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 .
Continued Examination Under 37 CFR 1.114
A request for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, including the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e), was filed in this application after final rejection. Since this application is eligible for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114. Applicant's submission filed on 01/27/2026 has been entered.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments have been fully considered but they are not persuasive. The applicant presents certain arguments about certain claim limitations not in the claims of the instant application and refers to prior art not presented in the previous office action(s). These arguments are therefore moot, and not persuasive.
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 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.
Claims 1, 12 & 17 are rejected under 35 U.S.C 103 as being unpatentable over Bruce (US 20170063810), hereon referred to as Bruce, in view of Pahl (US 2015/0288514), hereon referred to as Pahl, and in view of Nix (US 2024/0106636), hereon referred to as Nix.
In regards to claims 1, 12 & 17, Bruce discloses causing a server to hold long-term public/private Key Encapsulation Mechanism (KEM) keypair (The storage may comprise a hardcoded shared symmetric key that may be used to encrypt the encrypted public key; The storage also may comprise a hardcoded private symmetric key that may be used to encrypt a private key of an asymmetric key pair that includes the public key; (Paragraphs 0019-0025); using KEM to establish a pre-master shared secret (Generating a public key and a private key; encrypting the public key using a shared symmetric key shared with an agent; encrypting the private key using a private symmetric key; sending the encrypted public key to the agent; decrypting, by the agent, the encrypted public key with the shared symmetric key; receiving, from the agent, the message encrypted with the shared symmetric key; decrypting the message using the shared symmetric key, where the agent send messages encrypted with the decrypted public key as the agent may periodically send a status message (or “keep alive” message) to the license server; to confirm that the agent remains communicatively coupled to the license server during performance of the operation; such keep alive message may be encrypted using the shared symmetric key or the public key; where any encrypted msg by the public key is decrypted by the corresponding private key; Paragraphs 0039-0050; Figs.3-7); causing a client to send an ephemeral KEM public key to the server (Generating a public key and a private key; encrypting the public key using a shared symmetric key shared with an agent; encrypting the private key using a private symmetric key; sending the encrypted public key to the agent; decrypting, by the agent, the encrypted public key with the shared symmetric key; receiving, from the agent, the message encrypted with the shared symmetric key; decrypting the message using the shared symmetric key, where the agent send messages encrypted with the decrypted public key as the agent may periodically send a status message (or “keep alive” message) to the license server; to confirm that the agent remains communicatively coupled to the license server during performance of the operation; such keep alive message may be encrypted using the shared symmetric key or the public key; where any encrypted msg by the public key is decrypted by the corresponding private key; Paragraphs 0039-0050; Figs.3-7).
However, Bruce does not disclose using KEM to establish a master shared secret; and generating a session key by the server and establishes encryption to the client using the master shared secret. In an analogous art Pahl discloses using KEM to establish a master shared secret; and generating a session key by the server and establishes encryption to the client using the master shared secret (The key generating and encrypting the session key, encrypting the session key and sending it to the session server, which is shared with the client for secure communication between and [0228, 0233, 0237], where the server sends the session key to the session server with the knowledge that the session key is associated with the session between the session server; Paragraphs 0228-0238; Figs.15-17).
At the time before the effective filing date of the invention, it would have been obvious to the one with ordinary skill in the art to combine the teachings disclosed by Bruce, with the teachings disclosed by Pahl regarding using KEM to establish a master shared secret; and generating a session key by the server and establishes encryption to the client using the master shared secret. The suggestion/motivation of the combination would have been to provide additional security in secure sessions between client and sessions server (Pahl; Abs.).
However, the combination of Bruce and Pahl does not disclose …based on one or more post-quantum algorithms. In an analogous art Nix discloses …based on one or more post-quantum algorithms (Server can store KEM private keys…supports a plurality of different PQC key exchange mechanism; Paragraphs 0065-0075; 0329-0330).
At the time before the effective filing date of the invention, it would have been obvious to the one with ordinary skill in the art to combine the teachings disclosed by the combination of Bruce and Pahl, with the teachings disclosed by Nix regarding …based on one or more post-quantum algorithms. The suggestion/motivation of the combination would have been to provide additional security in secure communications using post-quantum cryptography (Nix; Paragraph 0002).
Claims 2-11, 13-16 & 18-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C 103 as being unpatentable over the combination of Bruce, Pahl and Nix, in view of Sidman (US 2008/0294726), hereon referred to as Sidman.
In regard to claims 2, 13 & 18, the combination of Bruce, Pahl and Nix does not disclose wherein the method further comprises: using a handshake that utilizes a static Key Encapsulation Mechanism (KEM) keypair to establish perfect forward secrecy. However, in an analogous art Sidman discloses wherein the method further comprises: using a handshake that utilizes a static Key Encapsulation Mechanism (KEM) keypair to establish perfect forward secrecy (A temporary public/private key pair is maintained within the server farms when a recipient is not yet a member of the private network; The public key of the temporary public/private key pair maintained by the server may be used by a sender to temporarily encrypt the symmetric key; Each of the recipients that are members of the private network may maintain a public/private key pair on clients, where the public key of the recipients is also stored in the server; When a recipient becomes a member of the private network, the new public key will be used to re-encrypt the symmetric key at the server after being unencrypted by the temporary private key; Paragraphs 0071-0081).
At the time before the effective filing date of the invention, it would have been obvious to the one with ordinary skill in the art to combine the teachings disclosed by the combination of Bruce, Pahl and Nix, with the teachings disclosed by Sidman regarding wherein the method further comprises: using a handshake that utilizes a static Key Encapsulation Mechanism (KEM) keypair to establish perfect forward secrecy. The suggestion/motivation of the combination would have been to provide additional security in electronic information exchange using private addresses and domains (Sidman; Paragraph 0001).
In regards to claims 3, 14 & 19, Sidman discloses wherein the method further comprises: causing the client to encapsulate a symmetric key using the server's static KEM public key to produce a ciphertext (A temporary public/private key pair is maintained within the server farms when a recipient is not yet a member of the private network. The public key of the temporary public/private key pair maintained by the server may be used by a sender to temporarily encrypt the symmetric key; Each of the recipients that are members of the private network may maintain a public/private key pair on clients, where the public key of the recipients is also stored in the server. When a recipient becomes a member of the private network, the new public key will be used to re-encrypt the symmetric key at the server after being unencrypted by the temporary private key. The encrypted symmetric key is sent from the sender to the server in order for the server to unencrypt/decrypt the encrypted symmetric key using the private key associated with the public key used by the sender to encrypt the symmetric key, where decrypting encrypted symmetric key produces a second symmetric key at the server, which is in turn encrypted and sent to the recipient. The email client add-in decrypts the encrypted symmetrical key with the recipient's private key corresponding to the recipient public key to yield the unencrypted symmetric key, where the recipient decrypts the encrypted symmetric key using the private key; Paragraphs 0071-0093).
In regards to claims 4 & 20, Bruce discloses wherein the method further comprises: causing the client to generate an ephemeral KEM keypair (Generating a public key and a private key; encrypting the public key using a shared symmetric key shared with an agent; encrypting the private key using a private symmetric key; sending the encrypted public key to the agent; decrypting, by the agent, the encrypted public key with the shared symmetric key; receiving, from the agent, the message encrypted with the shared symmetric key; decrypting the message using the shared symmetric key, where the agent send messages encrypted with the decrypted public key; The agent may periodically send a status message (or “keep alive” message) to the license server to confirm that the agent remains communicatively coupled to the license server during performance of the operation; such keep alive message may be encrypted using the shared symmetric key or the public key, where any encrypted msg by the public key is decrypted by the corresponding private key; Paragraphs 0039-0050; Figs. 2-3 & 7).
In regards to claim 5, Bruce discloses wherein the method further comprises: causing the client to use Authenticated Encryption with Associated Data (AEAD) with the symmetric key to encrypt the ephemeral KEM public key to produce encrypted text (Generating a public key and a private key; encrypting the public key using a shared symmetric key shared with an agent; encrypting the private key using a private symmetric key; sending the encrypted public key to the agent; decrypting, by the agent, the encrypted public key with the shared symmetric key; receiving, from the agent, the message encrypted with the shared symmetric key; decrypting the message using the shared symmetric key, where the agent send messages encrypted with the decrypted public key; The agent may periodically send a status message (or “keep alive” message) to the license server to confirm that the agent remains communicatively coupled to the license server during performance of the operation; such keep alive message may be encrypted using the shared symmetric key or the public key, where any encrypted msg by the public key is decrypted by the corresponding private key; Paragraphs 0039-0050; Figs. 2-3 & 7).
In regards to claims 6 & 15 the combination of Bruce, Pahl, Nix and Sidman discloses wherein the method further comprises: causing the client to send the ciphertext concatenated with the encrypted text to the server (The elements presented in the claim(s) do not contain any additional features, do not present any inventive step or novelty not addressed/presented in the combination of Bruce, Pahl, Nix and Sidman. Examiner takes official notice, that these elements are commonly known, minor design details that are derivable from the prior art and are well known, and obvious to an ordinary skill in the art. The additional features of these claims represent normal design options, which the skilled person would implement the combination of Bruce, Pahl, NIx and Sidman, depending on the circumstances, without exercising any inventive activity).
In regards to claim 7, Bruce discloses causing the server to decapsulate the ciphertext using their static KEM secret key to produce the symmetric key (Generating a public key and a private key; encrypting the public key using a shared symmetric key shared with an agent; encrypting the private key using a private symmetric key; sending the encrypted public key to the agent; decrypting, by the agent, the encrypted public key with the shared symmetric key; receiving, from the agent, the message encrypted with the shared symmetric key; decrypting the message using the shared symmetric key, where the agent send messages encrypted with the decrypted public key; The agent may periodically send a status message (or “keep alive” message) to the license server to confirm that the agent remains communicatively coupled to the license server during performance of the operation; such keep alive message may be encrypted using the shared symmetric key or the public key, where any encrypted msg by the public key is decrypted by the corresponding private key; Paragraphs 0039-0050; Figs. 2-3 & 7).
In regards to claim 8, the combination of Bruce, Pahl Nix and Sidman discloses wherein the method further comprises: causing the server to use AEAD with the symmetric key to decrypt the encrypted text by producing the ephemeral KEM public key (The elements presented in the claim(s) do not contain any additional features, do not present any inventive step or novelty not addressed/presented in the combination of Bruce, Pahl Nix and Sidman. Examiner takes official notice, that these elements are commonly known, minor design details that are derivable from the prior art and are well known, and obvious to an ordinary skill in the art. The additional features of these claims represent normal design options, which the skilled person would implement the combination of Bruce, Pahl and Sidman, depending on the circumstances, without exercising any inventive activity).
In regards to claim 9, Sidman discloses wherein the method further comprises: causing the server to encapsulate a second symmetric key by using the client's ephemeral KEM public key to produce a second ciphertext (A temporary public/private key pair is maintained within the server farms when a recipient is not yet a member of the private network. The public key of the temporary public/private key pair maintained by the server may be used by a sender to temporarily encrypt the symmetric key; each of the recipients that are members of the private network may maintain a public/private key pair on clients, where the public key of the recipients is also stored in the server. When a recipient becomes a member of the private network, the new public key will be used to re-encrypt the symmetric key at the server after being unencrypted by the temporary private key; Paragraphs 0071-0081).
In regards to claim 10, Sidman discloses wherein the method further comprises: causing the server to send the second ciphertext to the client (A temporary public/private key pair is maintained within the server farms when a recipient is not yet a member of the private network. The public key of the temporary public/private key pair maintained by the server may be used by a sender to temporarily encrypt the symmetric key; each of the recipients that are members of the private network may maintain a public/private key pair on, where the public key of the recipients is also stored in the server. When a recipient becomes a member of the private network, the new public key will be used to re-encrypt the symmetric key at the server after being unencrypted by the temporary private key, where the encrypted is sent from the sender to the server in order for the server to unencrypt/decrypt using the private key associated with the public key used by the sender to encrypt the symmetric key; Paragraphs 0071-0081).
In regards to claims 11 & 16, Sidman discloses wherein the method further comprises: causing the client to decapsulate the second ciphertext using their ephemeral KEM secret key to produce the second symmetric key (A temporary public/private key pair is maintained within the server farms when a recipient is not yet a member of the private network. The public key of the temporary public/private key pair maintained by the server may be used by a sender to temporarily encrypt the symmetric key; each of the recipients that are members of the private network may maintain a public/private key pair on clients, where the public key of the recipients is also stored in the server. When a recipient becomes a member of the private network, the new public key will be used to re-encrypt the symmetric key at the server after being unencrypted by the temporary private key, where the encrypted symmetric key is sent from the sender to the server in order for the server to unencrypt/decrypt the encrypted symmetric key using the private key associated with the public key used by the sender to encrypt the symmetric key, where decrypting encrypted symmetric key produces a “second” symmetric key at the server, which is in turn encrypted and sent to the recipient, the email client add-in decrypts the encrypted symmetrical key with the recipient's private key corresponding to the recipient public key to yield the unencrypted symmetric key, where the recipient decrypts the encrypted symmetric key using the private key; Paragraphs 0071-0075; 0090-0095).
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to SHARIF E ULLAH whose telephone number is (571)272-5453. The examiner can normally be reached Mon-Fri 7:00-5:30.
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, Farid Homayounmehr can be reached at 571-272-3739. 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.
/SHARIF E ULLAH/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2495