DETAILED ACTION
Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status
1. The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
Status of the Application
2. This application, filed November 26, 2024, is a continuation of U.S. Patent Application No. US 18/318,535, filed May 16, 2023, which issued as U.S. Patent No. US 12,184,922 B2 on December 31, 2024. Pursuant to a pre-examination amendment, claims 1 and 16-34 are pending in the application. The applicant has cancelled claims 2-15. The applicant has added claims 16-34. The applicant has amended claim 1.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
3. 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 (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) 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 the appropriate paragraphs of 35 U.S.C. 102 that form the basis for the rejections under this section made in this Office action:
A person shall be entitled to a patent unless –
(a)(1) the claimed invention was patented, described in a printed publication, or in public use, on sale, or otherwise available to the public before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
4. Claims 1, 18-23, 25, and 28-33 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Kumar et al. (US 2009/0146779 A1).
Regarding claim 1, Kumar discloses:
a display apparatus ([0026]; FIG. 2: 24, 29, 34) comprising:
display ([0026]; FIG. 2: 24, 29, 34) ;
a communicator ([0026]; FIG. 4: 56);
a processor ([0043], [0044]; FIG. 4: 51) configured to:
receive, through the communicator, information from a remote controller ([0017], [0018]),
the information corresponding to authentication of a user based on fingerprint information through a fingerprint scanner of the remote controller ([0017], [0018]) and
based on the authentication of the user being recognized based on the received information, control the display to display a screen corresponding to the authentication of the user ([0010], [0016], [0020], [0034]).
Regarding claim 18, Kumar discloses that the processor is further configured to: based on the authentication of the user being recognized based on the received information, control the display to display a content corresponding to the authentication of the user. ([0010], [0016], [0020], [0034])
Regarding claim 19, Kumar discloses that the processor is further configured to: based on the authentication of the user being recognized based on the received information, control the display to display different private content for respective users corresponding to the authentication of the user. ([0010], [0016], [0036])
Regarding claim 20, Kumar discloses that the processor is further configured to: based on the authentication of the user being recognized based on the received information, identify a user account corresponding to the fingerprint information for login a service to provide a content, and control the display to display the screen for providing the service associated with the user account. ([0010], [0016], [0040])
Regarding claim 21, Kumar discloses that the processor is further configured to: based on the authentication of the user being recognized based on the received information, obtain a user ID connected to the received information. ([0016], [0019], [0031], [0037])
Regarding claim 22, Kumar discloses that the authentication of the user is performed by comparing the fingerprint information input from the fingerprint scanner of the remote controller with a pre-stored fingerprint information corresponding a plurality of users. ([0018], [0022], [0044])
Regarding claim 23, Kumar discloses that the fingerprint information is obtained based on fingerprint data corresponding a shape of a fingerprint obtained through a surface of the fingerprint scanner. ([0017]; Kumar does not explicitly disclose obtaining a shape of a fingerprint, but Kumar does disclose a fingerprint sensor that is an electronic device “used to capture a digital image of a person’s fingerprint pattern when a person moves or sweeps their finger over the opening provided by fingerprint sensor 11 in a single scan.” An image of a fingerprint pattern inherently comprises a shape of the fingerprint.)
Regarding claim 25, Kumar discloses a method ([0046]; FIG. 5); otherwise, claims 25 is rejected as claim 1.
Claim 28 is rejected as claim 18 .
Claim 29 is rejected as claim 19.
Claim 30 is rejected as claim 20.
Claim 31 is rejected as claim 21.
Claim 32 is rejected as claim 22.
Claim 33 is rejected as claim 23.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
5. 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 (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) 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.
6. Claims 16, 17, 26, and 27 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kumar.
Regarding claim 16, Kumar discloses that the remote controller includes a four-direction button area to receive a user command for four-direction manipulation (FIG. 1).
Kumar does not disclose that the fingerprint scanner is disposed in an area inside the four-direction button area., but Kumar does disclose that the fingerprint scanner is disposed on the same surface as the four-direction button area (FIG. 1: 11), which indicates that to dispose the fingerprint scanner inside the four-direction button would constitute mere rearrangement of parts, which requires only routine skill for one of ordinary skill in the art and therefore is not novel.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the application to have determined through routine experimentation to have disposed the fingerprint scanner in an area inside the four-direction button for the benefit of making the controls of the remote controller more compact.
Regarding claim 17, Kumar discloses that the remote controller includes a confirmation button area to receive a user command for confirmation or selection, wherein the four-direction button area is disposed in an area outside the confirmation button area (FIG. 1).
Kumar does not disclose that the fingerprint scanner is disposed in the confirmation button area, but Kumar does disclose that the fingerprint scanner is disposed on the same surface as the confirmation button area (FIG. 1: 11), which indicates that to dispose the fingerprint scanner in the confirmation button area would constitute mere rearrangement of parts, which requires only routine skill for one of ordinary skill in the art and therefore is not novel.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the application to have determined through routine experimentation to have disposed the fingerprint scanner in the confirmation button area for the benefit of making the controls of the remote controller more compact.
Claim 26 is rejected as claim 16.
Claim 27 is rejected as claim 17.
7. Claims 24 and 34 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kumar in view of Bechtel (US 2006/0093192 A1).
Regarding claim 24, Kumar does not disclose that the processor is further configured to: based on the authentication of the user being misrecognized by the received information, transmit a signal, for providing a haptic feedback through the remote controller, to the remote controller.
Bechtel, addressing the same problem of how to address misrecognition of authentication information, teaches a finger guide device used to position a finger, thumb or human digit containing unique minutiae upon a scanner or sensor or other means to capture an image of a fingerprint ([0002]), wherein a relatively sharp ridge provides a tactile feedback to the user to communicate an incorrect placement of the finger and a need to reposition the finger within the recess of the finger guide device ([0035]) for the benefit of reducing the number of false rejects experienced during repeated use of a fingerprint identification system ([0034]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the application to have combined the teachings of Bechtel with the method of Kumar because that would have enabled the method to reduce the number of false rejects experienced during repeated use of a fingerprint identification system.
Claim 34 is rejected as claim 24.
Conclusion
8. Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to JOHN F MORTELL whose telephone number is (571)270-1873. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday 10-7 ET.
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, Davetta Goins can be reached at 571-272-2957. 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.
/JOHN F MORTELL/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2689
Prosecution Insights