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 1-20 are pending.
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. 12133081 (hereinafter ’081). Although the claims at issue are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other because each of the enumerated, instant claims in the following table is anticipated by a correspondingly mapped ‘081 claim.
Instant claims
‘081 claims
1, 11. A method comprising:
receiving, by at least one processor, an electronic access request to add a secondary electronic profile of a secondary user to a primary electronic profile of a primary user;
generating, by the at least one processor, a plurality of security challenges to authenticate the electronic access request;
sending, by the at least one processor, at least one first security challenge of the plurality of security challenges to the primary user, and
sending, by the at least one processor, at least one secondary security challenge of the plurality of security challenges to the secondary user;
receiving, by the at least one processor, a first response from a primary user device associated with the primary user in response to the at least one first security challenge;
receiving, by the at least one processor, a secondary response from a secondary user device associated with the secondary user in response to the at least one secondary security challenge;
determining, by the at least one processor, a user authentication that authenticates the electronic access request based at least in part on: the first response being a first valid response to the at least one first security challenge, the secondary response being a secondary valid response to the at least one secondary security challenge,
generating, by the at least one processor, the secondary electronic profile as a nested profile within the primary electronic profile.
2, 12. The method of claim 1, [1] wherein the first response comprises a primary user device identifier identifying the primary user device (maps to ‘081, claims 1 and 11) and [2] wherein the secondary response comprises a secondary user device identifier (maps to ‘081, claim 1).
3, 13. The method of claim 1, further comprising: [3] determining, by the at least one processor, a first response time associated with the first response (maps to ‘081, claims 1 and 11); and [4] determining, by the at least one processor, a secondary response time associated with the secondary response (maps to ‘081, claims 1 and 11).
4, 14. The method of claim 3, wherein the determining a user authentication that authenticates the electronic access request is further [5] based at least in part on the first response time and the secondary response time being received within a first predefined time period of each other (maps to ‘081, claims 1 and 11).
5, 15. The method of claim 3, wherein the determining a user authentication that authenticates [6] the electronic access request is further based at least in part on the first response time being within a first predetermined time period from sending the at least one first security challenge and the secondary response time being within a secondary predefined time period from sending that at least one secondary security challenge (maps to ‘081, claims 1 and 11).
6, 16. The method of claim 2, wherein the determining a user authentication that authenticates the electronic access request is further [7] based at least in part on the primary user device identifier and the secondary user device identifier being different (maps to ‘081, claims 1 and 11).
7, 17. The method as recited in claim 1, further comprising: determining, by the at least one processor, that the primary user device and the secondary user devices are different devices; and determining, by the at least one processor, a user authentication that authenticates the electronic access request based at least in part on the primary user device and the secondary user devices being different devices.
8, 18. The method as recited in claim 1, further comprising: receiving, by the at least one processor, a primary user location associated with the first valid response; receiving, by the at least one processor, a secondary user location associated with the secondary valid response; determining, by the at least one processor, a distance between the primary user location and the secondary user location; and determining, by the at least one processor, the user authentication based at least in part on the distance and a predetermined distance threshold.
9, 19. The method as recited in claim 1, wherein the security challenge, when sent to the primary user, causes the primary user device to display in a primary user device application to present a user selectable element allowing the primary user to confirm the secondary user; and wherein the security challenge, when sent to the secondary user, causes the secondary user device to display in a secondary user device application to present the user selectable element allowing the secondary user to confirm the secondary user.
10, 20. The method as recited in claim 1, wherein the primary electronic profile is a financial account.
1, 11. A method comprising:
receiving, by at least one processor, an electronic access request to add a secondary electronic profile of a secondary user to a primary electronic profile of a primary user; wherein the electronic access request comprises: a secondary user identifier identifying the secondary user, and a primary user identifier identifying the primary user;
determining, by the at least one processor, secondary user contact information associated with the secondary user based at least in part on the secondary user identifier;
determining, by the at least one processor, primary user contact information associated with the primary user based at least in part on the primary user identifier;
generating, by the at least one processor, a plurality of security challenges to authenticate the electronic access request;
sending, by the at least one processor, at least one first security challenge of the plurality of security challenges to the primary user based at least in part on the primary user contact information, and
sending, by the at least one processor, at least one secondary security challenge of the plurality of security challenges to the secondary user based at least in part on the secondary user contact information;
receiving, by the at least one processor, a first response from a primary user device associated with the primary user in response to the at least one first security challenge; [1] wherein the first response comprises a primary user device identifier identifying the primary user device;
[3] determining, by the at least one processor, a first response time associated with the first response;
receiving, by the at least one processor, a secondary response from a secondary user device associated with the secondary user in response to the at least one secondary security challenge; [2] wherein the secondary response comprises a secondary user device identifier identifying the secondary user device;
[4] determining, by the at least one processor, a secondary response time associated with the secondary response;
determining, by the at least one processor, a user authentication that authenticates the electronic access request based at least in part on: the first response being a first valid response to the at least one first security challenge, the secondary response being a secondary valid response to the at least one secondary security challenge, [7] the primary user device identifier and the secondary user device identifier being different, [6] the first response time being within a first predefined time period from sending the at least one first security challenge, the secondary response time being within a secondary predefined time period from sending the at least one secondary security challenge, and [5] the first response time and the secondary response time being received within a third predefined time period of each other;
generating, by the at least one processor, the secondary electronic profile as a nested profile within the primary electronic profile, wherein the secondary electronic profile comprises at least one access security permission to allow the secondary user to electronically access the primary electronic profile based at least in part on the secondary user identifier and the user authentication; and
instructing, by the at least one processor, a display of at least one of the primary user device and the secondary user device to display a confirmation of the secondary user being added to the primary electronic profile based at least in part on the access security permission.
2, 12. The method as recited in claim 1, further comprising: determining, by the at least one processor, that the primary user device and the secondary user devices are different devices; and determining, by the at least one processor, a user authentication that authenticates the electronic access request based at least in part on the primary user device and the secondary user devices being different devices.
4, 14. The method as recited in claim 1, further comprising: receiving, by the at least one processor, a primary user location associated with the first valid response; receiving, by the at least one processor, a secondary user location associated with the secondary valid response; determining, by the at least one processor, a distance between the primary user location and the secondary user location; and determining, by the at least one processor, the user authentication based at least in part on the distance and a predetermined distance threshold.
9, 19. The method as recited in claim 1, wherein the security challenge, when sent to the primary user, causes the primary user device to display in a primary user device application to present a user selectable element allowing the primary user to confirm the secondary user; and wherein the security challenge, when sent to the secondary user, causes the secondary user device to display in a secondary user device application to present the user selectable element allowing the secondary user to confirm the secondary user.
10, 20. The method as recited in claim 1, wherein the primary electronic profile is a financial account.
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
a. Jakobsson (US 20210058395): Techniques for SMS/email security challenge code authentication disclosed (par. 0356, 0358).
b. Daly (USP 10817590): Techniques for SMS security challenge code disclosed (col 23, ll 23-40)
c. Lopez-Uricoechea (USP 10944752)
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to CLAYTON R WILLIAMS whose telephone number is (571)270-3801. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 10:00am - 6:00pm.
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, Nicholas Taylor can be reached at 571-272-3889. 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.
/CLAYTON R WILLIAMS/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2443