DETAILED ACTION
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 . In communications filed on 08/25/2025. Claims 1-20 are pending in this examination.
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. This examination is in response to US Patent Application No. 19/309,064.
Drawings
New corrected drawings in compliance with 37 CFR 1.121(d) are required in this application because [the drawing filed on 08/25/2025 does not describe what the item numbers are in the FIG 1]. Applicant is advised to employ the services of a competent patent draftsperson outside the Office, as the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office no longer prepare new drawings. The corrected drawings are required in reply to the Office action to avoid abandonment of the application. The requirement for corrected drawings will not be held in abeyance.
MPEP: 1825 The Drawings [R-08.2017]
11.11 Words in Drawings
(a) The drawings shall not contain text matter, except a single word or words, when absolutely indispensable, such as “water,” “steam,” “open,” “closed,” “section on AB,” and, in the case of electric circuits and block schematic or flow sheet diagrams, a few short catchwords indispensable for understanding.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
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.
The factual inquiries set forth in Graham v. John Deere Co., 383 U.S. 1, 148 USPQ 459 (1966), that are applied 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.
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 1-6, 8, 10-14, and 17-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over BUD ANDREW(GB 2501362 A), hereinafter “BUD”, and in view of Larsson ( US2008/0252412), and in view of Craig ( US2021/0287768), and further in view of Paschall ( US2023/0377456).
Regarding claim 1, and 17, BUD discloses a system for real-time verification of an operator of an aircraft, a vehicle, or other mode of transportation before commencing travel, wherein the system comprising
While BUD discloses a system for real-time verification of an operator as: [0060] The identity validation and pseudonym verification techniques are collectively referred to herein as authentication techniques. These involve the use of some or all of: captured real-time data, including biometric data; previously captured secret data; and other established authentication means. Captured real-time data is sent to the Agent, which performs authentication by analyzing the captured data, and where applicable, comparing ii to stored data. including biometric data, pertaining to the user. In the case of communication methods, the Agent uses biometric parameters extracted from the real-time data to discover possession of secret knowledge by the individual and its communication to the Agent by biometric methods.
[0016, The original identity document is a passport, national identity card, driving license, Social Security card, credit card, or debit card. The username is a real name and: issuing a request over the network to a database that includes identity information; receiving identity information from the database; using the image of the original identity document to perform a validation that the username corresponds to an identity associated with the original identity document; and storing information indicative of the validation.
[0055] The described methods and. systems also enable independent validation of real identity, so that the biometric data may confirm the actual identity of the individual, not just their pseudonym. To this end, enrollment of real identity (see Figure 4) may include the visual capture of original identity documents. such as passport, national identity card, driving license, Social Security card, and credit or debit card. The process may also include crosschecks to other databases such as driving license issuers, national passport or identity card issuers, credit scoring databases, lists of lost and stolen documents, alerts of identity theft. electoral rolls, online telephone directories, schedules of company directors, register of vehieles… ].
a processing device including a processor and a memory storing instructions operable by the processing device that, when executed by the processor, causing the processing device to:
[0014] In general, the methods, systems, and computer program products described herein enable a remote agent to perform verification of online user pseudonyms, and to validate user identities online and in real time. Pseudonym verification arid identity validation is preceded by online enrollment of the online user. The agent may provide a service to one or more online service providers, and may be implemented in the cloud.
receive biometric data of the operator, wherein the biometric data comprising at least one of a fingerprint scan, a facial scan or a retinal scan of the operator
[009] Facial recognition has the advantage that, alone amongst biometric recognition methods, it does not require the user to do anything active at all. This makes it a much simpler experience. The use of face recognition as a means to save users the trouble of entering passwords is already established art and is standard on the latest release of the Android operating system. However, these methods -together with other similar biometric means such as fingerprint recognition are based on the detection and identification of the biometric characteristic by software on the user's device. Thus, validation is completed on the user's device.
verify the identity of the operator by comparing the biometric data of the operator with (i) the operator's data obtained by one or more governing bodies or regulatory authorities, wherein the operator's data including personal identifiable information, certifications, and licenses associated with the operator
[0016, The client device includes a camera, and the request that the client device capture biometric data of the online user includes a request that the camera capture a sequence of images of the online user. The client device is a computer system comprising an input and a digital camera in data communication with the input, wherein the request that the client device capture biometric data includes a request that the camera capture an image of the online user. … The username is a real name and: receiving over the network an image of an original identity document of the online user; using the image of the original identity document to perform a validation that the user name corresponds to an identity associated with the original identity document; and storing information indicative of the validation. The online user uses a client device connected to the network and the image of the original identity document of the online user is captured by the client device. The image of the original identity document includes a facial image, and validation involves comparing the received facial image of the online user with the image of the original identity document. The original identity document is a passport( issued by U.S. Department of State), national identity card, driving license ( equated to obtaining driver license from DMV equated to regulatory authorities), Social Security card( receiving from Social Security Administration equated to regulatory authorities), credit card, or debit card. The username is a real name and: issuing a request over the network to a database that includes identity information; receiving identity information from the database; using the image of the original identity document to perform a validation that the username corresponds to an identity associated with the original identity document; and storing information indicative of the validation.
and (ii) one or more authoritative databases including regulatory, compliance, and security databases maintained by one or more governing bodies or regulatory authorities
[0016, The original identity document is a passport( issued by U.S. Department of State), national identity card, driving license ( equated to obtaining driver license from DMV equated to regulatory authorities), Social Security card( receiving from Social Security Administration equated to regulatory authorities), credit card, or debit card (Issued by financial institutions like banks) .
BUD does not explicitly disclose, however, Larsson discloses verification of an operator of an aircraft, a vehicle, or other mode of transportation before commencing travel as: [ Abstract , Method for assuring that the operator of a vehicle is an authorized driver, the method including utilizing an onboard, multi-mode driver identification system to ascertain whether an operator is an authorized driver. The first driver identification procedure is performed on a present operator of the vehicle and determining whether the present operator is an authorized or unauthorized driver of the vehicle. A second driver identification procedure is performed on the present operator of the vehicle and determining whether the present operator is an authorized or unauthorized driver of the vehicle, wherein the first and second driver identification procedures are performed with a time interval therebetween, the time interval being dependent upon the nature of the work being performed by the operator. A remedial measure is exercised to avert potentially negative impact when the present operator of the vehicle is determined to be an unauthorized driver based upon at least one of the performed identification procedures], and [0004] One regular and three biometric verification methods were chosen for a test; fingerprint verification, face recognition, voice recognition and PIN code], and [0016] the driver enters his vehicle and is prompted to verify himself using PIN-code, fingerprint and face recognition. The system verifies him using PIN-code and face recognition and uses the fingerprint biometric to update the fingerprint template in the database], and [0186] It should be possible to verify the driver while he is driving( equated to real-time) in order to avoid that a verified driver starts the engine only to be thrown out of the vehicle by an impostor.], and [0203] Face recognition is sensitive to light conditions, but it can be an alternative to use before starting the vehicle since it is possible to add more coupe lighting during the verification.]
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the teaching of BUD by incorporating “multi-mode driver identification”, as taught by Larsson. One could have been motivated to do so in order to ascertain whether an operator is an authorized driver by gathering the driver’s identification[ Larsson, Abstract].
BUD, and Larsson do not explicitly disclose, however, Craig discloses:
continuously monitor operator verification data in real-time using an Al model against one or more authoritative databases
[0113] In one embodiment, the AI system 1507 may be utilized by the third-party server 1503 to interact with the user 1505 via the user's computing device 1506. For example, a virtual assistant or chat bot may be rendered (visually, in an auditory manner, or both) to interact with the user 1505 … , the AI system 1507 may monitor the expiration dates of documents (e.g., driver's license, passport, vaccine records, etc.) and may provide automated alerts to the user 1505 to alert the user 1505 to the need for renewal of the soon-to-be expired documents.
perform predictive analytics using the Al model by comparing current operator verification data with historical trends to determine a likelihood of operator error or a potential security issue
[0113] In one embodiment, the AI system 1507 may be utilized by the third-party server 1503 to interact with the user 1505 via the user's computing device 1506. For example, a virtual assistant or chat bot may be rendered (visually, in an auditory manner, or both) to interact with the user 1505 … , the AI system 1507 may monitor the expiration dates of documents (e.g., driver's license, passport, vaccine records, etc.) and may provide automated alerts to the user 1505 to alert the user 1505 to the need for renewal of the soon-to-be expired documents.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the teaching of BUD, and Larsson by incorporating “AI system”, as taught by Craig. One could have been motivated to do so in order to AI system monitor the expiration dates of documents (e.g., driver's license, passport, etc.) and provide automated alerts [ Craig, 0113].
BUD, Larsson and Craig do not explicitly disclose, however, Paschall discloses:
communicate the verification results and the predictive analytics to one or more governing bodies or regulatory authorities for authorization of the operator.
[ Abstract, the captured information is input to a computer programmed using Artificial Intelligence to analyze the information for possible traffic infractions and report that information to authorities.
[0026] A conclusion made by the programmed computer that a traffic infraction (a “positive event”) has occurred along with the underlying information is transmitted from the programmed computer to authorities or any other person or entity designated by the user of the system. In one embodiment, the authorities are local or state police. In one embodiment, the information is transmitted to insurance companies or other agencies such as the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA)
[0030] The infractions and occurrences that may be observed and/or detected by analysis of the stored information include the following: [0031] License plate tracking; [0032] Driving with an expired registration; [0033] Facial recognition/tracking; [0034] Traffic flow data; [0035] Detection of drivers under the influence…].
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the teaching of BUD, Larsson and Craig by incorporating “utilizing artificial intelligence”, as taught by Paschall. One could have been motivated to do so in order to analyze the information for possible traffic infractions and report that information to authorities. [ Paschall, Abstract].
Regarding claims 2, 11, and 18 , BUD does not explicitly disclose, however combination of Craig and Paschall discloses:
Craig discloses wherein the processing device is further configured to:(i) aggregate analytics data generated during the real-time monitoring of the operator verification data using the Al model
[0113] In one embodiment, the AI system 1507 may be utilized by the third-party server 1503 to interact with the user 1505 via the user's computing device 1506. For example, a virtual assistant or chat bot may be rendered (visually, in an auditory manner, or both) to interact with the user 1505 … , the AI system 1507 may monitor the expiration dates of documents (e.g., driver's license, passport, vaccine records, etc.) and may provide automated alerts to the user 1505 to alert the user 1505 to the need for renewal of the soon-to-be expired documents.
Paschall discloses (ii) identify patterns or trends in the operator behavior and system performance based on the aggregated analytics data using the Al model, wherein the identified trends or patterns are used to refine operator training programs, update safety protocols, and inform policy changes for reducing accidents caused by the operator error.
[0017] The computer will be programmed using AI where it will be provided with a plurality of various conditional data sets of regular driving patterns and data which will be considered the baseline data point. These baseline data points provide the programmed computer of the lawful condition for a particular rule, for example, driving along a highway at the proper speed. The data sets will comprise examples that are indicated as a “negative event” or a non-offense. The data sets will further comprise examples that are indicated to be “positive events.” Based on the data sets, the programmed computer will “learn” to discern between a negative event and positive event.
[0018] This process of “learning” will be repeated for each individual infraction, and according to the applicable rules and laws in various geographic jurisdictions. Further, as rules and laws change, the programmed computer may be reprogrammed in a similar fashion to reflect those changes.
Regarding claims 3, 12, and 19, BUD and Craig do not explicitly disclose, however, Paschall discloses wherein the refined training programs are dynamically adapted to individual operator profiles, wherein the policy changes comprise updates to regulatory frameworks for safety.
[0019] As the programmed computer “learns” its results will eventually only be randomly viewed by humans to confirm that it is operating within programmed parameters as well as to minimize false positive events.
Regarding claims 4, 20 , BUD discloses wherein the biometric data is obtained by presenting an operator app interface on an operator's device, wherein the operator app interface enables the operator to execute the fingerprint scan, facial scan, or retinal scan to obtain the biometric data.
[0016, The client device includes a camera, and the request that the client device capture biometric data of the online user includes a request that the camera capture a sequence of images of the online user].
Regarding claims 5 and 13, BUD does not explicitly disclose, however combination of Craig and Paschall discloses:
Craig discloses wherein the processing device is further configured to generate detailed reports using the Al model and to provide alerts to the one or more governing bodies or regulatory authorities, wherein the reports and alerts comprise actionable insights to enhance decision-making.
[0113] In one embodiment, the AI system 1507 may be utilized by the third-party server 1503 to interact with the user 1505 via the user's computing device 1506. For example, a virtual assistant or chat bot may be rendered (visually, in an auditory manner, or both) to interact with the user 1505 … , the AI system 1507 may monitor the expiration dates of documents (e.g., driver's license, passport, vaccine records, etc.) and may provide automated alerts to the user 1505 to alert the user 1505 to the need for renewal of the soon-to-be expired documents.
Furthermore, Paschall discloses: [ Abstract, the captured information is input to a computer programmed using Artificial Intelligence to analyze the information for possible traffic infractions and report that information to authorities.
[0026] A conclusion made by the programmed computer that a traffic infraction (a “positive event”) has occurred along with the underlying information is transmitted from the programmed computer to authorities or any other person or entity designated by the user of the system. In one embodiment, the authorities are local or state police. In one embodiment, the information is transmitted to insurance companies or other agencies such as the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA)
[0030] The infractions and occurrences that may be observed and/or detected by analysis of the stored information include the following: [0031] License plate tracking; [0032] Driving with an expired registration; [0033] Facial recognition/tracking; [0034] Traffic flow data; [0035] Detection of drivers under the influence…].
Regarding claims 6, and 14, BUD, and Craig do not explicitly disclose, however, Paschall discloses wherein the Al model is trained using a plurality of heterogeneous datasets comprising biometric data, historical operational records, security database information, operator behavioral data, and environmental data, thereby enabling the Al model to perform adaptive verification and the predictive analytics under varying operational conditions.
[ Abstract, the captured information is input to a computer programmed using Artificial Intelligence to analyze the information for possible traffic infractions and report that information to authorities.
[0026] A conclusion made by the programmed computer that a traffic infraction (a “positive event”) has occurred along with the underlying information is transmitted from the programmed computer to authorities or any other person or entity designated by the user of the system. In one embodiment, the authorities are local or state police. In one embodiment, the information is transmitted to insurance companies or other agencies such as the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA)
[0030] The infractions and occurrences that may be observed and/or detected by analysis of the stored information include the following: [0031] License plate tracking; [0032] Driving with an expired registration; [0033] Facial recognition/tracking; [0034] Traffic flow data; [0035] Detection of drivers under the influence…].
Regarding claim 8, BUD discloses wherein the system is installed in the aircraft, vehicle, or other mode of transportation.
[0055] The described methods and. systems also enable independent validation of real identity, so that the biometric data may confirm the actual identity of the individual, not just their pseudonym. To this end, enrollment of real identity (see Figure 4) may include the visual capture of original identity documents. such as passport, national identity card, driving license, Social Security card, and credit or debit card. The process may also include crosschecks to other databases such as driving license issuers, national passport or identity card issuers, credit scoring databases, lists of lost and stolen documents, alerts of identity theft. electoral rolls, online telephone directories, schedules of company directors, register of vehieles… ].
Furthermore, Paschall discloses [ Abstract, A mobile real-time 360-degree traffic data and video recording and tracking system and method based on Artificial Intelligence (AI) is disclosed. More particularly, a system of video cameras and other data sensors are mounted on a vehicle that captures information on all sides (360-degrees) from the vehicle. The captured information is input to a computer programmed using Artificial Intelligence to analyze the information for possible traffic infractions and report that information to authorities]
[0025] The cameras and sensors are mounted around the vehicle providing 360-degree recording of surrounding vehicles. The cameras store the information in a memory which can be resident in the vehicle. The information can later be transmitted to a remote computer either in real time or when a Wi-Fi® signal is available. In one embodiment, information that may be subject to privacy laws, such as GDPR, may be transferred in real time when the cameras and sensors are physically in communication with the database and/or programmed compute.
Regarding claim 10, content and limitations of this claim is based on the combination of claim 1, and 2.hence this claim is interpreted and rejected for the same rational set forth in claims 1, and 2.
Claims 7, and 15 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over BUD ANDREW(GB 2501362 A), hereinafter “BUD”, and in view of Larsson ( US2008/0252412), and in view of Craig ( US2021/0287768), and further in view of Paschall ( US2023/0377456), and further in view of Takata ( US2013/0179957).
Regarding claims 7, and 15, BUD, Larsson Craig, and Paschall do not explicitly disclose, however, Takata discloses wherein the verification process complies with the privacy and security guidelines outlined in the related Privacy Impact Assessment (ALL/PIA-027).
[0005] Non-Patent Document 1: Privacy Impact Assessment Update for the US-VISIT Program, U.S. Department of Homeland Security, Jul. 1, 2005. Chapter 1, 4.
[0013-0019] A preferable identification system according to the present invention may also be configured as an identification system including a passenger information DB storing therein ID information and biometric information, an ID information watch list DB storing therein ID information of persons on the blacklist, a terminal having an ID information capturing function of capturing ID information of a passenger and a biometric information capturing function of capturing biometric information of the passenger, an ID information matching server having an ID information watch list matching function of determining whether or not any ID information that matches the information in the passenger information DB is in the ID information watch list, and a verification server having a passenger to be examined by abbreviated immigration control procedure matching function of comparing the biometric information in the passenger information DB with the biometric information captured by the biometric information capturing function and thereby determining whether both information pieces are of an identical person or not].
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the teaching of BUD, Larsson, Craig, and Paschall by incorporating “Privacy Impact Assessment”, as taught by Takata. One could have been motivated to do so in order for identifying a person by matching the biometric information to the information database to determine whether both information pieces are of an identical person or not [ Takata, 0005, 0013-0019].
Claims 9, and 16 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over BUD ANDREW(GB 2501362 A), hereinafter “BUD”, and in view of Larsson ( US2008/0252412), and in view of Craig ( US2021/0287768), and further in view of Paschall ( US2023/0377456), and further in view of Chambers ( US9,910,432).
Regarding claims 9, and 16 BUD, Larsson, Craig, and Paschall do not explicitly disclose, however, Chambers discloses, wherein the vehicle is an autonomous vehicle that utilizes autonomous driving authorized by a remote operator.
[ Col. 1 lines 45-67, Col. 2 lines 1-5, In one embodiment a computer server receives an assistance request associated with an autonomous vehicle and selects a remote vehicle operator from a group of remote vehicle operators, where each remote vehicle operator has a control device. The computer server or the control device of the selected remote vehicle operator receives a situation report associated with the autonomous vehicle and an operator message based on the situation report may be sent to the control device.
(6) An operator command may be received from the control device, and a vehicle command based at least in part on the operator command may be sent to the autonomous vehicle. The vehicle command is configured to cause the autonomous vehicle to change from a first path to a second path.
(7) The autonomous vehicle is configured to store a command verification value, and to broadcast a status message comprising that command verification value. The autonomous vehicle is also configured to receive a vehicle command that contains a command verification value.
(8) The autonomous vehicle includes a finite state machine and is configured to transition from one active state to another state, based on the vehicle command. However, the autonomous vehicle will only transition from one active state to another state if the transition is valid, and if the command verification value in the vehicle command is valid when compared to the command verification value stored by the autonomous vehicle.
[Col. 3 lines 25-30, Unmanned Aerial System (UAS), The UAS disclosed in this document is an example implementation of an autonomous vehicle system that provides facilities for remote vehicle operator intervention, in real-time, during otherwise autonomous vehicle operations.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the teaching of BUD, Larsson, Craig, and Paschall by incorporating “ remote vehicle operator”, as taught by Chambers. One could have been motivated to do so in order for allowing a selected remote vehicle operator from a group/pool of remote vehicle operators with a control device to operate an autonomous vehicle [ Chambers, Col.1 lines 46-54].
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicants’
disclosure.
See submitted 892 for more relevant references.
Ritchie ( US2017/0270318) [0058] Those skilled in the art will appreciate, however, that the present invention contemplates the use of computer instructions that may perform any or all of the operations involved in privacy impact assessment and reporting, including access request and transaction request processing, authentication services, verification services, personal identification information collection and storage, and trusted transaction risk processing. The disclosure of computer instructions that include Metadata Editor Subsystem 104 instructions, Risk Assessment Subsystem 105 instructions, and Report Generation Subsystem 106 instructions
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to SHAHRIAR ZARRINEH whose telephone number is (571)272-1207. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday, 8:30am-5:30pm.
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, Jorge Ortiz-Criado can be reached at 571-272-7624. 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.
/SHAHRIAR ZARRINEH/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2496
