Cho system, with a motivation to provide a different alternative biometric method based on a confidence score (Novik, Parag. [0004]).
Claim 12 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Cho et al. (US 11,397,598) hereinafter Cho as applied to claim 10, and in view of Larson et al. (US 11,882,118) hereinafter Larson.
As per claim 12, Cho teaches the authentication guide device according to claim 10, [wherein the guide display unit is configured to display a final result of the plurality of types of biometric authentication of the person on the display unit together with names of the plurality of types of biometric authentication].
Cho does not expressly teach:
wherein the guide display unit is configured to display a final result of the plurality of types of biometric authentication of the person on the display unit together with names of the plurality of types of biometric authentication.
However, Larson teaches:
wherein the guide display unit is configured to display a final result of the plurality of types of biometric authentication of the person on the display unit together with names of the plurality of types of biometric authentication (Larson Col. 39, lines 11-14; “Upon properly scanning the enrollee's face, the face scan GUI instance 610 may be displayed with text 630 and/or icon 640 indicating the successful face scan.” … Col. 39, lines 52-57; “At FIG. 8 , the enrollee has aligned his/her palm within the palm outline 835 of palm scan GUI instance 805, which may be the same or similar as GUI instance 710. Upon properly scanning the enrollee's palm, the palm scan GUI instance 810 may be displayed with text 830 and/or icon 840 indicating the successful palm scan.”)
Cho and Larson are from similar field of technology. Prior to the instant application’s effective filling date, there was a need for providing a guide and a method for biometric authentication.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the teachings of Larson system into Cho system, with a motivation to display a result from a biometric authentication process and the name of type of biometric method performed (Larson, Col. 39, lines 11-14).
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Lee et al. (US 11,907,345) relates to obtain a request associated with biometric authentication, obtain an image including at least one external object using the camera, display a specified image on the display, when displaying at least a portion of the obtained image on a specified area of the display, the at least a portion of the obtained image being as a portion of the specified image, in response to displaying a specified object associated with the biometric authentication among the at least one external object on the specified area, perform the biometric authentication using biometric information corresponding to the specific object, and when displaying another image different from the obtained image on the display, the other image being as a portion of the specified image, in response to obtaining an image including the specified object among the at least one external object, perform the biometric authentication using the biometric information corresponding to the specified object. In addition, various embodiments recognized through the specification are possible.
Sugimura et al. (US 2003/0115473) relates to a biometrics authentication method includes: conducting authentication of a user by a method other than biometrics authentication; registering and Storing biometrics data regarding a user; determining whether or not biometrics authentication can be conducted by referring to Stored biometrics data, conducting biometrics authentication; and outputting an authentication result as to whether the user is authenticated, wherein biometrics data on the user is registered and Stored only in the case where the user is authenticated by the method other than the biometrics authentication, and biometrics authentication is conducted only in the case where it is determined that biometrics authentication can be conducted.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ALEX D CARRASQUILLO whose telephone number is (571)270-5045. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday 9:00 am - 6:00 pm.
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, Yin-Chen Shaw can be reached at 571-272-8878. 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.
/A.D.C./Examiner, Art Unit 2498
/YIN CHEN SHAW/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2498
Prosecution Insights