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 .
DETAILED ACTION
Claims 1-20 are pending in this office action.
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statements (IDS) submitted on September 30, 2024, and August 25, 2025, are in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statement is being considered by the examiner.
Specification
The disclosure is objected to because of the following informalities: the RELATED APPLICATION section needs updated to reflect applications that have matured into patents. Appropriate correction is required.
Double Patenting
The nonstatutory double patenting rejection is based on a judicially created doctrine grounded in public policy (a policy reflected in the statute) so as to prevent the unjustified or improper timewise extension of the “right to exclude” granted by a patent and to prevent possible harassment by multiple assignees. A nonstatutory double patenting rejection is appropriate where the conflicting claims are not identical, but at least one examined application claim is not patentably distinct from the reference claim(s) because the examined application claim is either anticipated by, or would have been obvious over, the reference claim(s). See, e.g., In re Berg, 140 F.3d 1428, 46 USPQ2d 1226 (Fed. Cir. 1998); In re Goodman, 11 F.3d 1046, 29 USPQ2d 2010 (Fed. Cir. 1993); In re Longi, 759 F.2d 887, 225 USPQ 645 (Fed. Cir. 1985); In re Van Ornum, 686 F.2d 937, 214 USPQ 761 (CCPA 1982); In re Vogel, 422 F.2d 438, 164 USPQ 619 (CCPA 1970); In re Thorington, 418 F.2d 528, 163 USPQ 644 (CCPA 1969).
A timely filed terminal disclaimer in compliance with 37 CFR 1.321(c) or 1.321(d) may be used to overcome an actual or provisional rejection based on nonstatutory double patenting provided the reference application or patent either is shown to be commonly owned with the examined application, or claims an invention made as a result of activities undertaken within the scope of a joint research agreement. See MPEP § 717.02 for applications subject to examination under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA as explained in MPEP § 2159. See MPEP § 2146 et seq. for applications not subject to examination under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA . A terminal disclaimer must be signed in compliance with 37 CFR 1.321(b).
The filing of a terminal disclaimer by itself is not a complete reply to a nonstatutory double patenting (NSDP) rejection. A complete reply requires that the terminal disclaimer be accompanied by a reply requesting reconsideration of the prior Office action. Even where the NSDP rejection is provisional the reply must be complete. See MPEP § 804, subsection I.B.1. For a reply to a non-final Office action, see 37 CFR 1.111(a). For a reply to final Office action, see 37 CFR 1.113(c). A request for reconsideration while not provided for in 37 CFR 1.113(c) may be filed after final for consideration. See MPEP §§ 706.07(e) and 714.13.
The USPTO Internet website contains terminal disclaimer forms which may be used. Please visit www.uspto.gov/patent/patents-forms. The actual filing date of the application in which the form is filed determines what form (e.g., PTO/SB/25, PTO/SB/26, PTO/AIA /25, or PTO/AIA /26) should be used. A web-based eTerminal Disclaimer may be filled out completely online using web-screens. An eTerminal Disclaimer that meets all requirements is auto-processed and approved immediately upon submission. For more information about eTerminal Disclaimers, refer to www.uspto.gov/patents/apply/applying-online/eterminal-disclaimer.
Claims 1-20 are rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claims 1-20 of U.S. Patent No. 12,107,846. Although the claims at issue are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other because both application and patent claim identifying a first list of users in a messaging system; checking user identity for each user in the first list with a database to determine if each user is of record in the database; if the user is of record, automatically locating user identity credentials for each user and an associated service, in an event there is no record found, tagging the user as a provisional new user and assigning new user identity credentials to the provisional new user; performing at least one of a resolution action and a reconciliation action with other information found for the provisional new user to determine a status for the provisional new user, wherein the reconciliation action is performed by an inference engine configured to infer existence of presence of a single user when the single user participates as multiple participants in a session from different devices; and if the status for the provisional new user determines no prior record of user identity credentials, adding the provisional new user as a new user with the new user identity credentials to the database and using the new user identity credentials to sign in the new user to the application.
The patent further claims wherein the other information includes at least one of a real name, IP address and a telephone number. It would have been obvious to use user specific information as the other information as a way to identify the provisional user.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
The following is a quotation of the appropriate paragraphs of 35 U.S.C. 102 that form the basis for the rejections under this section made in this Office action:
A person shall be entitled to a patent unless –
(a)(1) the claimed invention was patented, described in a printed publication, or in public use, on sale, or otherwise available to the public before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claims 1-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Vangpat et al. (U.S. Patent Pub. No. 2013/0086670).
Regarding claims 1, 10, and 19, Vangpat et al. teaches a computer-implemented method, comprising: automatically facilitating login of a plurality of users to an application, by an adaptive log-in interface identifying the plurality of users from their use of a messaging system (paragraph 0071); checking each user identity with a database to determine if each user is of record in the database (paragraph 0065); automatically locating user identity credentials for each user and an associated service, if the user identity is of record in the database (paragraph 0065); tagging the user as a provisional new user and assigning new user identity credentials to the provisional new user, in an event the user identity is not of record in the database (paragraph 0066); performing a resolution action to determine if the user identity credentials located are unique (paragraph 0065); performing a reconciliation action to determine if the provisional user has a single presence of has appeared as multiple participants from different devices (paragraph 0065); and if the status for the provisional new user determines no prior record of user identity credentials, adding the provisional new user as a new user with the new user identity credentials to the database and using the new user identity credentials to sign in the new user to the application (paragraph 0067).
Regarding claims 2, 11, and 20, Vangpat et al. teaches wherein the adaptive login interface includes an identity-provider application tracking any and all user identification credentials previously used by the users to dynamically provide a current set of user credentials to the users before issuing authentication for the users in the instance a user requires access to a particular application, wherein the identity-provider application dynamically and continuously updates the database (paragraph 0046).
Regarding claims 3 and 12, Vangpat et al. teaches wherein the identity-provider application provides an object to set up a meeting event (paragraph 0015).
Regarding claims 4 and 13, Vangpat et al. teaches wherein the adaptive sign-in interface identifies the users by their use of user identity credentials across a plurality of different applications, services, or systems, tracking each instance of use of a new email address, a new phone number by an existing user in the database and registering the new email address or new phone number in a user record in the database (paragraph 0066).
Regarding claims 5 and 14, Vangpat et al. teaches wherein the plurality of user identity credentials relates to an email, a text and a telephone (paragraph 0016).
Regarding claims 6 and 15, Vangpat et al. teaches wherein the adaptive log-in interface is integrated with an identity trusted-broker application on a client device used by a user, wherein the identity-broker application serves to authenticate a set of user credentials provided by the adaptive log-in interface by returning the set of user credentials to a requesting application (paragraph 0027).
Regarding claims 7 and 16, Vangpat et al. teaches wherein if the status for the provisional new user determines a prior record of user identity credentials, resolving the user identity credentials and updating a record for an existing user (paragraph 0066).
Regarding claims 8 and 17, Vangpat et al. teaches wherein a notification is sent to the user when the user identity credentials are confirmed and wherein a query notification is sent to the user to confirm new user identity credentials in the event of uncertainty (paragraph 0064).
Regarding claims 9 and 18, Vangpat et al. teaches wherein the adaptive log-in interface is integrated with a single sign-on provider to facilitate a connection between a cloud computing resource to decrease a need for a user to re-authenticate when using a mobile or a roaming application (paragraph 0005).
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to BRANDON HOFFMAN whose telephone number is (571)272-3863. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 8:30AM-5:00PM.
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, Jeffrey Pwu can be reached at (571)272-6798. 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.
/BRANDON HOFFMAN/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2433