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 Arguments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to claims 1-36 have been considered but are moot because the new ground of rejection does not rely on any reference applied in the prior rejection of record for any teaching or matter specifically challenged in the argument.
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 1-7, 9, 10-22, 24-25, 27-28, 31-34, and 36 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Saito in view of Sakaguchi et al. (US 2020/0043118 A1, hereinafter refers as Sakaguchi).
Regarding claim 1, Saito discloses an information processing apparatus comprising:
at least one memory that is configured to store instruction; and
at least one processor that is configured to execute the instructions to:
acquires first biometric information on a user (Fig. 2, 13, el. 12, el. 102, para. 40, to take a first image of the user);
and display second guidance information urging the user to register second biometric based on the second biometric information of the user acquired by capturing the user (Fig. 5, Fig. 13, el. 112, the display [el. 405] is to guide user to register by inputting image [el. 502])
Saito does not explicitly disclose display second guidance information urging the user to register second biometric based on the second biometric information of the user acquired by capturing the user and third biometric information of the user read from a medium when biometric authentication between the first biometric information and registered biometric information on a registrant fails,
Sakaguchi teaches … third biometric information of the user read from a medium when biometric authentication between the first biometric information and registered biometric information on a registrant fails (Fig. 10, when matching comparison fails to match, el. S124 to el. S116, to register user’s information);
It would be obvious for one of ordinary skill in the arts to modify Saito to include Sakaguchi in order to allow a system to authenticate only authorized user to pass the custom office in the airport.
Regarding claim 2, Saito in view of Sakaguchi discloses wherein when the user is determined to be the registrant, the instructions are executed to display first guidance information for guiding the user to a procedure place corresponding to a first scheme in which identity verification is performed by automated procedures using biometric authentication (Saiko, Fig. 5, Fig. 6, el. 604).
Regarding claim 3, Saito in view of Sakaguchi discloses wherein when the user is determined not to be the registrant ([Fig. 5, authentication failed]), the instructions are executed to display the second guidance information urging the user to register the second biometric information by biometric authentication between the second biometric information and the third biometric information (Saito Fig. 5, Fig. 13, el. 112, the display [el. 405] is to guide user to register by inputting image [el. 502], Fig. 12, Fig. 13, el. 121 to capture a third biometric information [el. 122-123], para. 124-125, Sakaguchi, Fig. 10).
Regarding claim 4, Saito discloses wherein when the user is determined not to be the registrant (Fig. 5, authentication failed), the instructions are executed to display the second guidance information urging the user to register (Fig. 5, el. 502, to register by inputting image) the third biometric information by biometric authentication between the second biometric information and the third biometric information (Saito Fig. 6, el. S604, Fig. 12, Fig. 13, el. 121 to capture a third biometric information [el. 122-123], para. 124-125), Sakaguchi, Fig. 10).
Regarding claim 5, Saito in view of Sakaguchi discloses wherein the medium is a passport carried by the user (Saito, Fig. 11).
Regarding claim 6, Saito in view of Sakaguchi discloses wherein the first biometric information, the second biometric information and the third biometric information are face images (Saito, Fig. 13, el. 102, el. 112, el. 122).
Regarding claim 7, Saito in view of Sakaguchi discloses wherein, at a procedure place where the user is able to select the first scheme, or a second scheme of performing identity verification by face to face, when the first scheme is selected, the procedure is automatically performed based on a result of a matching process between new biometric information on the user acquired at the procedure place and the registered biometric information (Saito, Fig. 13, el. 115, el. 124, person authenticating, Fig. 5, Fig. 6, el. S605).
Regarding claim 9, Saito in view of Sakaguchi discloses wherein when the face image is detected from a captured image in which the procedure place is captured, the instructions are executed to display a screen that superimposes and displays the first guidance information or the second guidance information on a detected region of the face image in the captured image (Saito, Fig. 3).
Regarding claim 11, Saito in view of Sakaguchi discloses wherein the instructions are executed to the display the procedure place corresponding to attribute information on the user associated with the registered biometric information to the user (Saito, Fig. 3).
Regarding claim 12, Saito in view of Sakaguchi discloses wherein the procedure at the procedure place includes an inspection procedure performed on the user during travel in an airport (Saito, para. 105).
Regarding claim 13, Saito in view of Sakaguchi discloses wherein the inspection procedure includes at least one of a security inspection procedure, a departure inspection procedure, an immigration procedure, and a custom inspection procedure (Saito, para. 105, the inspection procedure at the airport).
Regarding claim 15, the instant claim is analyzed with respect to claim 1.
Regarding claim 16, the instant claim is analyzed with respect to claim 2.
Regarding claim 17, the instant claim is analyzed with respect to claim 3.
Regarding claim 18, the instant claim is analyzed with respect to claim 4.
Regarding claim 19, Saito in view of Sakaguchi discloses wherein the instructions are executed to register the second biometric information as the registered biometric information based on a result of new biometric authentication between the second biometric information and the third biometric information (Saito, Fig. 3, Fig. 13).
Regarding claim 20, the instant claim is analyzed with respect claim 5.
Regarding claim 21, the instant claim is analyzed with respect claim 6.
Regarding claim 22, the instant claim is analyzed with respect claim 7.
Regarding claim 24, Saito in view of Sakaguchi discloses wherein the display unit causes a display terminal to display the first biometric information or the second biometric information (Saito, Fig. 11).
Regarding claim 25, the instant claim is analyzed with respect claim 9.
Regarding claim 27, the instant claim is analyzed with respect claim 11.
Regarding claim 28, the instant claim is analyzed with respect claim 12.
Regarding claim 29, the instant claim is analyzed with respect claim 13.
Regarding claim 31, the instant claim is analyzed with respect claim 1.
Regarding claim 32, the instant claim is analyzed with respect claim 1.
Regarding claim 33, the instant claim is analyzed with respect claim 1.
Regarding claim 34, the instant claim is analyzed with respect claim 1.
Regarding claim 36, Saito in view of Sakaguchi discloses wherein the instructions are executed to generate, when it is determined that the user is the registrant based on a first matching result between the first biometric information and the registered biometric information on the registrant (Saito Fig. 4, el. S405, Fig. 5), guidance information that is superposed and displayed on a region of a first person determined as the registrant in a captured image including a plurality of users (Saito Fig. 7, Fig. 6) and guides a destination of the user (Saito, para. 103, para. 108).
Claims 8 and 23 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Saito in view of in view of Sakaguchi in view of Tagawa et al. (US 2020/0118375 A1, hereinafter refers of Tagawa).
Regarding claim 8, Saito discloses all limitation of claim 7,
Saito does not explicitly disclose wherein in the second scheme, the procedure at the procedure place is performed based on the medium carried by the user in a state where the user and a staff member face each other;
Tagawa teaches wherein in the second scheme, the procedure at the procedure place is performed based on the medium carried by the user in a state where the user and a staff member face each other (para. 134, the customer office faces the user);
It would be obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the invention to modify Saito to include Tagawa in order to more accurately inspect a user’s identity.
Regarding claim 23, the instant claim is analyzed with respect claim 8.
Claims 10 and 26 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Saito in view of in view of Sakaguchi in view of Hiromoto (WO 2021/029047 A1)
Regarding claim 10, Saito discloses all limitation of claim 7,
Saito does not explicitly disclose the number of users who completed the procedure by using the first scheme and the number of users who completed the procedure by using the second scheme in the procedure place (para. 123-126);
Hiromoto does not explicitly disclose wherein the instructions are executed to add up and outputs each of the number of users who completed the procedure by using the first scheme and the number of users who completed the procedure by using the second scheme in the procedure place (a counter to add the number of passenger);
It would be obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before to modify Saito to include Hiromoto in order to accurately count the number of passenger going through the gate.
Regarding claim 26, the instant claim is analyzed with respect claim 10.
Claims 14 and 30 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Saito in view of in view of Sakaguchi in view of Lee et al. (US 2016/0189455 A1, hereinafter refers as Lee)
Regarding claim 14, the Saito discloses all limitation of claim 7,
Saito does not explicitly disclose wherein the procedure at the procedure place includes a payment procedure performed on the user who purchases an item in a shop or the user who receives a service;
Lee teaches wherein the procedure at the procedure place includes a payment procedure performed on the user who purchases an item in a shop or the user who receives a service (para. 49, the user to buy items from Free Duty shops);
It would be obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before to modify Saito to include Lee in order to allow the airport to generate an additional revenues.
Regarding claim 30, the instant claim is analyzed with respect claim 14.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 35 is objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, but would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter:
Regarding claim 35 and its dependents, the art of record either alone or in combination fails to particular disclose or suggest the claim limitation of “wherein the information processing apparatus acquire biometric information on the user in a procedure area where the user is able to select a first scheme involving use of the biometric authentication in a procedure or a second scheme not involving use of the biometric authentication in the procedure; wherein the information processing apparatus matches the biometric information with the registered biometric information on the registrant, the registrant being allowed to use the first scheme, and determines whether or not the user is the registrant; wherein, when it is determined that the user is the registrant, the information processing apparatus guides the user for a procedure place corresponding to the first scheme; and wherein, when it is determined that the user is not the registrant, the information processing apparatus generates guidance information about a way to a procedure place corresponding to the second scheme and displays guidance information urging the user to register the biometric information for using the first scheme.”
As to the art of record, Saito reference discloses a system to authenticate a user’s biometric face image to pass thru the airport. However, Saito does not teach with respect to the entire or combination claim limitation stated as above.
As to the art of record, Sakaguchi reference discloses the concept of a system to register the boarding information on a user by acquired by a check in procedure of the user. However, Sakaguchi does not teach with respect to the entire or combination claim limitation stated as above.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to CAI Y CHEN whose telephone number is (571)270-5679. The examiner can normally be reached 8:30 AM -4:30 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, Brian Pendleton can be reached at 571-272-7527. 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.
/CAI Y CHEN/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2425
Prosecution Insights