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 .
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted on 10/06/2025 was filed before the mailing of the first office action. The submission is in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statement is being considered by the examiner.
Priority
Acknowledgment is made of applicant’s claim for priority to application number 18/022686, filed on 02/22/2023. The abandoned parent application is claimed as having priority, as National Stage under 35 U.S.C. 371, to Application No. PCT/JP2020/036874, filed on 09/29/2020.
Status of Claims
Claims 1-4 were rejected in the Non-Final Office action mailed on 06/04/2025. Applicant’s amended claimset, entered on 09/04/2025, amended Claims 1-4. Herein this Final Office Action, Claims 1-4 are rejected.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments filed 09/04/2025, with respect to Rejections under 35 U.S.C. 101 for Claims 1-4, have been fully considered and are not persuasive.
On Page 5, Applicant argues that the “the automatic registration for a service and authentication of a user based on biometric information” “represent a technical improvement to the field of service registration systems” that integrates any judicial exception into a practical application under MPEP 2106.04(d). Examiner does not agree.
MPEP 2106.05(a) states “If it is asserted that the invention improves upon conventional functioning of a computer, or upon conventional technology or technological processes, a technical explanation as to how to implement the invention should be present in the specification. That is, the disclosure must provide sufficient details such that one of ordinary skill in the art would recognize the claimed invention as providing an improvement.”
MPEP 2106.05(a)I states “Examples that the courts have indicated may not be sufficient to show an improvement in computer-functionality: . . . iii. Mere automation of manual processes, such as using a generic computer to process an application for financing a purchase, Credit Acceptance Corp. v. Westlake Services, 859 F.3d 1044, 1055, 123 USPQ2d 1100, 1108-09 (Fed. Cir. 2017) . . .”
MPEP 2106.05(a)II states “Examples that the courts have indicated may not be sufficient to show an improvement to technology include: i. A commonplace business method being applied on a general purpose computer, Alice Corp., 573 U.S. at 223, 110 USPQ2d at 1976; Versata Dev. Group, Inc. v. SAP Am., Inc., 793 F.3d 1306, 1334, 115 USPQ2d 1681, 1701 (Fed. Cir. 2015); . . . ; iii. Gathering and analyzing information using conventional techniques and displaying the result, TLI Communications, 823 F.3d at 612-13, 118 USPQ2d at 1747-48; . . .”
Examiner responds that limitations related to “automatic” operations can have varying degrees of automation, to which may, or may not, represent a patent eligible technical improvement. In the instant claims, the specification fails to include the necessary technical explanation that shows a technical improvement, per MPEP 2106.05(a), beyond merely using generic computer components to perform the abstract idea per MPEP 2106.05(f).
On Page 6, Applicant argues “One of ordinary skill in the art would readily recognize that automatically collecting biometric user information, transferring said biometric user information that is used to generate an authentication result to an authentication server, as recited in the independent claims, is not a mental process or a method of organizing human activity and, thus, is not an abstract idea under 35 U.S.C. § 101.” Examiner does not agree.
Examiner responds that the 101 rejection is based on determining the scope of the recited abstract idea and then analyzing the recited additional elements, and claim as a whole, under Step 2A Prong Two and Step 2B. As explained in greater detail below in the rejection section, limitations of authenticating someone’s identity based on hearing their voice is a “mental process” (See MPEP 2106.04(a)III.), and limitations of reserving a hotel room and verifying someone’s identity are “certain methods of organizing human activity” (See MPEP 2106.04(a)II.). Additionally, as explained in greater detail below in the rejection section, the claimed computer components were determined to be additional elements, not a part of the abstract idea.
On Page 6, Applicant argues “Even, assuming arguendo, that the independent claims recite an abstract idea, these claims are directed to a practical application of any such abstract idea. A person of ordinary skill in the art would understand that these features enable enhanced convenience in comparison to alternative user registration and authentication methods. In the process of a typical user check-in, a user must present identification in person to an employee who manually verifies the user. By contrast, the present system can enhance user convenience by eliminating the need for a user to manually provide information for authentication. Furthermore, the present system enhances the efficiency of the system by eliminating the need for an employee to manually perform authentication. Accordingly, the claims represent an improvement to the field of service registration systems, and thus integrate any alleged judicial exception into a practical application.” Examiner does not agree.
Examiner responds that, per MPEP 2106.05(a), as cited above, a “technical explanation” must be present in the original disclosure, and “mere automation of manual processes” or “a commonplace business method being applied on a general purpose computer” are not improvements to technology. Applicant’s specification fails to disclose the required “technical explanation.”
Additionally, the claims to not eliminate the need for a user to provide identification information. Essentially, instead of providing their information to an employee, the claims have them providing their information to a computer, which would be analogous to the ineligible examples of MPEP 2106.05(a) discussed above, and be considered merely applying an abstract idea using a computer under MPEP 2106.05(f).
Applicant’s arguments filed 09/04/2025, with respect to Rejections under 35 U.S.C. 103 for Claims 1-4, have been fully considered are not persuasive.
On Pages 6-7, Applicant argues “Applicant respectfully submits that neither Italia, Shingu, nor any reasonable combination thereof teaches or suggests at least the above emphasized feature of claim 1. In rejecting previous claim 1, the Office cited to Italia at Fig. 2 as allegedly disclosing the above user prompt. However, Italia at Fig 2 merely describes "Prompt mobile computing device to acquire resource access application". Acquiring resource access is not equivalent to performing biometric authentication, as in present claim 1. Thus, Italia fails to teach or suggest "prompting the user to register biometric information of the user to an authentication server performing the biometric authentication when the reservation for the service is accepted" as required by present claim 1. Shingu does not resolve the deficiencies of Italia.” Examiner does not agree.
Examiner first notes that Applicant’s arguments do not include emphasized features of claim 1 “above.”
Examiner responds that the claims do not recite the limitation of "prompting the user to register biometric information of the user to an authentication server performing the biometric authentication when the reservation for the service is accepted." Additionally, the rejection has Shingu teaching “in a case of accepting the reservation for the service, transmit, to the terminal, a reservation completion notice including introduction information for registering biometric information of the user necessary for the biometric authentication.”
On Page 7 Applicant argues “Furthermore, none of the cited prior art provides any teaching of the transmission of biometric information, and the generation and receipt of an authentication result based on transmitted biometric information, much less "transmit the biometric information to the authentication server", and "receive an authentication result, generated based on the biometric information, from the authentication server." as required by present claim 1.” Examiner does not agree.
Both Italia (as cited in the rejection below) in at least ¶52, ¶¶61-62, and ¶¶96-98, and Shingu in at least Fig. 2 and ¶¶18-23 teaches the referenced limitation. Examiner notes that the additionally cited art of Alibaba teaches the use of voiceprint as having advantages over other biometric identification means, including facial recognition (Pages 1-2). Therefore, the art rejection remains.
On Page 7, Applicant argues that the remaining rejections should be withdrawn based on similarity and dependency to Claim 1. Examiner does not agree.
Examiner responds that because Claim 1 remains rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103, justification based on similarity and dependency does not overcome the rejection.
Claim Objection
Claim 1 is objected to because of the following informalities:
Claim 1 recites “the biometric authentication. receive the biometric information of the user” at lines 11-12. Although a period would normally signify the end of the claim, the period after “biometric authentication” is a typographical error, and should be replaced with appropriate punctuation, e.g. a comma or semicolon.
Appropriate correction is required.
Claim Interpretation
Claim 1 recites “voiceprint” in the last three paragraphs of the claim. The term is given its broadest reasonable interpretation in light of the specification under MPEP 2111. However, the specification (¶21) only lists “voiceprint” as an example of biometric information. See also Specification ¶73 and ¶114 discussing feature extraction.
MPEP 2111.01.I states “Under a broadest reasonable interpretation (BRI), words of the claim must be given their plain meaning, unless such meaning is inconsistent with the specification. The plain meaning of a term means the ordinary and customary meaning given to the term by those of ordinary skill in the art at the relevant time.”
MPEP 2111.01.III states “In some cases it is also appropriate to look to how the claim term is used in the prior art, which includes prior art patents, published applications, trade publications, and dictionaries. Phillips v. AWH Corp., 415 F.3d 1303, 1317, 75 USPQ2d 1321, 1329 (Fed. Cir. 2005) ("Although we have emphasized the importance of intrinsic evidence [(e.g. the specification)] in claim construction, we have also authorized district courts to rely on extrinsic evidence, which "consists of all evidence external to the patent and prosecution history, including expert and inventor testimony, dictionaries, and learned treatises.").”
Thus, this term is limited to its dictionary definition, which is consistent with its use in the art, of “an individually distinctive pattern of certain voice characteristics that is spectrographically produced” (emphasis added). A person of ordinary skill in the art would understand that “voiceprint” is referring to an output of a spectrograph, and not merely the unique sound characteristics (e.g. tone, pitch, timbre, ect.) of a voice.
Claims 3-4 recite “voiceprint” in the last three paragraphs of the claims, which is interpreted consistently with the similar limitations 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.
Claims 1-4 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 101 because the claimed invention is directed to an abstract idea without significantly more.
Step 1
Claims 1-2 recite a server (i.e. a machine or manufacture), Claim 3 recites a method (i.e. a process), and Claim 4 recites a non-transitory computer readable medium (i.e. a machine or manufacture). Therefore, Claims 1-4 all fall within the one of the four statutory categories of invention of 35 U.S.C. 101.
Step 2A, Prong One
Independent Claim 1 recites the abstract idea of “storing instructions; and [being] configured to execute the instructions to:
acquire, from a [user], first reservation information about a reservation for a service provided using biometric authentication;
determine whether or not to accept the reservation for the service based on the first reservation information and second reservation information registered . . . ; and
in a case of accepting the reservation for the service, transmit, to the [user], a reservation completion notice including introduction information for registering biometric information of the user necessary for the biometric authentication.
receive the biometric information of the user;
extract at least a [voice characteristic] from the biometric information;
transmit the extracted [voice characteristic] to an [authenticator] performing the biometric authentication; and
receive an authentication result, generated based on the [voice characteristic], from the [authenticator].”
The limitations stated above are processes/ functions that under broadest reasonable interpretation covers (1) acquiring reservation information, (2) determining whether to accept the reservation based on certain information, (3) transmitting a notice including information about registering for biometric authentication upon determining acceptance, (4) receiving biometric information of the user, (5) extracting voice characteristic from the biometric information, (6) transmitting the extracted voice characteristics to perform biometric authentication, and (7) receiving authentication results based on the biometric authentication, all of which are managing personal behavior by following rules and interacting between people (i.e. identifying or authenticating someone’s voice is a “social activity” and determining whether to accept a reservation based biometric identification is “social activities, teaching, [or] following rules or instructions”) and commercial or legal interactions (i.e. making a reservation is a “legal obligation,” “marketing or sales activity or behavior,” or “business relations”), which are certain methods of organizing human activity, an abstract idea, under MPEP 2106.04(a)(2)II, and “observations” (i.e. receiving biometric information), “evaluations” (i.e. extracting voice characteristics), and “judgments” (i.e. biometric authentication), which are mental processes, an abstract idea, under MPEP 2106.04(a)(2)III. The mere the recitation of generic computer components (i.e., the “server,” “memory,” “processor,” “user’s terminal,” “reservation information database,” “voiceprint,” and “authentication server”) implementing the identified abstract idea does not take the claim out of the certain methods of organizing human activity or mental processes groupings. MPEP 2106.04(d). If a claim limitation, under its broadest reasonable interpretation, covers “managing personal behavior or relationships or interactions between people,” “commercial or legal interactions,” “observations,” “evaluations,” and “judgments,” but for the recitation of generic computer components, then it falls in the certain methods of organizing human activity or mental processes groupings of abstract ideas. MPEP 2106.04. Therefore, Claim 1 recites an abstract idea.
Step 2A, Prong Two
The judicial exception is not integrated into a practical application. Claim 1 as a whole amounts to: (i) merely invoking generic components as a tool to perform the abstract idea or “apply it” (or an equivalent) and (ii) generally links the use of a judicial exception to a particular technological environment or field of use. The claim recites the additional elements of:
(i) “server” comprising (ii) “memory” and (iii) “processor,”
(iv) “user’s terminal,”
(v) “reservation database,”
(vi) “voiceprint,” and
(vii) “authentication server.”
The additional elements of (i) “server” (Fig. 3 and 19 and ¶¶163-64 shows “hotel server 30” (i.e. “server 100”) includes a “computer.”), (ii) “memory” (Fig. 19 and ¶167 shows “memory 312”), (iii) “processor” (Fig. 19 and ¶166 shows “processor 311”), (iv) “user’s terminal” (Fig. 3, 16, ¶40, and ¶118 shows “terminal 40.”), (v) “reservation database” (Fig. 13 and ¶110 shows “The reservation information database is built on the storage unit 305.”), (vi) “voiceprint” (¶21 shows “Examples of the user’s biometric information include data (feature quantities) calculated from physical characteristics unique to the individual, such as a face, a fingerprint, a voiceprint, a vein, a retina, and an iris pattern of a pupil.” ¶73 and ¶114 shows extraction of features from biometric information, but does not mention “voiceprint.”), and (vii) “authentication server” (Fig. 2 and ¶20 shows “The authentication server 10 may be installed at the site of the authentication center or in the cloud.” ¶171 shows “Each of the authentication server 10, the Web server 20, the authentication terminal 31, the terminal 40, etc., can also be configured by an information processor in the same manner as the hotel server 30.”), are recited at a high-level of generality, such that, when viewed as whole/ordered combination (Fig. 2-3, 13, 16, and 19 shows elements in combination), they amount to no more than mere instruction to apply the judicial exception using generic computer components or “apply it” (See MPEP 2106.05(f)).
The (i) “server,” (ii) “memory,” (iii) “processor,” (iv) “user’s terminal,” (v) “reservation database,” (vi) “voiceprint,” and (vii) “authentication server,” when viewed as whole/ordered combination (Fig. 2-3, 13, 16, and 19 shows elements in combination.), does no more than generally link the use of the judicial exception to a particular technological environment or field of use (i.e. online computer environment) (See MPEP 2106.05(h)).
Accordingly, these additional elements, when viewed as a whole/ordered combination (Fig. 2-3, 13, 16, and 19 shows elements in combination), do not integrate the abstract idea into a practical application because it does not impose any meaningful limits on practicing the abstract idea. Thus, the claim is directed to an abstract idea.
Step 2B
As discussed above with respect to Step 2A Prong Two, the additional elements amount to no more than: (i) “apply it” (or an equivalent) and (ii) generally link the use of a judicial exception to a particular technological environment or field of use, and are not a practical application of the abstract idea. The same analysis applies here in Step 2B, i.e., (i) merely invoking the generic components as a tool to perform the abstract idea or “apply it” (See MPEP 2106.05(f)) and (ii) generally linking the use of a judicial exception to a particular technological environment or field of use (See MPEP 2106.05(h)), does not integrate the abstract idea into a practical application at Step 2A or provide an inventive concept at Step 2B.
Therefore, the additional elements of (i) “server,” (ii) “memory,” (iii) “processor,” (iv) “user’s terminal,” (v) “reservation database,” (vi) “voiceprint,” and (vii) “authentication server,” do not integrate the abstract idea into a practical application at Step 2A or provide an inventive concept at Step 2B. Thus, even when viewed as a whole/ordered combination (Fig. 2-3, 13, 16, and 19 shows elements in combination), nothing in the claims adds significantly more (i.e., an inventive concept) to the abstract idea. Thus, the claim is ineligible.
Dependent Claim 2 recite the abstract idea of “wherein the introduction information is a URL (Uniform Resource Locator) for registering biometric information of the user . . . .”
Dependent Claim 2, has been given the full two-prong analysis including analyzing the further elements and limitations, both individually and in combination. When analyzed individually and in combination, this claim is also held to be patent ineligible under 35 U.S.C. 101. The further limitations of Claim 2 fail to establish claims that are not directed to an abstract idea because the further limitations merely limits the scope of the abstract idea (i.e. limiting the introduction information to a certain form). The elements of Claim 2 (i.e. elements of depended upon Claim 1) fails to establish claims that are not directed to an abstract idea because the elements merely recites the generic computer components of Claim 1 and generally link the abstract idea to a particular technology or field of use (i.e. i.e. online computer environment) just as in Claim 1. The organization of the further limitations of Claim 2 fails to integrate an abstract idea into a practical application just as discussed above for Claim 1. Additionally, performing the abstract idea of Claim 1 as recited in each of the further limitations of Claim 2, individually or in combination, does not (1) impose any meaningful limits on practicing the abstract ideas, or (2) provide improvements to the functioning of computing systems or to another technology or technical field, just as discussed above regarding Claim 1. Therefore, Claim 2 amounts to mere instructions to implement the abstract idea (1) using generic computer components—using the computer, in its ordinary capacity, as a tool to perform the abstract idea, and (2) generally linked to a particular technology or field of use. Because the claim merely use a computer, in its ordinary capacity in a particular field of use, as a tool to perform the abstract idea cannot provide an inventive concept, the elements and limitations of Claim 2 fails to establish that the claims provide an inventive concept, just as in Claim 1. Therefore, Claim 2 fails the Subject Matter Eligibility Test and are consequently rejected under 35 U.S.C. 101.
Claims 3-4 recite elements and limitations that are substantially similar to Claim 1. Therefore, Claims 3-4 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 101 just as Claim 1 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 101 as discussed above.
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.
The factual inquiries for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized as follows:
1. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art.
2. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue.
3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art.
4. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness.
Claims 1-4 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over WO-2022006619-A1 (“Italia” priority to AU-2020902320-A0 filed on 07/06/2020.) in view of JP-6690074-B1 (“Shingu” published on 04/28/2020) and “Voiceprint Recognition – Not Just a Powerful Authentication Tool” (“Alibaba” 03/17/2017, https://www.alibabacloud.com/blog/voiceprint-recognition-system-e28093-not-just-a-powerful-authentication-tool_72408).
Regarding Claim 1, Italia teaches “A server comprising: at least one memory storing instructions; and at least one processor configured to execute the instructions” (Fig. 1 and ¶48 show “As illustrated, the system 100 may comprise a resource management system 102 arranged to communicate with one or more computing devices 104 and one or more resource booking systems 106 across a communications network 108. In some embodiments, the system 100 comprises a client-server architecture where the resource management system 102 is configured as a server and at least one of the computing devices 104 is configured as a client computing device.” (Emphasis added). Fig. 2 and ¶74 shows “In particular, one or more processors 131 of the resource management system 102 may be configured to execute the resource management application 110 to cause the resource management system 102 to perform the method 200.”) to:
“acquire, from a user’s terminal, first reservation information about a reservation for a service provided using biometric authentication” (Fig. 2 and ¶75 shows “Referring now to Figure 2, a request to book a resource [(i.e. first reservation information about a reservation)] is received at the resource management system 102 from a computing device 104, at 202. The request comprises a resource identifier and a mobile computing device identifier. In some embodiments, the request further includes one or more of an indication of a duration for booking of the resource, any particular special requests and payment details. In some embodiments, the request also comprises one or more identity images, such as images of identity documents that include an image, such as a photographic image, of the user making the booking. The photographic identity documents may include a driving licence or a passport, for example.” See also, ¶¶76-81 showing that request can be sent after a selection of displayed available resources, Fig. 1 and ¶¶61-62 showing “facial recognition module 118,” and Fig. 3 and ¶¶94-98 showing identify verification.);
“determine whether or not to accept the reservation for the service based on the first reservation information and second reservation information registered in a reservation information database” (Fig. 2 and ¶82 shows that a booking is “created” at step “204.” ¶82 further shows “In some embodiments, the booking management module 112 transmits a booking confirmation request to the resource booking application 122 of the resource booking system. The booking confirmation request comprises the resource identifier and may further include additional information about the booking [(i.e. reservation information)].” ¶84 shows “In some embodiments, the resource booking application 122 determines whether to confirm or deny the booking confirmation request and sends a response to the booking management module 112.” ¶76 shows “In some embodiments, the booking management module 112 determines whether resources are available and any further details about the resources from a resource register 128 [(i.e. second reservation information registered)] which may be local to or remote from the resource management system 102, and which is periodically and/or regularly updated by one or more resource booking systems 106 associated with the resources. In some embodiments, the booking management module 112 determines whether resources are available and any further details about the resources by querying one or more resource booking system 106.”); and
“in a case of accepting the reservation for the service, transmit, to the terminal, a reservation completion notice including introduction information [to perform a download necessary for access]” (Fig. 2 and ¶¶82-86 shows that steps “208,” “210,” and “212” occur after creating a booking at step “204” (i.e. when the reservation for the service is accepted). Fig. 2 and ¶86 show “If it is determined that the resource access application 126 is not deployed on the mobile computing device 104, the resource management application 110 prompts the computing device 104, for example, by way of sending a link [(i.e. a reservation completion notice including introduction information)] to download the resource access application 126, to obtain [(i.e. install)] the resource access application 126, at 210, and the method reverts to 208.” ¶87 shows “In some embodiments, as opposed to providing the virtual key directly to the mobile computing device via the confirmation message, the virtual key may be provided indirectly to the mobile computing device, for example, by providing a confirmation code relating to the virtual key as opposed to the virtual key in the confirmation message. In embodiments where a confirmation code relating to a virtual key is provided, the confirmation code may be used to retrieve and download the related virtual key to the mobile computing device 104, for example, from a website, an address of which may be provided in the confirmation message.” The confirmation message teaches “a reservation completion notice.” ¶88 shows “For example, in some cases, it may be unnecessary for the mobile computing device 204 to have a resource management application 110 to receive and use a virtual key to access a resource. In embodiments where a confirmation code relating to a virtual key is provided, the confirmation code may be used to retrieve and download the related virtual key to the mobile computing device 104, for example, from a website, an address of which may be provided in the confirmation message.” (Emphasis added).).
“receive the biometric information of the user” (Fig. 3 and ¶96 shows “[At step 314,] The user may be directed to capture an image of their face [(i.e. biometric information of the user)] and resource access application 126 may transmit the captured image to the resource management system 102 for verification of the user’s identity.” Therefore, the resource management system 102 receives the image of their face.);
“extract at least a [verifiable information] from the biometric information” (Fig. 1 and ¶61 shows “The face recognition module 118 comprises program code capable of processing images comprising faces and comparing the faces in captured images to one or more images of faces stored in a booking register 137.” Fig. 1 and ¶62 shows “The face recognition module 118 may comprise program code to identify specific, distinctive details about a person’s face.”);
“transmit the extracted [verifiable information] to an authentication server performing the biometric authentication” (Fig. 1 and ¶61 shows “The face recognition module 118 comprises program code capable of processing images comprising faces and comparing the faces in captured images to one or more images of faces stored in a booking register 137.” The portion of the “face recognition module 118” that compares the faces in captured images to one or more images of faces stored in a booking register 137 teaches the “authentication server.” See also ¶52 showing “The resource management system 102 may comprise one or more servers . . .” and ¶62 and ¶98 showing the performance of biometric authentication.); and
“receive an authentication result, generated based on the [verifiable information], from the authentication server” (Fig. 1 and ¶61 shows “The face recognition module 118 comprises program code capable of processing images comprising faces and comparing the faces in captured images to one or more images of faces stored in a booking register 137.” Fig. 3 and ¶98 shows “At 318, the computing device 104 may receive a message from the resource management system 102 regarding the outcome of the identify verification process. If the user’s identity is successfully verified by the resource management system 102 by comparison with one or more photographic identity documents stored in the bookings register 137, then the resource access application 126 may present a message on the display 177 indicating a confirmation of verification of the user’s identity. If the message from the resource management system 102 indicates that the user’s identity has not been successfully verified, then the resource access application 126 may present a message on the display 177 indicating a failure of verification of the user’s identity and directions to reattempt the verification of identity.” Thus, in order to send the confirmation or unsuccessful message, resource management system 102 must receive the results from the face recognition module 118.).
Italia does not explicitly teach, but Shingu teaches “in a case of accepting the reservation for the service, transmit, to the terminal, a reservation completion notice including introduction information for registering biometric information of the user necessary for the biometric authentication” (Fig. 2 and ¶¶18-23 shows steps (1) “registration application information” is transmitted from owner terminal 20 to visitor reception system 12 after owner has decided to accept the rental request from the user, (2) the visitor reception system 12 sends “registration necessary information” to owner terminal 20, which includes a URL for downloading the face authentication application (i.e. introduction information for registering information necessary for the biometric authentication), (3) the owner terminal 20 forwards the “registration necessary information” to the visitor terminal 30 via email, (3a) the visitor installs the face authentication application on the visitor terminal 30 by using the URL sent by owner terminal 20, (3b) the visitor captures a facial image using the face authentication application on the visitor terminal 30 as part of “registration information,” (4) the “registration information” is transmitted to “face authentication cloud 14,” and finally (6) “registration completion information” is push-notified to owner terminal 20 which indicates that the face registration of the visitor is complete.).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine Shingu with Italia because Shingu teaches that the authentication server prevents a third party from entering the space even if the third party has hacked the user terminal, which further improves the security of the information and the space itself (¶25). Thus, combining Shingu with Italia furthers the interest taught in Shingu, and therefore, would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Italia and Shingu does not explicitly teach, but Alibaba teaches that “[verifiable information]” includes “voiceprint” (Pages 1-2 shows “In this advanced age, when mobile Internet is the norm, people leverage social networking, online shopping and online financial transactions without the need of being physically present at places. As a result, identity authentication has become the most critical security activity in the online world. . . Fortunately, we all have unique ‘living passwords’ on our bodies, such as the fingerprints, face, voice, and eyes. They are the unique and distinctive characteristics of individuals popularly called ‘biometric signatures.’ Voice is just one way of reflecting a person's identity. In reference to the nomenclature for ‘fingerprint,’ we also call it ‘voiceprint.’”).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine Alibaba with Italia and Shingu because Italia teaches facial identification for biometric authentication (¶¶61-62) and Alibaba teaches that voiceprint has advantages over facial identification in biometric authentication (Pages 1-2). Thus, combining Alibaba with Italia and Shingu furthers the interest taught in Alibaba, and therefore, would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Regarding Claim 2, Italia, Shingu, and Alibaba teach “The server according to Claim 1,” as discussed above.
Italia does not explicitly teach, but Shingu further teaches that “wherein the introduction information is a URL (Uniform Resource Locator) for registering biometric information of the user in [[an]] the authentication server [0021]When the registration required information transmitted from the user terminal 20 of the owner is received by the user terminal 30, the visitor installs the face authentication application in the user terminal 30 by using the registration required information received in the user terminal 30. For example, when the registration necessary information is a URL for downloading the face authentication application, the visitor downloads the face authentication application by accessing the URL in the user terminal 20. When such a face authentication application is installed in the user terminal 30, the visitor can input the registration information using the face authentication application. Specifically, the visitor reception service can be set to be used by using the face authentication application. When setting the use of the visitor reception service, the visitor inputs his or her name, date of birth, sex, mail address, telephone number, password, and the like as registration information using the user terminal 30. Further, when the visitor sets to use the visitor reception service, the visitor inputs information indicating that the visitor agrees with the terms of use of the visitor reception service. The setting of the use of the visitor reception service described above may be performed by the face authentication application or may be performed separately from the face authentication application. The visitor uses the face authentication application to capture an image of his / her face with the camera of the user terminal 30. Thus, the face image data of the visitor is obtained by the user terminal 30. [0022]When the visitor registers for the visitor reception service using the user terminal 30, the registration information input by the visitor is transmitted from the user terminal 30 to the face authentication cloud 14 of the face authentication system 10 ((4) in FIG. 2). . .” (Emphasis added).).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine Shingu with Italia because Shingu teaches that the authentication server prevents a third party from entering the space even if the third party has hacked the user terminal, which further improves the security of the information and the space itself (¶25). Thus, combining Shingu with Italia furthers the interest taught in Shingu, and therefore, would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Regarding Claim 3, Italia teaches “A method of controlling a server” (¶52 shows that “The resource management system 102 [(i.e. server)] may comprise one or more servers configured to provide resource management services by executing a resource management application 110 stored in a memory 129associated with the one or more servers of the resource management system 102. The memory 129 may be accessible by the at least one processor 131. The resource management system 102 may include multiple processing components or multiple virtual or physical servers operating together. In some embodiments, the resource management application 110 may comprise a booking management module 112, a virtual key management module 114, a reward management module 115, a distributed ledger integration module 117 and a face recognition module 118.” Fig. 2 and ¶74 shows “In particular, one or more processors 131 of the resource management system 102 may be configured to execute the resource management application 110 to cause the resource management system 102 to perform the method 200.”) comprising:
“acquiring, from a user’s terminal, first reservation information about a reservation for a service provided using biometric authentication” (Fig. 2 and ¶75 shows “Referring now to Figure 2, a request to book a resource [(i.e. first reservation information about a reservation)] is received at the resource management system 102 from a computing device 104, at 202. The request comprises a resource identifier and a mobile computing device identifier. In some embodiments, the request further includes one or more of an indication of a duration for booking of the resource, any particular special requests and payment details. In some embodiments, the request also comprises one or more identity images, such as images of identity documents that include an image, such as a photographic image, of the user making the booking. The photographic identity documents may include a driving licence or a passport, for example.” See also, ¶¶76-81 showing that request can be sent after a selection of displayed available resources, Fig. 1 and ¶¶61-62 showing “facial recognition module 118,” and Fig. 3 and ¶¶94-98 showing identify verification.);
“determining whether or not to accept the reservation for the service based on the first reservation information and second reservation information registered in a reservation information database” (Fig. 2 and ¶82 shows that a booking is “created” at step “204.” ¶82 further shows “In some embodiments, the booking management module 112 transmits a booking confirmation request to the resource booking application 122 of the resource booking system. The booking confirmation request comprises the resource identifier and may further include additional information about the booking [(i.e. reservation information)].” ¶84 shows “In some embodiments, the resource booking application 122 determines whether to confirm or deny the booking confirmation request and sends a response to the booking management module 112.” ¶76 shows “In some embodiments, the booking management module 112 determines whether resources are available and any further details about the resources from a resource register 128 [(i.e. second reservation information registered)] which may be local to or remote from the resource management system 102, and which is periodically and/or regularly updated by one or more resource booking systems 106 associated with the resources. In some embodiments, the booking management module 112 determines whether resources are available and any further details about the resources by querying one or more resource booking system 106.”); and
“in a case of accepting the reservation for the service, transmitting, to the terminal, a reservation completion notice including introduction information [to perform a download necessary for access]” (Fig. 2 and ¶¶82-86 shows that steps “208,” “210,” and “212” occur after creating a booking at step “204” (i.e. when the reservation for the service is accepted). Fig. 2 and ¶86 show “If it is determined that the resource access application 126 is not deployed on the mobile computing device 104, the resource management application 110 prompts the computing device 104, for example, by way of sending a link [(i.e. a reservation completion notice including introduction information)] to download the resource access application 126, to obtain [(i.e. install)] the resource access application 126, at 210, and the method reverts to 208.” ¶87 shows “In some embodiments, as opposed to providing the virtual key directly to the mobile computing device via the confirmation message, the virtual key may be provided indirectly to the mobile computing device, for example, by providing a confirmation code relating to the virtual key as opposed to the virtual key in the confirmation message. In embodiments where a confirmation code relating to a virtual key is provided, the confirmation code may be used to retrieve and download the related virtual key to the mobile computing device 104, for example, from a website, an address of which may be provided in the confirmation message.” The confirmation message teaches “a reservation completion notice.” ¶88 shows “For example, in some cases, it may be unnecessary for the mobile computing device 204 to have a resource management application 110 to receive and use a virtual key to access a resource. In embodiments where a confirmation code relating to a virtual key is provided, the confirmation code may be used to retrieve and download the related virtual key to the mobile computing device 104, for example, from a website, an address of which may be provided in the confirmation message.” (Emphasis added).)
“receiving the biometric information of the user” (Fig. 3 and ¶96 shows “[At step 314,] The user may be directed to capture an image of their face [(i.e. biometric information of the user)] and resource access application 126 may transmit the captured image to the resource management system 102 for verification of the user’s identity.” Therefore, the resource management system 102 receives the image of their face.);
“extracting at least a [verifiable information] from the biometric information” (Fig. 1 and ¶61 shows “The face recognition module 118 comprises program code capable of processing images comprising faces and comparing the faces in captured images to one or more images of faces stored in a booking register 137.” Fig. 1 and ¶62 shows “The face recognition module 118 may comprise program code to identify specific, distinctive details about a person’s face.”);
“transmitting the extracted [verifiable information] to an authentication server performing the biometric authentication” (Fig. 1 and ¶61 shows “The face recognition module 118 comprises program code capable of processing images comprising faces and comparing the faces in captured images to one or more images of faces stored in a booking register 137.” The portion of the “face recognition module 118” that compares the faces in captured images to one or more images of faces stored in a booking register 137 teaches the “authentication server.” See also ¶52 showing “The resource management system 102 may comprise one or more servers . . .” and ¶62 and ¶98 showing the performance of biometric authentication.); and
“receiving an authentication result, generated based on the [verifiable information], from the authentication server” (Fig. 1 and ¶61 shows “The face recognition module 118 comprises program code capable of processing images comprising faces and comparing the faces in captured images to one or more images of faces stored in a booking register 137.” Fig. 3 and ¶98 shows “At 318, the computing device 104 may receive a message from the resource management system 102 regarding the outcome of the identify verification process. If the user’s identity is successfully verified by the resource management system 102 by comparison with one or more photographic identity documents stored in the bookings register 137, then the resource access application 126 may present a message on the display 177 indicating a confirmation of verification of the user’s identity. If the message from the resource management system 102 indicates that the user’s identity has not been successfully verified, then the resource access application 126 may present a message on the display 177 indicating a failure of verification of the user’s identity and directions to reattempt the verification of identity.” Thus, in order to send the confirmation or unsuccessful message, resource management system 102 must receive the results from the face recognition module 118.).
Italia does not explicitly teach, but Shingu teaches “in a case of accepting the reservation for the service, transmitting, to the terminal, a reservation completion notice including introduction information for registering biometric information of the user necessary for the biometric authentication” (Fig. 2 and ¶¶18-23 shows steps (1) “registration application information” is transmitted from owner terminal 20 to visitor reception system 12 after owner has decided to accept the rental request from the user, (2) the visitor reception system 12 sends “registration necessary information” to owner terminal 20, which includes a URL for downloading the face authentication application (i.e. introduction information for registering information necessary for the biometric authentication), (3) the owner terminal 20 forwards the “registration necessary information” to the visitor terminal 30 via email, (3a) the visitor installs the face authentication application on the visitor terminal 30 by using the URL sent by owner terminal 20, (3b) the visitor captures a facial image using the face authentication application on the visitor terminal 30 as part of “registration information,” (4) the “registration information” is transmitted to “face authentication cloud 14,” and finally (6) “registration completion information” is push-notified to owner terminal 20 which indicates that the face registration of the visitor is complete.).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine Shingu with Italia because Shingu teaches that the authentication server prevents a third party from entering the space even if the third party has hacked the user terminal, which further improves the security of the information and the space itself (¶25). Thus, combining Shingu with Italia furthers the interest taught in Shingu, and therefore, would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Italia and Shingu does not explicitly teach, but Alibaba teaches that “[verifiable information]” includes “voiceprint” (Pages 1-2 shows “In this advanced age, when mobile Internet is the norm, people leverage social networking, online shopping and online financial transactions without the need of being physically present