DETAILED ACTION
Notice of 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 12/18/2024 is in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statement is being considered by the examiner.
Double Patenting
The non-statutory 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 non-statutory 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 non-statutory 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 e-Terminal Disclaimer may be filled out completely online using web-screens. An e-Terminal Disclaimer that meets all requirements is auto-processed and approved immediately upon submission. For more information about e-Terminal Disclaimers, refer to www.uspto.gov/patents/apply/applying-online/eterminal-disclaimer.
Claims 1-8 and 11-18 are rejected on the ground of non-statutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claims 1, 2, 6-11, 13, 14 and 17-22 of U.S. Patent No. 12,190,893, in view of Aley-Raz ( as rejected in the prior art rejections below). The claims 1, 2, 6-11, 13, 14 and 17-22 of U.S. Patent No. 12,190,893, and the instant application 18/986,144 are the same except for the limitation of " obtaining verification instructions for verifying the identity of the individual, wherein the verification instructions include items selected from the group consisting of a series of numbers and a series of terms that the individual is to speak in a specified order". Aley-Raz does disclose the mentioned limitation in paragraphs [0053]- [0056], where a speaker’s enrollment with specific pass-phrases, or one or more combinations of speech atoms (e.g., digits, letters and/or words) and during authentication how speaker is prompted to repeat specific sentences or speech atoms are described. It would have been obvious to one or ordinary skilled in the art to have modified the issued patent which would effectively measure the variation in the speaker's voice (see Aley-Raz [0041]). Although the claims at issue are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other because claims 1-8 and 11-18 of the instant application are similar in scope and content of the claims 1, 2, 6-11, 13, 14 and 17-22 of U.S. Patent No. 12,190,893 from the same applicant.
Application No: 18/986,144
Patent No: 12,190,893
1.A method performed by a biometrics unit for verifying the identity of an individual based on voice biometric information, comprising:
receiving at the biometrics unit a request to verify the identity of the individual, wherein the request includes an identity of a remote server that is to be notified of the result of the identity verification process;
causing a communications channel to be established between the biometrics unit and a telephony device used by the individual;
obtaining verification instructions for verifying the identity of the individual, wherein the verification instructions include items selected from the group consisting of a series of numbers and a series of terms that the individual is to speak in a specified order;
causing the obtained verification instructions to be conveyed to the individual over the communications channel;
receiving spoken audio input provided by the individual, where the spoken audio input is received over the communications channel, and where the spoken audio input is expected to include the individual speaking the items in the verification instructions;
determining whether the received spoken audio input substantially matches information that is stored in a voice biometrics database;
and sending an identity verification message to the individual and to the remote server indicating that the identity of the individual has been verified when the received spoken audio substantially matches information that is stored in a voice biometrics database.
1.A method performed by a biometrics unit for verifying the identity of an individual based on voice biometric information, comprising:
receiving at the biometrics unit a request to verify the identity of an individual using biometric information, wherein the request includes an identity of a remote server that is to be notified of the result of the identity verification process;
causing a communications channel to be established between the biometrics unit and a telephony device used by the individual;
obtaining verification instructions for verifying the identity of the individual using voice biometric information, wherein the verification instructions include a script that the individual is to speak;
see claim 2
causing the obtained verification instructions to be conveyed to the individual over the communications channel;
receiving spoken audio input provided by the individual, where the spoken audio input is received over the communications channel, and where the spoken audio input is expected to include the individual speaking the script in the verification instructions;
processing the received spoken audio input to generate a new voice print for the individual;
determining whether the generated new voice print substantially matches a previously generated voice print for the individual that is stored in a voice biometrics database;
and sending an identity verification message to the individual via the communications channel and to the remote server indicating that the identity of the individual has been verified when the generated new voice print substantially matches the previously generated voice print.
2. The method of claim 1, wherein the script in the verification instructions includes a plurality of terms arranged in a particular order, and wherein the method further comprises: examining the received spoken audio input to determine whether the individual spoke the plurality of terms in the particular order; and wherein the confirmation message is sent to the individual only if the examining step determines that the individual spoke the plurality of terms in the particular order.
2.The method of claim 1 wherein determining whether the received spoken audio input substantially matches information that is stored in a voice biometrics database further comprises:
generating a new voice print for the individual based on the received spoken audio input;
and determining whether the generated new voice print substantially matches a previously generated voice print for the individual that is stored in the voice biometrics database.
See claim 1
processing the received spoken audio input to generate a new voice print for the individual;
3. The method of claim 1, wherein the step of causing a communications channel to be established between the biometrics unit and a telephony device used by the individual comprises establishing a text-based messaging channel between the biometrics unit and the telephony device used by the individual.
6. The method of claim 1, wherein the step of causing a communications channel to be established between the biometrics unit and a telephony device used by the individual comprises establishing a text-based messaging channel between the biometrics unit and the telephony device used by the individual.
4. The method of claim 3, wherein the step of causing the obtained verification instructions to be conveyed to the individual comprises sending the verification instructions to the individual as part of a message that is sent to the individual's telephony device via the text-based messaging channel.
7. The method of claim 6, wherein the step of causing the obtained verification instructions to be conveyed to the individual comprises sending the verification instructions to the individual as part of a message that is sent to the individual's telephony device via the text-based messaging channel.
5. The method of claim 4, wherein the step of receiving spoken audio input from the individual comprises receiving, via the text-based messaging channel, a file containing the spoken audio input.
8. The method of claim 7, wherein the step of receiving spoken audio input from the individual comprises receiving, via the text-based messaging channel, a file containing the spoken audio input.
6. The method of claim 3, wherein the step of obtaining verification instructions comprises receiving text-based instructions, and wherein causing the obtained verification instructions to be sent to the individual comprises sending a text-based message that includes the verification instructions to the individual via the text-based messaging channel.
9. The method of claim 7, wherein obtaining verification instructions comprises receiving text-based instructions, and wherein causing the obtained verification instructions to be sent to the individual comprises sending a text-based message that includes the verification instructions to the individual via the text-based messaging channel.
7. The method of claim 3, wherein the step of obtaining verification instructions comprises receiving audio verification instructions, and wherein causing the verification instructions to be sent to the individual comprises sending a file containing the audio verification instructions to the individual via the text-based messaging channel.
10. The method of claim 7, wherein obtaining verification instructions comprises receiving audio verification instructions, and wherein causing the verification instructions to be sent to the individual comprises sending a file containing the audio verification instructions to the individual via the text-based messaging channel.
8. The method of claim 1, wherein the request to verify the identity of an individual is received from a first server controlled by a first entity, and wherein the remote server that is to be notified of the result of the identity verification process is a second server controlled by a second entity that is different from the first entity.
11. The method of claim 1, wherein the request to verify the identity of an individual is received from a first server controlled by a first entity, and wherein the remote server that is to be notified of the result of the identity verification process is a second server controlled by a second entity that is different from the first entity.
9. The method of claim 1, wherein the verification instructions include a series of numbers, and the numbers are not in numerical order.
10. The method of claim 1, wherein the verification instructions include a series of random numbers.
11. A system for verifying the identity of an individual based on voice biometric information, comprising:
a memory;
and at least one processor, wherein the at least one processor is configured to perform a method comprising the steps of:
receiving at a biometrics unit a request to verify the identity of the individual, wherein the request includes an identity of a remote server that is to be notified of the result of the identity verification process;
causing a communications channel to be established between the biometrics unit and a telephony device used by the individual;
obtaining verification instructions for verifying the identity of the individual, wherein the verification instructions include items selected from the group consisting of a series of numbers and a series of terms that the individual is to speak in a specified order;
causing the obtained verification instructions to be conveyed to the individual over the communications channel;
receiving spoken audio input provided by the individual, where the spoken audio input is received over the communications channel, and where the spoken audio input is expected to include the individual speaking the items in the verification instructions;
determining whether the received spoken audio input substantially matches information that is stored in a voice biometrics database;
and sending an identity verification message to the individual and to the remote server indicating that the identity of the individual has been verified when the received spoken audio substantially matches information that is stored in a voice biometrics database.
13.A system for verifying the identity of an individual based on voice biometric information, comprising:
a memory;
and at least one processor, wherein the at least one processor is configured to perform a method comprising the steps of:
receiving, at a biometrics unit, a request to verify the identity of an individual using biometric information, wherein the request includes an identity of a remote server that is to be notified of the result of the identity verification process;
causing a communications channel to be established between the biometrics unit and a telephony device used by the individual;
obtaining verification instructions for verifying the identity of the individual using voice biometric information, wherein the verification instructions include a script that the individual is to speak;
see claim 14
causing the obtained verification instructions to be conveyed to the individual over the communications channel;
receiving spoken audio input provided by the individual, where the spoken audio input is received over the communications channel, and where the spoken audio input is expected to include the individual speaking the script in the verification instructions;
processing the received spoken audio input to generate a new voice print for the individual;
determining whether the generated new voice print substantially matches a previously generated voice print for the individual that is stored in a voice biometrics database;
and sending an identity verification message to the individual via the communications channel and to the remote server indicating that the identity of the individual has been verified when the generated new voice print substantially matches the previously generated voice print.
14. The system of claim 13, wherein the script in the verification instructions includes a plurality of terms arranged in a particular order, and wherein the method performed by the at least one processor further comprises: examining the received spoken audio input to determine whether the individual spoke the plurality of terms in the particular order; and wherein the confirmation message is sent to the individual only if the examining step determines that the individual spoke the plurality of terms in the particular order.
12. The method of claim 11 wherein determining whether the received spoken audio input substantially matches information that is stored in a voice biometrics database further comprises:
generating a new voice print for the individual based on the received spoken audio input;
and determining whether the generated new voice print substantially matches a previously generated voice print for the individual that is stored in the voice biometrics database.
See claim 13
processing the received spoken audio input to generate a new voice print for the individual;
13. The method of claim 11, wherein the step of causing a communications channel to be established between the biometrics unit and a telephony device used by the individual comprises establishing a text-based messaging channel between the biometrics unit and the telephony device used by the individual.
17. The system of claim 13, wherein the step of causing a communications channel to be established between the biometrics unit and a telephony device used by the individual comprises establishing a text-based messaging channel between the biometrics unit and the telephony device used by the individual.
14. The method of claim 13, wherein the step of causing the obtained verification instructions to be conveyed to the individual comprises sending the verification instructions to the individual as part of a message that is sent to the individual's telephony device via the text-based messaging channel.
18. The system of claim 17, wherein the step of causing the obtained verification instructions to be conveyed to the individual comprises sending the verification instructions to the individual as part of a message that is sent to the individual's telephony device via the text-based messaging channel.
15. The method of claim 14, wherein the step of receiving spoken audio input from the individual comprises receiving, via the text-based messaging channel, a file containing the spoken audio input.
19. The system of claim 17, wherein the step of receiving spoken audio input from the individual comprises receiving, via the text-based messaging channel, a file containing the spoken audio input.
16. The method of claim 13, wherein the step of obtaining verification instructions comprises receiving text-based instructions, and wherein causing the obtained verification instructions to be sent to the individual comprises sending a text-based message that includes the verification instructions to the individual via the text-based messaging channel.
20. The system of claim 17, wherein obtaining verification instructions comprises receiving text-based instructions, and wherein causing the obtained verification instructions to be sent to the individual comprises sending a text-based message that includes the verification instructions to the individual's telephony device via the text-based messaging channel.
17. The method of claim 13, wherein the step of obtaining verification instructions comprises receiving audio verification instructions, and wherein causing the verification instructions to be sent to the individual comprises sending a file containing the audio verification instructions to the individual via the text-based messaging channel.
21. The system of claim 17, wherein obtaining verification instructions comprises receiving audio verification instructions, and wherein causing the verification instructions to be sent to the individual comprises sending a file containing the audio verification instructions to the individual's telephony device via the text-based messaging channel.
18. The system of claim 11, wherein the request to verify the identity of an individual is received from a first server controlled by a first entity, and wherein the remote server that is to be notified of the result of the identity verification process is a second server controlled by a second entity that is different from the first entity.
22. The system of claim 13, wherein the request to verify the identity of an individual is received from a first server controlled by a first entity, and wherein the remote server that is to be notified of the result of the identity verification process is a second server controlled by a second entity that is different from the first entity.
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, 2, 9-12 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Talmor et al. (US 20060286969 A1), hereinafter referenced as Talmor, in view of Aley-Raz et al. (US 20100131273 A1), hereinafter referenced as Aley-Raz.
Regarding Claim 1, Talmor teaches a method performed by a biometrics unit for verifying the identity of an individual based on voice biometric information, comprising:
receiving at the biometrics unit a request to verify the identity of the individual ( Talmor: Para.[0084], Fig.3, request to identify the user travelling in his car 30 in a restricted zone from an authentication system 34),
wherein the request includes an identity of a remote server that is to be notified of the result of the identity verification process ( Talmor: Para.[0085], in the case of border crossing, border crossing authority ( identity of the remote server) may ask to identify all of the passengers in the car as well as the driver. The number of verified persons is then equal to the number of passengers who are allowed to cross the border. Thus the border control authorities may receive a signal indicating that a car with a given registration is authorized to pass through with four occupants);
causing a communications channel to be established between the biometrics unit and a telephony device used by the individual ( Talmor: Para.[0082], Fig.2, at S2, the user places call to service center. Para.[0084], Fig.3, a call has been placed from user’s cell phone 36 via cellular system 38);
obtaining verification instructions for verifying the identity of the individual, wherein the verification instructions include items selected from the group consisting of [a series of numbers and] a series of terms that the individual is to speak [in a specified order ]( Talmor: Para.[0083], Fig. 2, at stage S4,the user is asked to speak into his telephone, a challenge-response session may be conducted in which the user is challenged to repeat random words. Para.[0084], Fig.3, the user is asked to confirm his identity by speaking a given utterance into his telephone);
causing the obtained verification instructions to be conveyed to the individual over the communications channel ( Talmor: Para.[0083], Fig.2, at stage S4, the user is asked to speak into his telephone. Para.[0084], Fig.3, a call has been placed from user’s cell phone 36 via cellular system 38);
receiving spoken audio input provided by the individual, where the spoken audio input is received over the communications channel, and where the spoken audio input is expected to include the individual speaking the items in the verification instructions ( Talmor: Para.[0083], Fig.2, at stage S4, user is asked to speak into his telephone ( over the communications channel) in which the user is challenged to repeat random words. He does so and the voice is received as per instruction. Para.[0084], Fig.3, a call has been placed from user’s cell phone 36 via cellular system 38);
determining whether the received spoken audio input substantially matches information that is stored in a voice biometrics database ( Talmor: Para.[0079], [0083], Fig.2, a voice print is extracted in stage S5. The voice prints are compared in comparison stage S6, which may use any method for comparing the voice prints. Para.[0084], voice prints are compared to carry out the authentication of the user);
and sending an identity verification message to the individual and to the remote server indicating that the identity of the individual has been verified when the received spoken audio substantially matches information that is stored in a voice biometrics database (Talmor: Para.[0023],[0084], [0085], Once the user has been authenticated then by comparing the extracted voice print, a signal verifying the authentication is produced to indicate the authentication. If the authorization is made then the user is allowed to proceed. In the case of border crossing, border crossing authority (remote server) may ask to identify all of the passengers in the car as well as the driver. By the a speakerphone mounted in the car it is possible to allow each passenger to identify himself by speaking in turn. The number of verified persons is then equal to the number of passengers who are allowed to cross the border. Thus the border control authorities may receive a signal indicating that a car with a given registration is authorized to pass through with four occupants).
Talmor while teaching the method of claim 1, fails to explicitly teach the claimed, obtaining verification instructions for verifying the identity of the individual, wherein the verification instructions include items selected from the group consisting of a series of numbers and a series of terms that the individual is to speak in a specified order.
However, Aley-Raz does teach the claimed, obtaining verification instructions for verifying the identity of the individual, wherein the verification instructions include items selected from the group consisting of a series of numbers and a series of terms that the individual is to speak in a specified order ( Aley-Raz: Para.[0053]-[0056], Fig. 1, during text-dependent enrollment, the speaker enrolls by saying a specific pass-phrase, or a set of specific pass-phrases, or one or more combinations of speech atoms (e.g., digits, letters and/or words).During authentication stage, speaker is prompted to repeat one or more of the pass-phrases, or one or more random or pseudo-random combinations of speech atoms/sentences. These sentences may be random or pseudo-random, or may be selected at random or pseudo-randomly from a closed set of pre-defined sentences).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to incorporate Aley-Raz’s teaching of a system and method of liveness detection using voice biometrics which is based on voice print from text dependent and text independent audio samples, into the method and system of a personal authentication, taught by Talmor, because, this would effectively measure the variation in the speaker's voice across a single session. (Aley-Raz [0041]).
Claim 11 is a system claim, comprising: a memory; and at least one processor, wherein the at least one processor is configured to ( Talmor: Para.[0059], the invention described as being performed by a data processor, such as a computing platform for executing a plurality of instructions. Several selected steps could be implemented by hardware or by software on any operating system of any firmware or a combination thereof ), perform the steps in method claim 1 above and as such, claim 11 is similar in scope and content to claim 1 and therefore, claim 11 is rejected under similar rationale as presented against claim 1 above.
Regarding Claim 2, Talmor in view of Aley-Raz teach the method of claim 1. Aley-Raz further teaches, wherein determining whether the received spoken audio input substantially matches information that is stored in a voice biometrics database further comprises: generating a new voice print for the individual based on the received spoken audio input ( Aley-Raz: Para.[0042], the voice characteristics may be extracted from a sample or several samples of the speaker's voice, and may be analyzed and stored in a data repository as "voice signature" or "voice print". The voice signature holds the parameters of a mathematical model that describes the voice characteristics of the speaker);
and determining whether the generated new voice print substantially matches a previously generated voice print for the individual that is stored in the voice biometrics database ( Aley-Raz: Para.[0043], during an authentication phase, the speaker is asked to provide one or more additional voice samples. These voice samples are compared with stored voice signature, and the degree of match between the newly-acquired voice samples and the previously-stored voice signature is computed. A "degree of match" or confidence level may be referred to as "score" or "similarity score". By comparing the score to a threshold value, the system may decide whether or not the speaker to be authenticated is indeed the same speaker whose voice characteristics are modeled in the voice signature);
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to incorporate Aley-Raz’s teaching of a system and method of liveness detection using voice biometrics which is based on voice print from text dependent and text independent audio samples, into the method and system of a personal authentication, taught by Talmor, because, this would effectively measure the variation in the speaker's voice across a single session. (Aley-Raz [0041]).
Claim 12 is a system claim performing the steps in method claim 2 above and as such, claim 12 is similar in scope and content to claim 2 and therefore, claim 12 is rejected under similar rationale as presented against claim 2 above.
Regarding Claim 9, Talmor in view of Aley-Raz teach the method of claim 1. Aley-Raz further teaches, wherein the verification instructions include a series of numbers, and the numbers are not in numerical order ( Aley-Raz: Para.[0053],[0054], during the authentication stage the speaker is prompted to repeat one or more of the pass-phrases, or one or more random or pseudo-random combinations of speech atoms (e.g., digits, letters and/or words)).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to incorporate Aley-Raz’s teaching of a system and method of liveness detection using voice biometrics which is based on voice print from text dependent and text independent audio samples, into the method and system of a personal authentication, taught by Talmor, because, this would effectively measure the variation in the speaker's voice across a single session. (Aley-Raz [0041]).
Regarding Claim 10, Talmor in view of Aley-Raz teach the method of claim 1. Aley-Raz further teaches, wherein the verification instructions include a series of random numbers ( Aley-Raz: Para.[0053],[0054], during the authentication stage the speaker is prompted to repeat one or more of the pass-phrases, or one or more random or pseudo-random combinations of speech atoms (e.g., digits, letters and/or words)).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to incorporate Aley-Raz’s teaching of a system and method of liveness detection using voice biometrics which is based on voice print from text dependent and text independent audio samples, into the method and system of a personal authentication, taught by Talmor, because, this would effectively measure the variation in the speaker's voice across a single session. (Aley-Raz [0041]).
Claims 3-7, 13-17 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Talmor et al. (US 20060286969 A1), hereinafter referenced as Talmor, in view of Aley-Raz et al. (US 20100131273 A1), hereinafter referenced as Aley-Raz, further in view of Spector et al. (US 20070055517 A1), hereinafter referenced as Spector .
Regarding Claim 3, Talmor in view of Aley-Raz teach the method of claim 1. Talmor in view of Aley-Raz fail to explicitly teach the claimed, wherein the step of causing a communications channel to be established between the biometrics unit and a telephony device used by the individual comprises establishing a text-based messaging channel between the biometrics unit and the telephony device used by the individual.
However, Spector does teach the claimed, wherein the step of causing a communications channel to be established between the biometrics unit and a telephony device used by the individual comprises establishing a text-based messaging channel between the biometrics unit and the telephony device used by the individual (Spector: Para.[0039], Fig.4, voice authentication module 422 transmits the disposable pass phrase to the user through one or more of data network 301, PSTN 302, and wireless network 303 and can be transmitted in either a voice or text format, as an e-mail or instant message or an SMS message).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to incorporate Spector’s teaching of multi-factor authentication of a person, into the method and system of Talmor in view of Aley-Raz, because, this would effectively improve the method of ascertaining an individual's identity for access to data networks or physical locations. Such a method should not be prohibitive in cost and complexity and yet should offer multiple factors of authentication rather than static username and pass phrase.( Spector [0007]).
Claim 13 is a system claim performing the steps in method claim 3 above and as such, claim 13 is similar in scope and content to claim 3 and therefore, claim 13 is rejected under similar rationale as presented against claim 3 above.
Regarding Claim 4, Talmor in view of Aley-Raz, further in view of Spector teach the method of claim 3. Spector further teaches, wherein the step of causing the obtained verification instructions to be conveyed to the individual comprises sending the verification instructions to the individual as part of a message that is sent to the individual's telephony device via the text-based messaging channel ( Spector: Para.[0039], lines 4-9, voice authentication module can send the instructions ( pass phrase) to the mobile telephone of the user by text messaging).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to incorporate Spector’s teaching of multi-factor authentication of a person, into the method and system of Talmor in view of Aley-Raz, because, this would effectively improve the method of ascertaining an individual's identity for access to data networks or physical locations. Such a method should not be prohibitive in cost and complexity and yet should offer multiple factors of authentication rather than static username and pass phrase.( Spector [0007]).
Claim 14 is a system claim performing the steps in method claim 4 above and as such, claim 14 is similar in scope and content to claim 4 and therefore, claim 14 is rejected under similar rationale as presented against claim 4 above.
Regarding Claim 5, Talmor in view of Aley-Raz, further in view of Spector teach the method of claim 4. Spector further teaches, wherein the step of receiving spoken audio input from the individual comprises receiving, via the text-based messaging channel, a file containing the spoken audio input ( Spector: Para.[0043], Fig.6, at step 603, voice authentication module receives name data ( as verification step) in textual form, where name data is digitized audio data).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to incorporate Spector’s teaching of multi-factor authentication of a person, into the method and system of Talmor in view of Aley-Raz, because, this would effectively improve the method of ascertaining an individual's identity for access to data networks or physical locations. Such a method should not be prohibitive in cost and complexity and yet should offer multiple factors of authentication rather than static username and pass phrase.( Spector [0007]).
Claim 15 is a system claim performing the steps in method claim 5 above and as such, claim 15 is similar in scope and content to claim 5 and therefore, claim 15 is rejected under similar rationale as presented against claim 5 above.
Regarding Claim 6, Talmor in view of Aley-Raz, further in view of Spector teach the method of claim 3. Spector further teaches, wherein the step of obtaining verification instructions comprises receiving text-based instructions, and wherein causing the obtained verification instructions to be sent to the individual comprises sending a text-based message that includes the verification instructions to the individual via the text-based messaging channel ( Spector: Para.[0039], lines 4-9, voice authentication module can send the instructions ( pass phrase) to the mobile telephone of the user by text messaging. Further in Para.[0031], lines 1-7, user is asked to enter verification information textually).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to incorporate Spector’s teaching of multi-factor authentication of a person, into the method and system of Talmor in view of Aley-Raz, because, this would effectively improve the method of ascertaining an individual's identity for access to data networks or physical locations. Such a method should not be prohibitive in cost and complexity and yet should offer multiple factors of authentication rather than static username and pass phrase.( Spector [0007]).
Claim 16 is a system claim performing the steps in method claim 6 above and as such, claim 16 is similar in scope and content to claim 6 and therefore, claim 16 is rejected under similar rationale as presented against claim 6 above.
Regarding Claim 7, Talmor in view of Aley-Raz, further in view of Spector teach the method of claim 3. Spector further teaches, wherein the step of obtaining verification instructions comprises receiving audio verification instructions, and wherein causing the verification instructions to be sent to the individual comprises sending a file containing the audio verification instructions to the individual via the text-based messaging channel ( Spector: Para.[0031], lines 1-8, user is asked to enter verification information with voice interface. Further in Para.[0067],lines 1-7, voice registration module sends a request to the user to register orally and the request can be sent by any number of communication channels such as voice, data or cellular, which implies text-based channel).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to incorporate Spector’s teaching of multi-factor authentication of a person, into the method and system of Talmor in view of Aley-Raz, because, this would effectively improve the method of ascertaining an individual's identity for access to data networks or physical locations. Such a method should not be prohibitive in cost and complexity and yet should offer multiple factors of authentication rather than static username and pass phrase.( Spector [0007]).
Claim 17 is a system claim performing the steps in method claim 7 above and as such, claim 17 is similar in scope and content to claim 7 and therefore, claim 17 is rejected under similar rationale as presented against claim 7 above.
Claims 8, 18 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Talmor et al. (US 20060286969 A1), hereinafter referenced as Talmor, in view of Aley-Raz et al. (US 20100131273 A1), hereinafter referenced as Aley-Raz, further in view of Mushing et al. ( US 10049362 B2), hereinafter referenced as Mushing.
Regarding Claim 8, Talmor in view of Aley-Raz teach the method of claim 1. Talmor in view of Aley-Raz fail to explicitly teach the claimed, wherein the request to verify the identity of an individual is received from a first server controlled by a first entity, and wherein the remote server that is to be notified of the result of the identity verification process is a second server controlled by a second entity that is different from the first entity.
However, Mushing does teach the claimed, wherein the request to verify the identity of an individual is received from a first server controlled by a first entity, and wherein the remote server that is to be notified of the result of the identity verification process is a second server controlled by a second entity that is different from the first entity ( Mushing: Column 6, lines 40-58, column 7, lines 27-34, Figs. 1, 4, request to verify the identity is received from merchant 4 and acquirer 6 ( first entity), card issuer 5 ( remote server) ( second entity) was notified after the identity verification was done to complete transaction).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to incorporate Mushing’s teaching of systems and methods of voice authentication in transactions, into the method and system of Talmor in view of Aley-Raz, because, this would effectively improve the method of authentication of a customer’s identity and provide convenience of use and security for users.( Mushing, Column 2, lines 44-62).
Claim 18 is a system claim performing the steps in method claim 8 above and as such, claim 18 is similar in scope and content to claim 8 and therefore, claim 18 is rejected under similar rationale as presented against claim 8 above.
Conclusion
Listed below are the prior arts made of record and not relied upon but are considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Sarwar et al. (US 20190068594 A1) teaches system and methods for authenticating a user and a telephony device. The systems and methods utilize biometric data and/or cryptography for authenticating the user and the telephony device in a network-based environment during a communications session with other network elements and applications.
Sheets et al. (US 20190340620 A1) teaches systems and methods for biometrics transaction processing. A location of a device associated with a user may be determined. A reference to a biometric data model associated with the user stored within a database may be retrieved, based at least in part on the location. Biometric data may be received from the user. Using the reference, the biometric data may be compared to the biometric data model stored within the database. A determination may be made whether the user is authenticated for the transaction based on the comparing step.
Harding et al. (US 10681041 B2) teaches a system and method for enabling out of band biometric verification. The system includes a biometric engine coupled with an interactive messaging system and configured as an identity provider. The biometric identity provider includes a biometric enrollment process using open standard authentication protocols. The identity provider may answer calls generated by a service provider for biometric verification request for a user by sending an interactive message to a wireless mobile device associated to the user. The user captures and sends a biometric input to the identity provider. Biometrics provided by a user are compared by the biometric engine against biometric templates stored for that user in order to verify the user. The identity provider then sends a response back to the service provider. The service provider may grant or deny services to a user depending on the response.
Wyss et al. (US 20210320801 A1 ) teaches a method for verifying an individual's identity for granting access to a computer system that includes receiving a personal identifier of the individual and data related to the individual speaking an authentication sequence. The method includes performing a biometrics identity proof that includes: identifying a first set of characteristics from the data; retrieving, from a database, a second set characteristics linked to the personal identifier of the individual; and comparing the first set of characteristics against the second set of characteristics to determine a similarity score. The method includes performing a proof of possession of an authentication device that includes determining whether a recognized value of the authentication sequence matches an expected value of the authentication sequence. The method includes calculating a confidence score for verifying the individual's identity based the similarity score and whether a match was determined.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to NADIRA SULTANA whose telephone number is (571)272-4048. The examiner can normally be reached M-F,7:30 am-5:00pm.
Examiner interviews are available via telephone, in-person, and video conferencing using a USPTO supplied web-based collaboration tool. To schedule an interview, applicant is encouraged to use the USPTO Automated Interview Request (AIR) at http://www.uspto.gov/interviewpractice.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Paras D. Shah can be reached on (571) 270-1650. 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.
/NADIRA SULTANA/Examiner, Art Unit 2653
Prosecution Insights