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 .
DETAILED ACTION
Information Disclosure Statement
1. The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted on 01/31/2025 (2 and 4 pages) has been considered by Examiner and made of record in the application file.
2. Claims 8 and 15 are rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claims 1 and 8 of U.S. Patent No. 12,242,583. Although the conflicting claims are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other because all the claimed limitations are transparently found in the U.S. Patent No. 12,242,583 with obvious wording variations as shown in the following table.
U.S. Patent No. 12,242,583
Application No. 19/041,654
1. An apparatus, comprising: one or more processors; and a memory storing processor-executable instructions that, when executed by the one or more processors, cause the apparatus to: based on a request to access the apparatus, determine one or more visemes associated with a user;
8. An apparatus, comprising: one or more processors; and a memory storing processor-executable instructions that, when executed by the one or more processors, cause the apparatus to: based on a request to access a user device, determine one or more visemes of a user;
determine a correspondence between the one or more visemes of the user
and one or more stored visemes of the user satisfies a threshold;
determine the one or more visemes of the user do not correspond to one or more stored visemes of the user;
and grant, based on the correspondence between the one or more visemes of the user and the one or more stored visemes of the user satisfying the threshold, access to the apparatus.
and based determining the one or more visemes of the user do not correspond to one or more stored visemes of the user, deny access to the user device.
Consider claims 8 and 15, claims 1 and 8 respectively of U.S. Patent No. 12,242,583 teaches all limitations of claims 8 and 15 except does not explicitly teaches “based determining the one or more visemes of the user do not correspond to one or more stored visemes of the user, deny access to the user device”. However, “based determining the one or more visemes of the user do not correspond to one or more stored visemes of the user, deny access to the user device” would have been a matter of Engineer preference. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the claimed invention was made to use, based determining the one or more visemes of the user do not correspond to one or more stored visemes of the user, deny access to the user device, as an Engineer preference, to prevent unauthorized access to sensitive information.
Consider claims 12 and 19, claims 5 and 12 respectively of U.S. Patent No. 12,242,583 teaches all limitations of claims 12 and 19 except does not explicitly teaches “deactivate the apparatus, transition the apparatus from an unlocked state to a locked state, terminate outputting content, or closing one or more applications associated with the apparatus”. However, “deactivate the apparatus, transition the apparatus from an unlocked state to a locked state, terminate outputting content, or closing one or more applications associated with the apparatus” would have been a matter of Engineer preference. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the claimed invention was made to use, deactivate the apparatus, transition the apparatus from an unlocked state to a locked state, terminate outputting content, or closing one or more applications associated with the apparatus, as an Engineer preference to prevent unauthorized access to sensitive information.
Consider claims 14 and 20, claims 7 and 14 respectively of U.S. Patent No. 12,242,583 teaches all limitations of claims 14 and 20 except does not explicitly teaches “deny, based on the facial recognition threshold not being satisfied, access to the user device”. However, “deny, based on the facial recognition threshold not being satisfied, access to the user device” would have been a matter of Engineer preference. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the claimed invention was made to use, deny, based on the facial recognition threshold not being satisfied, access to the user device, as an engineer preference to prevent unauthorized access to sensitive information.
Consider claim 1, the subject-matter of independent claim 1 relates to a method with features fully corresponding to the characteristics of claims 8 and 15. Therefore, the same argumentation presented in relation to claims 8 and 15 are, mutatis mutandis, of application to claim 1.
Consider claims 2-7, the subject-matter of claims 2-7 relates to a method with features fully corresponding to the characteristics of claims 9-14 respectively. Therefore, the same argumentation presented in relation to claims 9-14 are, mutatis mutandis, of application to claims 2-7.
U.S. Patent No. 12,242,583 Application No. 19/041,654
2-4, 6 and 9-11. 9-11, 13 and 16-18.
Conclusion
3. Any response to this action should be mailed to:
Mail Stop_________ (Explanation, e.g., Amendment or After-final, etc.)
Commissioner for Patents
P.O. Box 1450
Alexandria, VA 22313-1450
Facsimile responses should be faxed to:
(571) 273-8300
Hand-delivered responses should be brought to:
Customer Service Window
Randolph Building
401 Dulany Street
Alexandria, VA 22313
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Tuan H. Nguyen whose telephone number is (571) 272-8329. The examiner can normally be reached on 8:00Am - 5:00Pm.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Pan Yuwen can be reached on (571) 272-7855. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is (571) 273-8300.
Information regarding the status of an application may be obtained from the Patent Application Information Retrieval (PAIR) system. Status information for published applications may be obtained from either Private PAIR or Public PAIR.
Status information for unpublished applications is available through Private PAIR only. For more information about the PAIR system, see http://pair-direct.uspto.gov. Should you have questions on access to the Private PAIR system, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free).
/TUAN H NGUYEN/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2649
Prosecution Insights