DETAILED ACTION
This office action is in reply to applicant communication filed on April 29, 2026.
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 .
Claims 1-30 are pending.
Response to Argument
Applicant’s arguments filed on April 29, 2026 with respect to the 35 USC 103 rejections of independent claims have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
Applicant’s arguments filed on April 29, 2026 with respect to the objection of claim 29 have been fully considered and withdrawn in view of the amendment made to the claim.
Applicant’s argues that the prior arts on record, Van (US Pub. No. 2022/0342972) in view of Levitov (US Pub. No. 2017/0329946) fails to teach the independent claims limitation, “….a first state by disabling a biometric data function and enabling an object recognition function” Examiner respectfully disagrees.
A review of the prior arts of the record (Van) corresponding to the above argued claim limitation reveals that the argued limitation is disclosed by Van’s reference as, (paragraph 46 of Van, in accordance with some examples, a method is described, the method comprising: at an electronic device with a display, a button, and one or more biometric sensors separate from the button: while the electronic device is in a first state in which a respective function of the device is disabled, detecting one or more activations of the button). According to Van, when the device is in the first state, every function of the device is disabled. Van’s device activates the biometric sensor only when it detects one or more activations of the button (see paragraph 6 of Van). Therefore, in Van’s first state, the biometric sensor is deactivated unless the button is activated. In addition to Van, the secondary reference (Levitov) disclosed part of the above limitation (i.e., enabling an object recognition function) as, (paragraph 18 of Levitov, the method of the present invention preferably comprises the following steps: storing a biometric representation for at least one authorized user; detecting motion near the computing device; activating an image capturing device when motion is detected; triggering the image capturing device to receive an image when motion is detected; activating a biometric analysis module when an image is received; analyzing the image using the biometric analysis module to identify any people in the image as authorized or unauthorized users; and deactivating the image capturing device and the biometric analysis module after the people in the image have been identified). Therefore, the combination of Van and Levitov teaches the above argued limitation.
Applicant’s argues that the prior arts on record, Van in view of Levitov fails to teach the independent claims limitation, “….in response to detecting the indicator: setting the device in a second state by enabling the biometric data function” Examiner respectfully disagrees.
A review of the prior arts of the record (Van) corresponding to the above argued claim limitation reveals that the argued limitation is disclosed by Van’s reference as, (paragraph 46 of Van, in response to detecting the one or more activations of the button (i.e., the claimed in response to detecting the indicator): capturing, with the one or more biometric sensors that are separate from the button, biometric data (i.e. the claimed second state)). As indicated in the first argument above, Van’s biometric sensor is activated when the button is activated and the activation of Van’s biometric sensor is equivalent to the claimed setting the device in second state.
In response to applicant’s argument that there is no teaching, suggestion, or motivation to combine the references, the examiner recognizes that obviousness may be established by combining or modifying the teachings of the prior art to produce the claimed invention where there is some teaching, suggestion, or motivation to do so found either in the references themselves or in the knowledge generally available to one of ordinary skill in the art. See In re Fine, 837 F.2d 1071, 5 USPQ2d 1596 (Fed. Cir. 1988), In re Jones, 958 F.2d 347, 21 USPQ2d 1941 (Fed. Cir. 1992), and KSR International Co. v. Teleflex, Inc., 550 U.S. 398, 82 USPQ2d 1385 (2007). In this case, Van’s reference relates generally to biometric authentication, and more specifically to interfaces and techniques for enrollment and authentication of biometric features, and Levitov’s reference relates to a method for regulating access to a computing device, wherein a motion detector detects motion near the computing device and triggers an imaging device to receive an image, which is then analyzed to identify any people in the image.
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 of this title, 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 1-30 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Van (US Pub. No. 2022/0342972) in view of Levitov (US Pub. No. 2017/0329946).
As per claim 1 Van discloses:
A method comprising: setting a device in a first state by disabling a biometric data function and enabling an object recognition function; (paragraph 46 of Van, in accordance with some examples, a method is described, the method comprising: at an electronic device with a display, a button, and one or more biometric sensors separate from the button: while the electronic device is in a first state in which a respective function of the device is disabled, detecting one or more activations of the button).
While the device is in the first state: analyzing data, and determining, based on the analyzed data, whether a user of the device provided an indicator; (paragraph 46 of Van, detecting one or more activations of the button) and
In response to detecting the indicator: setting the device in a second state by enabling the biometric data function, and performing the biometric data function to determine whether the user is authorized to use the device; and in response to determining the user is authorized to use the device, setting the device in a third state. (paragraph 46 of Van, in response to detecting the one or more activations of the button: capturing, with the one or more biometric sensors that are separate from the button, biometric data (i.e. the claimed second state); in accordance with a determination that the biometric data satisfies biometric authentication criteria, transitioning the electronic device to a second state in which the respective function of the device is enabled (i.e., the claimed third state)).
Van teaches the method of biometric authentication and more specifically to interface and techniques for enrollment and authentication of biometric features (see paragraph 2 of Van) and but fails to disclose:
Analyzing sensor data using the object recognition function.
However, in the same field of endeavor, Liu teaches this limitation as, (paragraph 18 of Levitov, the method of the present invention preferably comprises the following steps: storing a biometric representation for at least one authorized user; detecting motion near the computing device; activating an image capturing device when motion is detected; triggering the image capturing device to receive an image when motion is detected; activating a biometric analysis module when an image is received; analyzing the image using the biometric analysis module to identify any people in the image as authorized or unauthorized users; and deactivating the image capturing device and the biometric analysis module after the people in the image have been identified).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the teaching of Van and include the above limitation using the teaching of Levitov in order to enhance computer information security by detecting user/motion near the computing device and activate an image capturing device (see paragraph 18 of Levitov).
Claim 21 is rejected under the same reason set forth in rejection of claim 1.
As per claim 2 Van in view of Levitov discloses:
The method of claim 1, further comprising determining a geographic location of the device, wherein setting the device in the first state is responsive to the geographic location being associated with a requirement to obtain consent from users prior to collecting or using biometric data. (Paragraph 189 of Van, device 100 optionally includes, in addition to accelerometer(s) 168, a magnetometer (not shown) and a GPS (or GLONASS or other global navigation system) receiver (not shown) for obtaining information concerning the location and orientation (e.g., portrait or landscape) of device 100).
Claim 22 is rejected under the same reason set forth in rejection of claim 2.
As per claim 3 Van in view of Levitov discloses:
The method of claim 1, wherein setting the device in the third state includes unlocking the device. (Paragraph 45 of Van, capturing first biometric data using the one or more biometric sensors; means for after capturing the first biometric data: means for in accordance with a determination that the first biometric data satisfies biometric authentication criteria, transitioning the device from the locked state to an unlocked state; and means for in accordance with a determination that the first biometric data does not satisfy the biometric authentication criteria).
Claim 23 is rejected under the same reason set forth in rejection of claim 3.
As per claim 4 Van in view of Levitov discloses:
The method of claim 1, wherein setting the device in the third state includes granting access to a locked application or feature. (Paragraph 42 of Van, in accordance with a determination that the respective operation requires authentication and that the device is in the unlocked state, performing the respective operation; and in accordance with a determination that the respective operation requires authentication and that the device is in the locked state: capturing second biometric data using the one or more biometric sensors without an explicit input from the user requesting a second biometric authentication check; and after capturing the second biometric data, performing the second biometric authentication check, including: in accordance with a determination that the second biometric data satisfies the biometric authentication criteria, performing the respective operation; and in accordance with a determination that the second biometric data does not satisfy the biometric authentication criteria, forgoing performance of the respective operation).
Claim 24 is rejected under the same reason set forth in rejection of claim 4.
As per claim 5 Van in view of Levitov discloses:
The method of claim 1, wherein the object recognition function is incapable of identifying the user as a particular person. (Paragraph 36 of Van, in accordance with some examples, a method is described, the method comprising: at an electronic device having one or more biometric sensors and a display: detecting that device wake criteria have been met; in response to detecting that the device wake criteria have been met transitioning the electronic device from a first visual state to a second visual state; and after transitioning the device to the second visual state: in accordance with a determination that biometric authentication criteria has been met based on biometric data provided by the one or more biometric sensors) and (paragraph 688 of Van, the electronic device wakes from a low power (e.g., display-off) state. As illustrated, in some examples, the electronic device 1900 wakes in response to a lift gesture 1906 performed by a user).
Claim 25 is rejected under the same reason set forth in rejection of claim 5.
As per claim 6 Van in view of Levitov discloses:
The method of claim 1, wherein disabling the biometric data function comprises restricting an application from analyzing the sensor data for personal identification purposes. (Paragraph 50 of Van, in accordance with some examples, an electronic device is described, the electronic device comprising: a display; a button; one or more biometric sensors separate from the button; means for while the electronic device is in a first state in which a respective function of the device is disabled).
Claim 26 is rejected under the same reason set forth in rejection of claim 6.
As per claim 7 Van in view of Levitov discloses:
The method of claim 1, wherein disabling the biometric data function comprises disabling a fingerprint analysis at a fingerprint sensor. (Paragraph 50 of Van, in accordance with some examples, an electronic device is described, the electronic device comprising: a display; a button; one or more biometric sensors separate from the button; means for while the electronic device is in a first state in which a respective function of the device is disabled).
Claim 27 is rejected under the same reason set forth in rejection of claim 7.
As per claim 8 Van in view of Levitov discloses:
The method of claim 6, further comprising, in response to detecting an input at the fingerprint sensor while in the first state, issuing a request at the device for the user to provide the indicator to enable the fingerprint analysis of the fingerprint sensor. (Paragraph 78 of Van, a credential entry user interface with a plurality of character entry keys; while displaying the credential entry user interface, receiving, via the touch-sensitive display, a touch gesture input that includes movement of a contact on the touch-sensitive display; and in response to receiving the touch gesture input that includes movement of the contact on the touch-sensitive display: in accordance with a determination that a first set of one or more criteria are met, the first set of one or more criteria including a requirement that biometric authentication is currently enabled on the electronic device, attempting to biometrically authenticate a user of the electronic device based on biometric information captured using the one or more biometric sensors.
Claim 28 is rejected under the same reason set forth in rejection of claim 8.
As per claim 9 Van in view of Levitov discloses:
The method of claim 1, wherein the indicator is a gesture. (Paragraph 77 of Van. receiving, via the touch-sensitive display, a touch gesture input that includes movement of a contact on the touch-sensitive display; and in response to receiving the touch gesture input that includes movement of the contact on the touch-sensitive display: in accordance with a determination that a first set of one or more criteria are met, the first set of one or more criteria including a requirement that biometric authentication is currently enabled on the electronic device).
Claim 29 is rejected under the same reason set forth in rejection of claim 9.
As per claim 10 Van in view of Levitov discloses:
The method of claim 1, wherein the indicator is a printed symbol. (Paragraph 11 of Van, displaying, on the display, a first user interface; while displaying the first user interface, detecting an occurrence of a condition that corresponds to initiating a biometric enrollment process for enrolling a respective type of biometric feature; in response to detecting the occurrence of a condition that corresponds to initiating the biometric enrollment process, displaying, on the display, a digital viewfinder including a preview of image data captured by the one or more cameras; and after initiating the biometric enrollment process).
Claim 30 is rejected under the same reason set forth in rejection of claim 10.
As per claim 11 Van discloses:
An apparatus comprising: a state controller to manage a state of a device, wherein: a first state includes a biometric data function being disabled and an object recognition function being enabled; (paragraph 46 of Van, in accordance with some examples, a method is described, the method comprising: at an electronic device with a display, a button, and one or more biometric sensors separate from the button: while the electronic device is in a first state in which a respective function of the device is disabled, detecting one or more activations of the button).
A second state includes the biometric data function being enabled; and a third state includes the device or an application of the device being unlocked; (paragraph 46 of Van, in response to detecting the one or more activations of the button: capturing, with the one or more biometric sensors that are separate from the button, biometric data (i.e. the claimed second state); in accordance with a determination that the biometric data satisfies biometric authentication criteria, transitioning the electronic device to a second state in which the respective function of the device is enabled (i.e., the claimed third state)).
An indicator detector to, when the device is in the first state, analyze data to determine whether a user of the device provided an indicator, wherein the state controller is to set the device to the second state in response to the indicator detector detecting the indicator; and an authenticator to, when in the second state, perform the biometric data function to determine whether the user is authorized to use the device, wherein the state controller is to set the device to the third state in response to the authenticator determining that the user is authorized to use the device, and at least one of the state controller, the indicator detector, and the authenticator is implemented by a logic circuit. (Paragraph 46 of Van, in response to detecting the one or more activations of the button: capturing, with the one or more biometric sensors that are separate from the button, biometric data (i.e. the claimed second state); in accordance with a determination that the biometric data satisfies biometric authentication criteria, transitioning the electronic device to a second state in which the respective function of the device is enabled (i.e., the claimed third state)).
Van teaches the method of biometric authentication and more specifically to interface and techniques for enrollment and authentication of biometric features (see paragraph 2 of Van) and but fails to disclose:
Analyze sensor data using the object recognition function.
However, in the same field of endeavor, Liu teaches this limitation as, (paragraph 18 of Levitov, the method of the present invention preferably comprises the following steps: storing a biometric representation for at least one authorized user; detecting motion near the computing device; activating an image capturing device when motion is detected; triggering the image capturing device to receive an image when motion is detected; activating a biometric analysis module when an image is received; analyzing the image using the biometric analysis module to identify any people in the image as authorized or unauthorized users; and deactivating the image capturing device and the biometric analysis module after the people in the image have been identified).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the teaching of Van and include the above limitation using the teaching of Levitov in order to enhance computer information security by detecting user/motion near the computing device and activate an image capturing device (see paragraph 18 of Levitov).
As per claim 12 Van in view of Levitov discloses:
The apparatus of claim 11, wherein the state controller is to determine a geographic location of the device, and setting the device in the first state is responsive to the geographic location being associated with a requirement to obtain consent from users prior to collecting or using biometric data. (Paragraph 189 of Van, a GPS (or GLONASS or other global navigation system) receiver (not shown) for obtaining information concerning the location and orientation (e.g., portrait or landscape) of device 100) and (paragraph 194 of Van, device/global internal state 157, as shown in FIGS. 1A and 3. Device/global internal state 157 includes one or more of: active application state, indicating which applications, if any, are currently active; display state, indicating what applications, views or other information occupy various regions of touch screen display 112; sensor state, including information obtained from the device's various sensors and input control devices 116; and location information concerning the device's location and/or attitude).
As per claim 13 Van in view of Levitov discloses:
The apparatus of claim 11, wherein the state controller is to set the device to the third state by granting an access level corresponding to a profile associated with the user. (Paragraph 1125 of Van, successful user authentication via fingerprint authentication (as described with respect to FIGS. 34A-34D) results in a certain outcome (e.g., access to a restricted application, webpage, or account)) and (paragraph 608 of Van, the electronic device (e.g., 100, 300, 500, 1500) determines whether a face or a fingerprint of the user matches stored information about face(s) and/or fingerprint(s) that are authorized for use in biometric authentication at the device (e.g., 100, 300, 500, 1500)).
As per claim 14 Van in view of Levitov discloses:
The apparatus of claim 11, wherein the object recognition function is incapable of identifying the user as a particular person. (Paragraph 36 of Van, in accordance with some examples, a method is described, the method comprising: at an electronic device having one or more biometric sensors and a display: detecting that device wake criteria have been met; in response to detecting that the device wake criteria have been met transitioning the electronic device from a first visual state to a second visual state; and after transitioning the device to the second visual state: in accordance with a determination that biometric authentication criteria has been met based on biometric data provided by the one or more biometric sensors) and (paragraph 688 of Van, the electronic device wakes from a low power (e.g., display-off) state. As illustrated, in some examples, the electronic device 1900 wakes in response to a lift gesture 1906 performed by a user).
As per claim 15 Van in view of Levitov discloses:
The device of claim 11, wherein the biometric data function being disabled comprises being restricted from analyzing the sensor data for personal identification purposes. .(Paragraph 50 of Van, in accordance with some examples, an electronic device is described, the electronic device comprising: a display; a button; one or more biometric sensors separate from the button; means for while the electronic device is in a first state in which a respective function of the device is disabled).
As per claim 16 Van in view of Levitov discloses:
The device of claim 11, wherein the biometric data function being disabled comprises sensor data used for the object recognition function being deleted without using the collected data for the biometric data function. (Paragraph 710 of Van, one or more features (e.g., display (e.g., 1902), the one or more biometric sensors (e.g., 1903), microphone, access to sensitive data such as the contents of messages and applications, the ability to perform destructive actions such as deleting photos or communications).
As per claim 17 Van in view of Levitov discloses:
The device of claim 11, wherein the biometric data function being disabled comprises a fingerprint analysis at a fingerprint sensor being disabled. (Paragraph 50 of Van, in accordance with some examples, an electronic device is described, the electronic device comprising: a display; a button; one or more biometric sensors separate from the button; means for while the electronic device is in a first state in which a respective function of the device is disabled).
As per claim 18 Van in view of Levitov discloses:
The device of claim 17, further comprising an output device to output a request for the user to provide the indicator to enable the fingerprint analysis at the fingerprint sensor in response to detecting an input at the fingerprint sensor. (Paragraph 78 of Van, a credential entry user interface with a plurality of character entry keys; while displaying the credential entry user interface, receiving, via the touch-sensitive display, a touch gesture input that includes movement of a contact on the touch-sensitive display; and in response to receiving the touch gesture input that includes movement of the contact on the touch-sensitive display: in accordance with a determination that a first set of one or more criteria are met, the first set of one or more criteria including a requirement that biometric authentication is currently enabled on the electronic device, attempting to biometrically authenticate a user of the electronic device based on biometric information captured using the one or more biometric sensors).
As per claim 19 Van in view of Levitov discloses:
The device of claim 11, wherein the indicator is a gesture. (Paragraph 77 of Van. receiving, via the touch-sensitive display, a touch gesture input that includes movement of a contact on the touch-sensitive display; and in response to receiving the touch gesture input that includes movement of the contact on the touch-sensitive display: in accordance with a determination that a first set of one or more criteria are met, the first set of one or more criteria including a requirement that biometric authentication is currently enabled on the electronic device).
As per claim 20 Van in view of Levitov discloses:
The device of claim 11, wherein the indicator is a printed symbol. (Paragraph 11 of Van, displaying, on the display, a first user interface; while displaying the first user interface, detecting an occurrence of a condition that corresponds to initiating a biometric enrollment process for enrolling a respective type of biometric feature; in response to detecting the occurrence of a condition that corresponds to initiating the biometric enrollment process, displaying, on the display, a digital viewfinder including a preview of image data captured by the one or more cameras; and after initiating the biometric enrollment process).
Conclusion
The prior art made or record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant’s disclosure is Blanch (US Pub. No. 2018/0225435). Blanch discloses:
The portable device comprises means for obtaining biometric data of a user; means for activating a user profile from the biometric data obtained, enabling access to data associated with the activated user profile; and means for deactivating an activated user profile, disabling access to the data associated with the user profile, which comprise a sensor that upon activation deactivates the activated user profile. The portable device selects and activates a user profile from the different user profiles previously configured from the biometric data of a user, such as a fingerprint, to thus enable access to the data associated with the user profile that can be used by different peripherals forming part of the portable device, such as screens, radio frequency transmitters, light indicators, etc. Access to the data associated with the user profile can be disabled by actuating a sensor that enables the deactivation of the activated user profile.
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 TESHOME HAILU whose telephone number is (571)270-3159. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 8 a.m. - 5 p.m..
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, Ali Shayanfar can be reached at (571) 270-1050. 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.
/TESHOME HAILU/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2434
Prosecution Insights