Obviousness

US Patent 10219199 relates to a method and system for enabling a mode of a smartphone in response to a proximity criterion and a physiological parameter, involving distinct short-range (unlicensed) and wide-area (licensed) wireless communication interfaces. The priority date for this patent is November 4, 2008.

A person having ordinary skill in the art (POSA) in this field would typically possess a bachelor's degree in electrical engineering, computer science, or a related discipline, along with 2-5 years of experience in mobile communication systems design, wireless application development, or similar areas focusing on wireless protocols and mobile device functionalities.

The following analysis considers combinations of prior art references that predate the November 4, 2008 priority date, and explains why a POSA would have been motivated to combine them to arrive at the claimed invention.

Obviousness Analysis of Independent Claim 1 (Method)

Claim 1 outlines a method of operating a smartphone involving:

• Wirelessly providing/receiving information to/from an entity using a first air interface.
• Wirelessly receiving a communications service from a wireless network using a second, different air interface.
• The communications service is received without the entity's involvement, and the entity functions independently of it.
• Detecting a proximity condition between the smartphone and the entity.
• In response to the proximity condition and a physiological parameter, establishing a wireless short-range communications link (first air interface) with the entity for information exchange.
• The first air interface is for interaction with the entity, independent of the second air interface's communications service from the wireless network.
• The second air interface receives the communications service from the wireless network, without the entity's involvement or specific information exchange with the entity.
• The first air interface uses unlicensed frequencies (short-range).
• The second air interface uses licensed frequencies.
• The first air interface is not involved in providing the communications service.

Combination of Prior Art References for Obviousness of Claim 1:

A combination of the following prior art references would render Claim 1 obvious to a POSA:

1. US20030172028A1 (IBM, "Authorization of payment for a commercial transaction via a Bluetooth enabled device"): This patent application teaches a mobile device (e.g., a cellular phone) using a short-range Bluetooth link to a point-of-sale (POS) terminal (an "entity") to authorize payment for commercial transactions based on proximity. [cite: US20030172028A1 Abstract,,] Bluetooth operates on unlicensed frequencies and constitutes a "first air interface" for providing/receiving information (e.g., payment details, authorization). The mobile device being a "cellular phone" inherently implies its capability to connect to a cellular network using a "second air interface" operating on licensed frequencies for general communication services. [cite: US20040143550A1 (describing a "Cellular electronic wallet device and method" related to similar concepts)] The POS terminal (entity) is not involved in providing this cellular network service, and operates independently of it.
2. US20080040274A1 (Chukwuemeka, "Method of making secure electronic payments using communications devices and biometric data"): This reference discloses methods of making secure electronic payments using communications devices and "biometric data," which are examples of physiological parameters (e.g., fingerprints, voice, retinal scans). [cite: US20080040274A1 Abstract,,] It teaches that such biometric data can be used as a trigger or condition for initiating or authorizing secure electronic payments.
3. US20070178935A1 (Samsung, "Apparatus and method for changing operation mode of dual mode terminal"): This patent application describes an apparatus and method for changing the operation mode of a "dual mode terminal." [cite: US20070178935A1 Abstract] This concept would be understood by a POSA to apply to a mobile device managing different communication technologies or "modes" (e.g., a short-range link like Bluetooth and a wide-area cellular link).

Motivation for a POSA to Combine these References:

A POSA would be motivated to combine these references to enhance the security, reliability, and user experience of mobile payment and interaction systems.

• Combining US20030172028A1 with US20080040274A1: To improve the security and authentication of the proximity-based payment system taught by US20030172028A1, a POSA would find it obvious to incorporate biometric authentication, as disclosed in US20080040274A1. This would add a "physiological parameter" as a necessary condition or trigger for establishing the short-range payment link or completing the transaction, thereby fulfilling the claim's requirement for a physiological parameter in response to which the link is established and information exchanged. [cite: Claim 1] For example, a user might need to be in proximity to a POS terminal (US20030172028A1) AND perform a fingerprint scan (US20080040274A1) before their smartphone initiates payment via Bluetooth.
• Combining the above with US20070178935A1: A POSA, recognizing that smartphones commonly support multiple communication technologies (e.g., Bluetooth for local interaction and cellular for wide-area network access), would seek to manage these distinct communication modes effectively. US20070178935A1 provides the teaching for a "dual mode terminal" and changing its operation mode, which directly supports the idea of distinctly managing the "first air interface" (unlicensed, for entity interaction) and the "second air interface" (licensed, for network services). This ensures that the short-range communication with the entity for information exchange (e.g., payment) occurs independently of the broader communication service provided by the wireless network, and that the entity itself is not involved in providing that network service. This explicit management of different communication modes for different purposes (local interaction vs. network service) would be an obvious design choice for efficiency, security, and resource management in a sophisticated mobile device. The claims' emphasis on the independence and non-involvement of the entity in the communications service from the wireless network is an inherent result of using two distinct communication technologies and would be understood as such by a POSA implementing these combined systems.

Therefore, a POSA, motivated to create a more secure and robust mobile payment system with clear separation of communication functions, would have found it obvious to combine the teachings of US20030172028A1, US20080040274A1, and US20070178935A1, thereby rendering Claim 1 obvious under 35 U.S.C. § 103.

Obviousness Analysis of Independent Claim 10 (System)

Claim 10 describes a system comprising a smartphone configured to perform the operations of Claim 1.

Obviousness of Claim 10:

Since the method of Claim 1 would be obvious to a POSA based on the combination of prior art discussed above, a system configured to perform that obvious method would also be obvious. The cited references inherently describe or imply the necessary system components:

• US20030172028A1 describes a "Bluetooth enabled device" (smartphone) and a "point-of-sale terminal" (entity) for transactions. [cite: US20030172028A1 Abstract]
• US20080040274A1 discusses "communications devices" and "biometric data" input means. [cite: US20080040274A1 Abstract] A POSA would understand how to integrate biometric sensors (e.g., fingerprint scanner) into a smartphone.
• US20070178935A1 details an "apparatus" (system) for changing the operation mode of a dual-mode terminal. [cite: US20070178935A1 Abstract]

A POSA would readily implement the obvious method steps as features of a smartphone system, configuring its hardware (e.g., Bluetooth module, cellular modem, biometric sensor) and software to perform the detection, link establishment, and information exchange as described. Thus, Claim 10, being a system claim embodying the obvious method of Claim 1, would also be obvious under 35 U.S.C. § 103.