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 .
This Office Action is in response to the Amendment filed on 07/08/2026.
In the instant Amendment, claims 1, 9, and 16 have been amended; and claims 1, 9, and 16 are independent claims. Claims 1-20 have been examined and are pending. This Action is made FINAL.
Response to Arguments
Applicants’ arguments in the instant Amendment, filed on 07/08/2026, with respect to limitations listed below, have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
Applicant’s argument: “[A]pplicant submits that, for a prima facie case of obviousness, the Examiner is required to "explain why the differences between the prior art and the claimed invention would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art," and provide "articulated reasoning with some rational underpinning to support the legal conclusion of obviousness" and provides "[i]n determining the differences between the prior art and the claims, the question under 35 U.S.C. 103 is not whether the differences themselves would have been obvious, but whether the claimed invention as a whole would have been obvious."”
The Examiner disagrees with the Applicants. The Examiner recognizes that obviousness may be established by combining or modifying the teachings of the prior art to produce the claimed invention where there is some teaching, suggestion, or motivation to do so found either in the references themselves or in the knowledge generally available to one of ordinary skill in the art. See In re Fine, 837 F.2d 1071, 5 USPQ2d 1596 (Fed. Cir. 1988), In re Jones, 958 F.2d 347, 21 USPQ2d 1941 (Fed. Cir. 1992), and KSR International Co. v. Teleflex, Inc., 550 U.S. 398, 82 USPQ2d 1385 (2007). In this case, Lee teaches method and apparatus for setup of wireless communication and Yang teaches subscriber identity privacy protection against fake base station. Lee and Yang are both from the same analogous art and therefore they are combinable. One of the ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention would been motivated to combine the two references to drive at applicant invention. Therefore, the examiner finds this argument not persuasive.
Applicant’s arguments: “Lee in view of Dade does not teach or suggest "broadcasting, by the first computing device, to computing devices within communication range including the second computing device, based on an update to the network credential, one or more wireless network frames comprising one or more messages and a second version of the network credential that replaces the first version of the network credential for access to the network encrypted by the first computing device using the public key."”
The Examiner disagrees with the Applicants. The Examiner respectfully submits that Lee discloses broadcasting, by the first computing device, based on an update to the network credential, one or more wireless network frames comprising one or more messages and a second version of the network credential that replace the first version of the network credential for access to the network encrypted by the first computing device using the public key (Lee: par. 0139 the IoT device 100 sends a NAN SDF publish to a terminal 300; par. 0141 the terminal 300 transmits a NAN SDF follow-up to the IoT device 100 in agreement with the NAN SDF publish in step 2107. The NAN SDF follow-up may include configuration data containing AP information encrypted with a public key and option 1; par. 0143 the IoT device 100 sends a NAN SDF follow-up to the terminal 300 in response to the NAN SDF follow-up sent from the terminal 300 in step 2108 [i.e. NAN SDF follow-up is updated and replaced NAN SDF]). More specifically, Lee discloses the IoT device 100 sends a NAN SDF publish to the terminal 300 in step 504. Then, the NAN SDF publish contains service information. The service information may include information, e.g., a public key, necessary for a Wi-Fi setup scheme, such as easy setup or relay-based setup, and the security scheme of the Io T device 100 and the terminal 300. The terminal 300 displays a popup window to receive a setup verification from the user in step 505. In addition, the terminal 300 sends a NAN SDF follow-up to the IoT device 100. The NAN SDF follow-up contains service information encrypted with a public key in step 506. The service information may include AP information that is used for connection with the AP 200. When the IoT device 100 receives the NAN SDF follow-up, the IoT device 100 is connected with the AP 200, entering into the AP connection state in step 507 [par. 0075]. In the same analogues art, Dade discloses broadcasting, by the first computing device, to computing devices within communication range including the second computing device (Dade: par. 0019 a mobile device 110 is configured to periodically scan for wireless access devices 102, 104, and maintain a list and/or table of the access devices 102, 104 having a signal strength that indicates the mobile device 110 is within the communication range of the access device 102, 104. For example, a mobile device 110 may receive broadcast messages and/or beacon signals from access devices 102, 104 within communication range advertising their identity (e.g., service set identifier (SSID) or media access control (MAC) address)). [NOTE: The rejection relies on the combined teachings of the references rather than requiring any single reference to disclose the complete claimed method/system. Applicant's separate attacks on the individual references do not address the rejection as a combination. In re Keller, 642, F.2d 413, 425 (CCPA 1981). Obviousness turns on what the combined teachings would have suggested a person of ordinary skill in the art, and familiar elements performing their known functions may be combined when the result would have been predictable. See In re Mouttet, 686, F.3d 1322, 1332-33 (fed. Cir. 2012); KSR Int'l Co.v. Teleflex Inc., 550 U.S. 398, 416-18 (2007)]. Therefore, the examiner finds this argument not persuasive.
Applicant’s arguments: “The combination of Lee with Dade is not properly supported.”
The Examiner disagrees with the Applicants. The Examiner recognizes that obviousness may be established by combining or modifying the teachings of the prior art to produce the claimed invention where there is some teaching, suggestion, or motivation to do so found either in the references themselves or in the knowledge generally available to one of ordinary skill in the art. See In re Fine, 837 F .2d 1071, 5 USPQ2d 1596 (Fed. Cir. 1988), In re Jones, 958 F.2d 347, 21 USPQ2d 1941 (Fed. Cir. 1992), and KSR International Co. V. Teleflex, Inc., 550 U.S. 398, 82 USPQ2d 1385 (2007). Lee teaches method and apparatus for setup of wireless communication and Transmission Control Protocol (TCP) optimization systems and Dade teaches methods that decouple wired and wireless TCP connections at a wireless access device. In this case, Lee and Dade are both from the same analogous art and therefore they are combinable. One of the ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention would been motivated to combine the two references to drive at applicant invention. Therefore, the examiner finds this argument not persuasive.
The amended claims 1, 9 and 16 have been addressed in rejection below.
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 (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 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.
This application currently names joint inventors. In considering patentability of the claims the examiner presumes that the subject matter of the various claims was commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the claimed invention(s) absent any evidence to the contrary. Applicant is advised of the obligation under 37 CFR 1.56 to point out the inventor and effective filing dates of each claim that was not commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the later invention in order for the examiner to consider the applicability of 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(C) for any potential 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) prior art against the later invention.
Claims 1, 3-4, 6, 8, 16, 18 and 20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over LEE et al. (“Lee,” US 2017/0353981) in view of Dade (US 2012/0163167).
Regarding claim 1: Lee discloses a method comprising:
receiving, by a first computing device (Lee: fig. 21 item 300 terminal), from a second computing device (Lee: fig. 21 item 100 IoT device):
a first request, to communicate via a network, that comprises a first version of a network credentials associated with access to the network; and a public key associated with the second computing device (Lee: par. 0139 the IoT device 100 sends NAN discovery beacons to recognize ambient terminal(s) in step 2103 [] the IoT device 100 sends a NAN SDF publish to a terminal 300 [] the NAN SDF publish includes a service name field and a service information field [] the service information field may include option 1 which is a security scheme and a public key which is security information; par. 0140 where a connection-less security scheme is used, the service information field in the NAN SDF publish may include option 1 1901 as a security scheme and a public key 1911 as security information);
broadcasting, by the first computing device, based on an update to the network credential, one or more wireless network frames comprising one or more messages and a second version of the network credential that replace the first version of the network credential for access to the network encrypted by the first computing device using the public key (Lee: par. 0139 the IoT device 100 sends a NAN SDF publish to a terminal 300; par. 0141 the terminal 300 transmits a NAN SDF follow-up to the IoT device 100 in agreement with the NAN SDF publish in step 2107. The NAN SDF follow-up may include configuration data containing AP information encrypted with a public key and option 1; par. 0143 the IoT device 100 sends a NAN SDF follow-up to the terminal 300 in response to the NAN SDF follow-up sent from the terminal 300 in step 2108 [i.e. NAN SDF follow-up is updated and replaced NAN SDF]);
receiving, from the second computing device, a second request, to communicate via the network, that comprises the second version of the network credentials (Lee: par. 0143 the IoT device 100 sends a NAN SDF follow-up to the terminal 300 in response to the NAN SDF follow-up sent from the terminal 300 in step 2108).
Lee doesn’t explicitly disclose broadcasting, by the first computing device, to computing devices within communication range including the second computing device and allowing, based on the second request, the second computing device to communicate via the network.
However, Dade discloses broadcasting, by the first computing device, to computing devices within communication range including the second computing device (Dade: par. 0019 a mobile device 110 is configured to periodically scan for wireless access devices 102, 104, and maintain a list and/or table of the access devices 102, 104 having a signal strength that indicates the mobile device 110 is within the communication range of the access device 102, 104. For example, a mobile device 110 may receive broadcast messages and/or beacon signals from access devices 102, 104 within communication range advertising their identity (e.g., service set identifier (SSID) or media access control (MAC) address)); and
allowing, based on the second request, the second computing device to communicate via the network (Dade: par. 0020 the wireless switch 106 sends an association response containing an acceptance or rejection notice to the mobile device 110 requesting association via the access device 102).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the teachings of Dade with the system/method of Lee to include broadcast, to computing devices within communication range including the second computing device. One would have been motivated selectively enabling connection optimization at the wireless access device by utilizing wireless local area network connection information between the mobile device and the wireless access device with the wireless connection (Dade: par. 0003).
Regarding claim 3: Lee in view of Dade discloses the method of claim 1.
Lee further discloses wherein broadcasting, the one or more wireless network frames comprising the second version of the network credential comprises at least one of: broadcasting, until a time to live ("TTL") element associated with the public key expires, the one or more messages comprising the second version of the network credential; or
sending, until the second request to communicate via the network is received, the one or more wireless network frames comprising the second version of the network credential (Lee: par. 0141 the terminal 300 transmits a NAN SDF follow-up to the IoT device 100 in agreement with the NAN SDF publish in step 2107; par. 0108 a fine timing measurement (FTM) [i.e., wireless network frame] [] FTM frames FTM_1, FTM_2, and FTM_3).
Regarding claim 4: Lee in view of Dade discloses the method of claim 1.
Lee further discloses wherein the one or more wireless network frames comprise at least one of a network message, a broadcast frame, an Internet Protocol packet, or a beacon frame (Lee: par. 0095 a terminal receives a NAN discovery beacon from an IoT device in step 801. The NAN discovery beacon is in the form of a frame that the IoT device sends to discover a device; par. 0108 a fine timing measurement (FTM) [i.e., wireless network frame] [] FTM frames FTM_1, FTM_2, and FTM_3).
Regarding claim 6: Lee in view of Dade discloses the method of claim 1.
Lee further discloses receiving, from the second computing device via the network, at least one communication (Lee: par. 0153 the IoT device 100 sends a NAN discovery beacon to a terminal 300).
Regarding claim 8: Lee in view of Dade discloses the method of claim 1.
Lee further discloses wherein the one or more wireless network frames comprise a plurality of wireless network frames, and wherein each wireless network frame of the plurality of wireless network frames: is associated with one computing device of a plurality of computing devices, and comprises the second version of the network credential encrypted using a public key corresponding to the one computing device (Lee: par. 0108 a fine timing measurement (FTM) [i.e., wireless network frame] based on times [] when FTM frames FTM_1, FTM_2, and FTM_3 are sent and [] when ACKs are received through the exchange of the FTM frames and the ACKs between the IoT device 100 and the terminal 300; par. 0141 the terminal 300 transmits a NAN SDF follow-up to the IoT device 100 in agreement with the NAN SDF publish in step 2107. The NAN SDF follow-up may include configuration data containing AP information encrypted with a public key and option 1; par. 0143 the terminal 300 sends, to the IoT device 100, a NAN SDF follow-up containing configuration data as per option 1 which is a security scheme contained in the received NAN SDF publish in step 2105; fig. 1).
Regarding claim 16: Lee discloses a system comprising:
a first computing device (Lee: fig. 21 item 300 terminal) configured to:
receive, from a second computing device (Lee: fig. 21 item 100 IoT device), a first request, to communicate via a network, that comprises a first version of a network credential associated with the network; receive a public key associated with the second computing device (Lee: par. 0139 the IoT device 100 sends NAN discovery beacons to recognize ambient terminal(s) in step 2103 [] the IoT device 100 sends a NAN SDF publish to a terminal 300 [] the NAN SDF publish includes a service name field and a service information field [] the service information field may include option 1 which is a security scheme and a public key which is security information; par. 0140 where a connection-less security scheme is used, the service information field in the NAN SDF publish may include option 1 1901 as a security scheme and a public key 1911 as security information);
broadcast, based on an update to the network credential, one or more messages comprising a second version of the network credential, one or more wireless network frames comprising one or more messages and a second version of the network credential that replaces the first version of the network credential for access to the netwrok encrypted by the first computing device using the public key (Lee: par. 0139 the IoT device 100 sends a NAN SDF publish to a terminal 300; par. 0141 the terminal 300 transmits a NAN SDF follow-up to the IoT device 100 in agreement with the NAN SDF publish in step 2107. The NAN SDF follow-up may include configuration data containing AP information encrypted with a public key and option 1; par. 0143 the IoT device 100 sends a NAN SDF follow-up to the terminal 300 in response to the NAN SDF follow-up sent from the terminal 300 in step 2108 [i.e. NAN SDF follow-up is updated and replaced NAN SDF]);
receive a second request, to communicate via the network, that comprises the second version of the network credential (Lee: par. 0143 the IoT device 100 sends a NAN SDF follow-up to the terminal 300 in response to the NAN SDF follow-up sent from the terminal 300 in step 2108).
Lee doesn’t explicitly disclose broadcast, to computing devices within communication range including the second computing device, allow, based on the second request, the second computing device to communicate via the network and the second computing device configured to: after the second request, communicate via the network.
However, Dade discloses broadcast, to computing devices within communication range including the second computing device (Dade: par. 0019 a mobile device 110 is configured to periodically scan for wireless access devices 102, 104, and maintain a list and/or table of the access devices 102, 104 having a signal strength that indicates the mobile device 110 is within the communication range of the access device 102, 104. For example, a mobile device 110 may receive broadcast messages and/or beacon signals from access devices 102, 104 within communication range advertising their identity (e.g., service set identifier (SSID) or media access control (MAC) address));
allow, based on the second request, the second computing device to communicate via the network (Dade: par. 0020 the wireless switch 106 sends an association response containing an acceptance or rejection notice to the mobile device 110 requesting association via the access device 102); and
the second computing device configured to: after the second request, communicate via the network (Dade: par. 0018 the wireless access devices 102, 104 are configured to receive data from mobile devices 110 over wireless data communication links. Once that data is captured by the wireless access device 102, the data may be encapsulated [] for communication to another access device 102, 104, a mobile device 110, and/or the local network 112).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the teachings of Dade with the system/method of Lee to include broadcast, to computing devices within communication range including the second computing device. One would have been motivated selectively enabling connection optimization at the wireless access device by utilizing wireless local area network connection information between the mobile device and the wireless access device with the wireless connection (Dade: par. 0003).
Regarding claim 18: Claim 18 is similar in scope to claim 4, and is therefore rejected under similar rationale.
Regarding claim 20: Claim 20 is similar in scope to claim 6, and is therefore rejected under similar rationale.
Claims 2, 5, 17 and 19 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over LEE et al. (“Lee,” US 2017/0353981) in view of Dade (US 2012/0163167) and YANG et al. (“Yang,” US 2021/0092603).
Regarding claim 2: Lee in view of Dade discloses the method of claim 1.
Lee further discloses wherein broadcasting the one or more wireless network frames (Lee: par. 0108 a fine timing measurement (FTM) [i.e., wireless network frame] based on times [] when FTM frames FTM_1, FTM_2, and FTM_3 are sent and [] when ACKs are received through the exchange of the FTM frames and the ACKs between the IoT device 100 and the terminal 300).
Lee in view of Dade does not explicitly disclose wherein the public key comprises a time to live ("TTL") element, and the second version of the network credential is based on: determining that the TTL element of the public key is unexpired.
However, Yang discloses wherein the public key comprises a time to live ("TTL") element, and wherein sending the one or more messages comprising the second version of the network credential is based on: determining that the TTL element of the public key is unexpired (Yang: par. 0079 at a time indicated by 902, a first network public key K1 is established for use over a time period indicated as the K1 lifetime [] as indicated in FIG. 9, the K1 and K2 lifetimes span an overlapping time period 912, where both the first key K1 and the second key K2 can be validly used before the first key K1 expires at time 906).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the teachings of Yang with the system/method of Lee and Dade to include the public key comprises a time to live ("TTL") element, and determining that the TTL element of the public key is unexpired. One would have been motivated for protecting subscriber identity when communicating messages communicated between a wireless device and a wireless network entity (Yang: par. 0001).
Regarding claim 5: Lee in view of Dade discloses the method of claim 1.
Lee in view of Dade does not explicitly disclose determining the update to the network credential based on at least one of: receiving, from a user device, an instruction associated with the network; receiving, from an administrative device, the instruction associated with the network; or determining, based on a network rule, the update to the network credential.
However, Yang further discloses further comprising determining the update to the network credential based on at least one of:
receiving, from a user device, an instruction associated with the network;
receiving, from an administrative device, the instruction associated with the network; or
determining, based on a network rule, the update to the network credential (Yang: par. 0077 at 802, the UE 102 initiates a network attach procedure with a cellular wireless network entity 516, which may be not trusted by the UE 102 until authentication is successful).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the teachings of Yang with the system/method of Lee and Dade to include determining, based on a network rule, the update to the network credential. One would have been motivated for protecting subscriber identity when communicating messages communicated between a wireless device and a wireless network entity (Yang: par. 0001).
Regarding claim 17: Claim 17 is similar in scope to claim 2, and is therefore rejected under similar rationale.
Regarding claim 19: Claim 19 is similar in scope to claim 5, and is therefore rejected under similar rationale.
Claims 7, 9-10 and 12-15 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over LEE et al. (“Lee,” US 2017/0353981) in view of Dade (US 2012/0163167) and Nagarajamoorthy et al. (“Nagarajamoorthy,” US 2018/0167812).
Regarding claim 7: Lee in view of Dade discloses the method of claim 1.
Lee further discloses receiving, by the second computing device, the one or more wireless network frames (Lee: par. 0108 a fine timing measurement (FTM) [i.e., wireless network frame] based on times [] when FTM frames FTM_1, FTM_2, and FTM_3 are sent and [] when ACKs are received through the exchange of the FTM frames and the ACKs between the IoT device 100 and the terminal 300); and
sending, by the second computing device to the first computing device, the second request to communicate via the network (Lee: par. 0143 the IoT device 100 sends a NAN SDF follow-up to the terminal 300 in response to the NAN SDF follow-up sent from the terminal 300 in step 2108).
Lee in view of Dade does not explicitly disclose decrypting, by the second computing device, the second version of the network credential using a private key associated with the public key.
However, Nagarajamoorthy discloses decrypting, by the second computing device, the updated network credentials using a private key associated with the public key (Nagarajamoorthy: par. 0064 at step 722, the new client device 102 can decrypt the encrypted digital certificate [i.e., network credential] using its private key generated during step 708).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the teachings of Nagarajamoorthy with the system/method of Lee and Dade to include decrypting the updated network credentials using the private key. One would have been motivated to granting network access to client device when the trusted authenticator approves the potential new connection (Nagarajamoorthy: par. 0008).
Regarding claim 9: Lee discloses a method comprising:
determining by a second computing device (Lee: fig. 21 item 100 IoT device):
a public key (Lee: fig. 19; par. 0133 security information 1911 which is a public key);
sending to a first computing device (Lee: fig. 21 item 300 terminal):
the public key; and a first request, to communicate via a network, that comprises a first version of a network credential associated with the network, (Lee: par. 0139 the IoT device 100 sends NAN discovery beacons to recognize ambient terminal(s) in step 2103 [] the IoT device 100 sends a NAN SDF publish to a terminal 300 [] the NAN SDF publish includes a service name field and a service information field [] the service information field may include option 1 which is a security scheme and a public key which is security information; par. 0140 where a connection-less security scheme is used, the service information field in the NAN SDF publish may include option 1 1901 as a security scheme and a public key 1911 as security information);3626141.0347U1
receiving, from the first computing device, one or more wireless network frames comprising one or more messages and a second version of the network credential, wherein the second version of the network credential replace the first version of the network credential for access to the network and is encrypted by the first computing device using the public key (Lee: par. 0139 the IoT device 100 sends a NAN SDF publish to a terminal 300; par. 0141 the terminal 300 transmits a NAN SDF follow-up to the IoT device 100 in agreement with the NAN SDF publish in step 2107. The NAN SDF follow-up may include configuration data containing AP information encrypted with a public key and option 1; par. 0143 the IoT device 100 sends a NAN SDF follow-up to the terminal 300 in response to the NAN SDF follow-up sent from the terminal 300 in step 2108 [i.e. NAN SDF follow-up is updated and replaced NAN SDF]); and
sending, to the first computing device, a second request, to communicate via the network, that comprises the second version of the network credential (Lee: par. 0143 the IoT device 100 sends a NAN SDF follow-up to the terminal 300 in response to the NAN SDF follow-up sent from the terminal 300 in step 2108).
Lee does not explicitly disclose broadcast to computing devices within communication range of the first computing device, including the second computing device.
However, Dade discloses broadcast to computing devices within communication range of the first computing device, including the second computing device (Dade: par. 0019 a mobile device 110 is configured to periodically scan for wireless access devices 102, 104, and maintain a list and/or table of the access devices 102, 104 having a signal strength that indicates the mobile device 110 is within the communication range of the access device 102, 104. For example, a mobile device 110 may receive broadcast messages and/or beacon signals from access devices 102, 104 within communication range advertising their identity (e.g., service set identifier (SSID) or media access control (MAC) address)).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the teachings of Dade with the system/method of Lee to include broadcast to computing devices within communication range of the first computing device, including the second computing device. One would have been motivated selectively enabling connection optimization at the wireless access device by utilizing wireless local area network connection information between the mobile device and the wireless access device with the wireless connection (Dade: par. 0003).
Lee in view of Dade does not explicitly disclose a private key associated with the public key and decrypting the second version of the network credential using the private key.
However, Nagarajamoorthy discloses a private key associated with the public key (Nagarajamoorthy: par. 0057 the new client device 102 can generate a key pair and a CSR. The key pair can comprise a private key and a public key); and
decrypting the second version of the network credential using the private key (Nagarajamoorthy: par. 0064 at step 722, the new client device 102 can decrypt the encrypted digital certificate [i.e., network credential] using its private key generated during step 708).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the teachings of Nagarajamoorthy with the system/method of Lee and Dade to include decrypting the updated network credentials using the private key. One would have been motivated to granting network access to Yang client device when the trusted authenticator approves the potential new connection (Nagarajamoorthy: par. 0008).
Regarding claim 10: Lee in view of Dade and Nagarajamoorthy discloses the method of claim 9.
Lee further discloses wherein the first computing device comprises at least one of a gateway, a router, a network hub, a repeater, a bridge, or an access point, and wherein the second computing device comprises at least one of a user device, a tablet, a laptop, a desktop, a mobile device, a set-top box, a sensor, a camera, an appliance, or a smart device (Lee: fig. 2, items 100 and 200).
Regarding claim 12: Lee in view of Dade and Nagarajamoorthy discloses the method of claim 9.
Lee further discloses wherein the one or more messages comprise at least one of a network message, a broadcast frame, an Internet Protocol packet, or a beacon frame (Lee: par. 0095 a terminal receives a NAN discovery beacon from an IoT device in step 801. The NAN discovery beacon is in the form of a frame that the IoT device sends to discover a device).
Regarding claim 13: Lee in view of Dade and Nagarajamoorthy discloses the method of claim 9.
Lee further discloses wherein broadcasting, by the first computing device, the one or mor wireless network frames comprising the one or more messages and the second version of the network credential until the TTL element expires, or
broadcasting, by the first computing device, the one or more wireless network frames comprising the one or more messages and the second version of the network credential until the second request to communicate via the network is received (Lee: par. 0141 the terminal 300 transmits a NAN SDF follow-up to the IoT device 100 in agreement with the NAN SDF publish in step 2107; par. 0108 a fine timing measurement (FTM) [i.e., wireless network frame] [] FTM frames FTM_1, FTM_2, and FTM_3).
Regarding claim 14: Lee in view of Dade and Nagarajamoorthy discloses the method of claim 9.
Lee further discloses receiving, from the second computing device via the network, at least one communication (Lee: par. 0153 the IoT device 100 sends a NAN discovery beacon to a terminal 300).
Regarding claim 15: Lee in view of Dade and Nagarajamoorthy discloses the method of claim 9.
Lee further discloses receiving, by the first computing device, from the second computing device: the first request to communicate via the network, and3726141.0347U1 the public key (Lee: par. 0139 the IoT device 100 sends NAN discovery beacons to recognize ambient terminal(s) in step 2103 [] the IoT device 100 sends a NAN SDF publish to a terminal 300 [] the service information field may include option 1 which is a security scheme and a public key which is security information);
broadcasting, by the first computing device, the one or more wireless network frames comprising the one or more messages and the second version of the network credential (Lee: par. 0141 the terminal 300 transmits a NAN SDF follow-up to the IoT device 100; par. 0108 a fine timing measurement (FTM) [i.e., wireless network frame] based on times [] when FTM frames FTM_1, FTM_2, and FTM_3 are sent and [] when ACKs are received through the exchange of the FTM frames and the ACKs between the IoT device 100 and the terminal 300); and
receiving, by the first computing device from the second computing device, the second request to communicate via the network (Lee: par. 0143 the IoT device 100 sends a NAN SDF follow-up to the terminal 300 in response to the NAN SDF follow-up sent from the terminal 300 in step 2108).
Claim 11 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over LEE et al. (“Lee,” US 2017/0353981) in view of Dade (US 2012/0163167), Nagarajamoorthy et al. (“Nagarajamoorthy,” US 2018/0167812) and YANG et al. (“Yang,” US 2021/0092603).
Regarding claim 11: Lee in view of Dade and Nagarajamoorthy discloses the method of claim 9.
Lee in view of Dade and Nagarajamoorthy does not explicitly disclose wherein the public key comprises a time to live ("TTL") element, and wherein receiving the one or more messages comprising the second version of the network credential comprises receiving, prior to an expiration on the TTL element, the second version of the network credential.
However, Yang discloses wherein the public key comprises a time to live ("TTL") element, and wherein receiving the one or more messages comprising the second version of the network credential comprises receiving, prior to an expiration on the TTL element, the second version of the network credential (Yang: par. 0079 at a time indicated by 902, a first network public key K1 is established for use over a time period indicated as the K1 lifetime [] as indicated in FIG. 9, the K1 and K2 lifetimes span an overlapping time period 912, where both the first key K1 and the second key K2 can be validly used before the first key K1 expires at time 906).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the teachings of Yang with the system/method of Lee, Dade and Nagarajamoorthy to include receiving the one or more messages comprising the second version of the network credential comprises receiving, prior to an expiration on the TTL element. One would have been motivated for protecting subscriber identity against fake base stations when communicating messages communicated between a wireless device and a wireless network entity, including limited-use fallback encryption keys and single-use encrypted subscriber identities (Yang: par. 0001).
Conclusion
THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a).
A shortened statutory period for reply to this final action is set to expire THREE MONTHS from the mailing date of this action. In the event a first reply is filed within TWO MONTHS of the mailing date of this final action and the advisory action is not mailed until after the end of the THREE-MONTH shortened statutory period, then the shortened statutory period will expire on the date the advisory action is mailed, and any nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) pursuant to 37 CFR 1.136(a) will be calculated from the mailing date of the advisory action. In no event, however, will the statutory period for reply expire later than SIX MONTHS from the mailing date of this final action.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Fahimeh Mohammadi whose telephone number is (571)270-7857. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday 9:00 - 5:00.
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, Luu Pham can be reached at 5712705002. 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.
/FAHIMEH MOHAMMADI/ Examiner, Art Unit 2439
/LUU T PHAM/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2439
Prosecution Insights