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 .
Status of Claims
The office action is being examined in response to the application filed by the applicant on February 27th, 2025.
Claims 1 – 4, 6, 7 and 9 - 16 are pending and have been examined.
This action is made NON-FINAL.
The examiner would like to note that this application is now being handled by examiner Bill Chen.
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, 6, 7 and 9 - 16 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 101 because the claimed invention is directed to an abstract idea without significantly more, and therefore does not recite patent-eligible subject matter.
Step 2A, Prong 1, Independent claim 1 recites:
acquire preference information regarding preference of a user;
register biometric information for registration of the user in association with the preference information of the user in storage;
perform biometric authentication by comparing biometric information for authentication of the user acquired in each of a plurality of locations in a facility with the biometric information for registration; and
control, in a case where the biometric authentication has been successful, a guidance based on at least the preference information of the user.
These limitations, under their broadest reasonable interpretation, recite collecting information regarding a user (preference information and biometric information), comparing acquired biometric information with stored biometric information to determine whether the user is authenticated, and providing personalized guidance based upon the user’s stored preference information following successful authentication.
Such limitations describe the abstract idea of managing interactions between individuals and services by recognizing a user and providing personalized recommendations or guidance, which is a certain method of organizing human activity. For example, a museum employee could recognize a returning visitor, recall the visitor’s stated interests, verify the visitor’s identity and recommend exhibits matching those interests.
Additionally, the limitations reciting comparing biometric information, determining whether authentication succeeds, and selecting guidance based on stored preference information can practically be performed through observation, evaluation, and judgment and therefore recite mental processes, including observations, evaluations, and decisions.
Accordingly, claim 1 recites an abstract idea.
Step 2A, Prong 1, For independent claim 9: Claim 9 recites substantially the same abstract idea discussed with respect to claim 1, expressed as method steps rather than apparatus components. The claim similarly acquires preference information, registers biometric information, compares biometric information for authentication, and provides guidance based upon stored preference information.
Accordingly, claim 9 recites an abstract idea.
Step 2A, Prong 1, For independent claim 13: Claim 13 recites a non-transitory computer-readable medium for storing instructions for causing a computer to perform substantially the same operations recited in method claim 9. The claim therefore recites the same abstract idea for the same reasons discussed above with respect to claims 1 and 9. The additional recitation of a non-transitory computer-readable medium merely constitutes a generic storage medium for executing the abstract idea and does not integrate the judicial exception into a practical application nor provide significantly more.
Accordingly, claim 13 recites an abstract idea.
Step 2A, Prong 2, For independent claim 1: the claims do not integrate the judicial exception into a practical application. The additional elements include an information processing apparatus, authentication terminals, storage, biometric information acquisition, authenticating, and a computer-readable medium. These additional elements merely perform generic computer functions of: (a) acquiring data, (b) storing data, (c) comparing stored data, (d) communicating with authentication terminals, (e) executing program instructions, and (f) presenting personalized guidance.
The claims do not improve biometric authentication technology, facial recognition algorithms, storage technology, communication protocols, indoor navigation technology, or any other computer technology. Rather, the claimed invention merely uses generic computer components as tools to automate the longstanding business practice of recognizing an individual and providing personalized recommendations based on known preferences.
The claims therefore fail to integrate the abstract idea into a practical application.
Step 2A, Prong 2, For independent claim 9: The additional elements merely require a generic computer performing generic data acquisition, storage, comparison, authentication, and guidance functions. The claim does not improve the operation of a computer, biometric authentication, data storage, or any other technology. Rather, the computer is merely used as a tool to automate the abstract idea.
Accordingly, the claim does not integrate the judicial exception into a practical application.
Step 2A, Prong 2, For independent claim 13: The recited non-transitory computer-readable medium merely stores program instructions that cause a generic computer to execute the abstract idea. The claim does not improve computer functionality, storage technology, biometric authentication, or any other technological field. Instead, it merely uses a generic storage medium as a tool for implementing the abstract idea.
Accordingly, the claim does not integrate the judicial exception into a practical application.
Step 2B: For independent claim 1: The claims do not include additional elements amounting to significantly more than the abstract idea. The additional elements recite generic computing components, including: an information processing apparatus, storage, authentication terminals, biometric information acquisition, authentication, and a non-transitory computer readable medium storing program instruction. Viewed individually and as an ordered combination, the additional elements merely automate the abstract idea using generic computer technology and do not affect any improvement in the functioning of a computer or other technology. The ordered combination simply performs acquiring user preference information, register biometric information, compare biometric information for authentication, retrieve stored preference information, and provide personalized guidance. This sequence merely automates a longstanding practice that could otherwise be performed by a human attendant using ordinary observation and memory.
Accordingly, the claims do not amount to significantly more than the abstract idea itself.
Step 2B: For independent claim 9: Claim 9 recites substantially the same abstract idea discussed with respect to claim 1, expressed as method steps rather than apparatus components. Accordingly, the judicial exception and the analysis under Step 2A and Step 2B are substantially the same as discussed above for claim 1.
Step 2B: For independent claim 13: Claim 13 recites the same abstract idea for the same reasons discussed above with respect to claims 1 and 9. The additional recitation of a non-transitory computer-readable medium merely constitutes a generic storage medium for executing the abstract idea and does not integrate the judicial exception into a practical application nor provide significantly more.
Step 2A Prong 2 and Step 2B: For dependent claims, these claims do not include additional elements, but further instruct one to practice the abstract idea by using general computer components that are merely used as a tool. As a result, it amounts no more than mere instructions to apply the exception using a generic computer component (MPEP 2106.05(f)). Therefore, these claim limitations amount to no more than mere instructions to apply the exception using generic components and or computing technologies (e.g., that are merely deployed to be used as a tool—see MPEP 2106.05(f)).
Additionally, these elements and their limitations are “merely indicating a field of use or technological environment in which to apply a judicial exception do not amount to significantly more than the exception itself, and cannot integrate a judicial exception into a practical application” (MPEP 2106.05(h)). Accordingly, these additional elements do not integrate the abstract idea into a practical application because it does not impose any meaningful limits on practicing the abstract idea.
Therefore, claims 1 – 4, 6, 7 and 9 - 16 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 101 for being directed to an abstract idea without sufficient integration into a practical application, and the additional elements do not add significantly more than the judicial exception.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
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.
Claims 1 – 4, 6, 7 and 9 - 16 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being unpatentable by Egger (U.S. Pub No. 20200151437 A1).
Regarding claims 1, 9 and 13:
Egger discloses:
a memory storing instructions [¶0022]: The controller includes access to memory and/or other data storage devices; and
one or more processors configured to execute the instructions to [¶0022]: The controller also includes a processor that is able to manage operations of other hardware: acquire preference information regarding preference of a user [¶0016-0017]: Personalization preferences are recognized, stored, and then used to enhance user experiences based on their history and characteristics;
register biometric information for registration of the user in association with the preference information of the user in storage [¶0018]: Facial recognition may be used to identify users;
perform biometric authentication by comparing biometric information for authentication of the user acquired in each of a plurality of locations in a facility with the biometric information for registration [¶0018 - 0019]: The individual recognition process uses optical markers as well as cameras configured to a machine learning system in order to properly map facial features involving human skeletal modeling; and
control, in a case where the biometric authentication has been successful, a guidance based on at least the preference information of the user [Fig. 1; ¶0020]: The preference implementation system acts upon a user’s individual history and uses stored data to generate future plans to enhance user experience.
Regarding claims 2, 10 and 14:
Egger discloses:
wherein the one or more processor controls, in a case where the biometric authentication has been successful in the first location among the plurality of locations, the guidance based on the preference information of the user [Fig. 1; ¶0020]: The preference implementation system may be implemented in a plethora of locations, such as: a shopping mall, a resort, theme park, sports arena, etc. Visitors consent to participating in image recognition within the space and the system is then configured to execute method steps;
Regarding claims 3, 11, and 15:
Egger discloses:
the one or more processors configured to execute the instructions to: acquire touring history information regarding a touring history of the user in the facility, wherein the one or more processors controls, in a case where the biometric authentication has been successful in one of the plurality of locations other than the first location, the guidance based on the preference information and the touring history information of the user [Figs. 1, 4; ¶0018, 0020 - 0022, 0027]: The preference implementation system is configured to recognize and store user interactions in order to provide enhanced customized user experiences. Additionally, [Fig. 1; ¶0020]: The preference implementation system acts upon a user’s individual history and uses stored data to generate future plans to enhance user experience.;
Regarding claims 4, 12 and 16:
Egger discloses:
the one or more processors configured to execute the instructions to: acquire settlement history information regarding a settlement history of the user in the facility, wherein the one or more processors controls, in a case where the biometric authentication has been successful in one of the plurality of locations [Fig. 1; ¶0027]: Visitor customization record may include historic information such as the visitor’s purchase level and frequent-buyer or reward-program status. Alternatively, facial recognition is configured for payment and providing goods or services based on visitor history and preferences.
Pertinent Art
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant’s disclosure.
Treves (US20090291672 A1) is pertinent because it is related to “A system and method for receiving travel information such as flight information, directional guidance to airport gates and facilities, and interacting autonomously with service providers such as airlines and rental car companies without requiring human resources to receive the tickets or car keys.”
Mori (US12322206 B2) is pertinent because it is related to “a presentation control device, a system, a method and a non-transitory computer-readable medium storing a program, and more particularly, relates to a presentation control device, a system, a method and a non-transitory computer-readable medium storing a program for presenting presentation information to a user.”
Kobayashi (US20240104442 A1) is pertinent because it is related to an “information processing apparatus acquires biological information of a passenger who has disembarked from an aircraft. The information processing apparatus acquires flight information corresponding to the acquired biological information from a storage device in which the biological information of the passenger and the flight information of the passenger are stored in association with each other. “
Hirama (US20180341985 A1) is pertinent because it is related to “management of advertising, and more specifically relates to management of advertisements displayed on a mobile entity.”
Leow (US20160165036 A1) is pertinent because it is related to “A system and method for securely and automatically identifying users to an inquirer for purposes of obtaining user identifying information is described. The system consisting of at least one client device associated with a user, at least one inquiring device associated with a host, a client information server and a network. The system and method allows computer based systems to automatically authenticate the identities of a plurality of users entering a physical space and obtain information pertaining to user preferences.”
Egger (US 20200151437 A1) is pertinent because it is directed “to systems and methods for providing goods or services to visitors or customers of a facility, such as a sports stadium, a shopping mall, a restaurant, a hotel, any entertainment venue, or the like, based on their stated or known preferences regarding those goods or services.”
Chan (US20150371260 A1) is pertinent because it is directed to “a purchasing system having a memory device configured to store image data regarding a user, and a processing circuit coupled to the memory device and configured to generate body data of the user based on the image data.”
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Bill Chen whose telephone number is (571)270-0660. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday 8:30am - 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, Nathan Uber can be reached on (571) 270-3923. 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.
/BILL CHEN/Examiner, Art Unit 3626
/NATHAN C UBER/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3626
Prosecution Insights