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 .
DETAILED ACTION
1. This action is responsive to communication filed on: 27 May 2026 with acknowledgement of an original application filed on 1 September 2022 and that this application is a continuation of a German application filed 3 September 2021.
2. 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and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114.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 27 May 2026 has been entered.
3. Claims 1-15 are currently pending. Claims 1, 14, and 15, are independent claims. Claims 1, 14, and 15, have been amended.
Response to Arguments
4. Applicant's arguments filed 27 May 2026 have been fully considered however they are moot due to new grounds of rejection below necessitated by applicant’s amendments to the claims.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
5. The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of 35 U.S.C. 112(a):
(a) IN GENERAL.—The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor or joint inventor of carrying out the invention.
6. Claims 1-15 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(a) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), first paragraph, as failing to comply with the written description requirement. The claim(s) contains subject matter which was not described in the specification in such a way as to reasonably convey to one skilled in the relevant art that the inventor or a joint inventor, or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the inventor(s), at the time the application was filed, had possession of the claimed invention. The independent have been amended to include the following limitation:
“a heartbeat module configured to provide a heartbeat function, the heartbeat module monitored by one or more of the one or more enclaves to determine an operational status of the computer platform and the component, the check result being based at least in part on the heartbeat function”
Support does not exist for the twice underlined portion of this limitation. The only paragraphs that use the term heartbeat, are paragraphs 117-119, which are shown below:
PNG
media_image1.png
240
450
media_image1.png
Greyscale
The terms and phrases “to determine an operational status of the computer platform and component” and “the check result being based at least in part on the heartbeat function” are not present in the original disclosure. Therefore, the amendment is considered new matter. Appropriate Correction is required.
The Examiner suggests the Applicant’s Representative amend the claims as indicated below, in order to overcome the new matter rejection.
Examiner’s Suggested amendment to the limitation:
a heartbeat module configured to provide a heartbeat function, the heartbeat module monitored by one or more of the one or more enclaves wherein the enclaves and the heartbeat module are implemented as an ASIC module.
7. To expedite a complete examination of the instant application the claims rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112 above are further rejected as set forth below.
Claim Rejections – 35 USC § 103
8. 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.
9. Claims 1-7, 9-11, and 14-15 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Goldberg U.S. Patent Application Publication 2019/0106117 (hereinafter ‘117) in view of Scarlata et al. U.S. Patent Application Publication No. 2017/0353319 (hereinafter ‘319) in further view of Stein et al. U.S. Patent Application Publication No. 2021/0044967 (hereinafter ‘967) in further view of Hansel et al. U.S. Patent Application Publication No. 2019/0324454 (hereinafter ‘454).
As to independent claim 1, “A system for monitoring a component of an effect chain for an at least partially automated driving function of a motor vehicle, comprising: a computer platform, including: a processor; one or more memory blocks” is taught in ‘117 the Abstract and paragraph 5, note the system and method is directed to monitoring the status a vehicle as well as monitoring components (i.e. vehicle controller) to determine if a failure mode exists;
the following is not explicitly taught in ‘117:
“one or more processing enclaves, wherein: the computer platform is configured to receive data from the component” however ‘319 teaches a computing environment including an attestation system that can be utilized in various host devices (i.e. motor vehicles) with one or more secure enclaves in paragraphs 15 and 22;
“the one or more enclaves includes a certificate enclave configured to create a certificate for the component” however ‘319 teaches enclaves for providing keys, quotes, certificates in paragraphs 25-26;
“the certificate is sent to the component, the certificate enclave configured to check the data based on the certificate, to output a check result” however ‘319 teaches verifying certificates by a secure enclave and providing the quote to a backend service in paragraphs 26-27;
“and a trigger device configured to trigger a security action based on the check result” however ‘319 teaches providing the quote to a backend service which can provide a level of service (i.e. deny / which is interpreted equivalent to ‘a security action’) in paragraph 27;
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention of a vehicle controller safety monitor that utilizes communication between components and networks taught in ‘117 to include a means to utilize enclaves and certificates to check a component. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to perform such a modification to establish secure communication and trust between components and of a system see ‘319 paragraph 3.the following is not explicitly taught in ‘117 and ’319:
“wherein the certificate enclave is configured to determine whether the data was received within a predetermined time interval following output of the certificate, the check result indicating whether the data was received within the predetermined time interval” however ‘967 teaches a computerized method of evaluating authenticity of automotive devices (i.e. components) that evaluates certificates to determine if the device (i.e. component) is configured with a certificate that is received during a valid period of time before receiving data from the automotive device (component) in the Abstract, paragraphs 25, 51, 155, and 161;
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention of a vehicle controller safety monitor that utilizes communication between components and networks taught in ‘117 and ‘317 to include a means to only utilize data within a predetermined output of the certificate. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to perform such a modification because it is important for automotive devices during communication session such as autonomous driving systems to evaluate the identity posture (time or certificate receipt) of other automotive devices to prevent the use of data from a malicious device or compromised automotive device see ‘967 paragraphs 166-167.the following is not explicitly taught in ‘117, ‘319, and ‘967:
“a heartbeat module configured to provide a heartbeat function, the heartbeat module monitored by one or more of the one or more enclaves to determine an operational status of the computer platform and the component, the check result being based at least in part on the heartbeat function” however ‘454 teaches the use of a bus guardian that may act as a heartbeat device by keeping track of overall health of the autonomous vehicle (including various compute systems and vehicle component) in paragraph 133.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention of a vehicle controller safety monitor that utilizes communication between components and networks taught in ‘117, ‘319, and ‘454 to include a means to only utilize a heartbeat function such as a bus guardian. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to perform such a modification because successful and safe navigation of autonomous vehicles (AV) may depend on data being transmitted fast and in time between different components of the AV system. Problems such as exceeding channel capacity, congestion, and latency may occur. In addition, communications between AV components may be unsecure and susceptible to eavesdropping, unwanted modifications, faults, or erroneous instructions. Therefore, safeguards are needed, see ‘454 paragraphs 2-5, 47, and 51.
As to dependent claim 2, “The system as recited in claim 1, wherein the one or more enclaves include a processing unit enclave, which is configured to implement a processing unit” is taught in ‘319 paragraph 22.
As to dependent claim 3, “The system as recited in claim 2, wherein the processing unit is configured to provide a lockstep function” is shown in ‘117 paragraphs 21-22.
As to dependent claim 4, “The system as recited in claim 1, wherein the one or more enclaves include a time trigger enclave, which is configured to provide a time trigger function” is disclosed in ‘117 paragraph 22.
As to dependent claim 5, “The system as recited in claim 1, wherein the one or more enclaves include a watchdog enclave, which configured to provide a watchdog function” is taught in ‘117 paragraphs 22 and 31.
As to dependent claim 6, “The system as recited in claim 1, wherein the one or more enclaves include an authentication management enclave, which is configured to provide an authentication management function” is shown in ‘319 the Abstract and paragraph 15.
As to dependent claim 7, “The system as recited in claim 6, wherein the authentication management enclave is configured to provide a key management function” is disclosed in ‘319 paragraph 28.
As to dependent claim 9, “The system as recited in claim 1, wherein the one or more enclaves include a test generator enclave, which is configured to provide a test generator function for testing the component, for testing the component during runtime” is taught in ‘117 paragraph 39.
As to dependent claim 10, “The system as recited in claim 1, wherein the one or more enclaves include a memory enclave, which is set up to provide a memory function for storing cryptographic data” is shown in ‘319 paragraph 66.
As to dependent claim 11, “The system as recited in claim 1, wherein the computer platform is an ASIC” is disclosed in ‘117 paragraph 46.
As to independent claim 14, “A method for monitoring a component of an effect chain for an at least partially automated driving function of a motor vehicle, using a system including a computer platform, the computer platform including: a processor, one or more memory blocks” is taught in ‘117 the Abstract and paragraph 5, note the system and method is directed to monitoring the status a vehicle as well as monitoring components (i.e. vehicle controller) to determine if a failure mode exists;
the following is not explicitly taught in ‘117:
“an input configured to receive output data output from the component” however ‘319 teaches a computing environment including an attestation system that can be utilized in various host devices (i.e. motor vehicles) with one or more secure enclaves in paragraphs 15 and 22;
“computer-executable instructions executable by the processor to implement one or more enclaves, using the one or more memory blocks, the one or more enclaves including a certificate enclave configured to create a certificate for the component of the effect chain” however ‘319 teaches enclaves for providing keys, quotes, certificates in paragraphs 25-26;
“an output configured to output the certificate to the component, the certificate enclave being configured to check the output data received following the output of the certificate, based on the certificate, to output a check result” however ‘319 teaches verifying certificates by a secure enclave and providing the quote to a backend service in paragraphs 26-27;
“and a trigger device configured to trigger a security action based on the check result” however ‘319 teaches providing the quote to a backend service which can provide a level of service (i.e. deny / which is interpreted equivalent to ‘a security action’) in paragraph 27;
“the method comprising the following steps: creating a certificate for the component of the effect chain using the certificate enclave; outputting the certificate to the component using the output” however ‘319 teaches enclaves for providing keys, quotes, certificates in paragraphs 25-26;
“receiving output data output by the component by way of the input; checking the output data received following output of the certificate, based on the certificate, using the certificate enclave, to output a check result” however ‘319 teaches verifying certificates by a secure enclave and providing the quote to a backend service in paragraphs 26-27;
“and triggering a security action based on the check result, using the trigger device” however ‘319 teaches providing the quote to a backend service which can provide a level of service (i.e. deny / which is interpreted equivalent to ‘a security action’) in paragraph 27;
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention of a vehicle controller safety monitor that utilizes communication between components and networks taught in ‘117 to include a means to utilize enclaves and certificates to check a component. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to perform such a modification to establish secure communication and trust between components and of a system see ‘319 paragraph 3.the following is not explicitly taught in ‘117 and ‘’319:
“wherein the certificate enclave is configured to determine whether the data was received within a predetermined time interval following output of the certificate, the check result indicating whether the data was received within the predetermined time interval” however ‘967 teaches a computerized method of evaluating authenticity of automotive devices (i.e. components) that evaluates certificates to determine if the device (i.e. component) is configured with a certificate that is received during a valid period of time before receiving data from the automotive device (component) in the Abstract, paragraphs 20, 61, 155, and 161;
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention of a vehicle controller safety monitor that utilizes communication between components and networks taught in ‘117 and ‘317 to include a means to only utilize data within a predetermined output of the certificate. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to perform such a modification because it is important for automotive devices during communication session such as autonomous driving systems to evaluate the identity posture (time or certificate receipt) of other automotive devices to prevent the use of data from a malicious device or compromised automotive device see ‘967 paragraphs 166-167.
the following is not explicitly taught in ‘117, ‘319, and ‘967:
“a heartbeat module configured to provide a heartbeat function, the heartbeat module monitored by one or more of the one or more enclaves to determine an operational status of the computer platform and the component, the check result being based at least in part on the heartbeat function” however ‘454 teaches the use of a bus guardian that may act as a heartbeat device by keeping track of overall health of the autonomous vehicle (including various compute systems and vehicle component) in paragraph 133.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention of a vehicle controller safety monitor that utilizes communication between components and networks taught in ‘117, ‘319, and ‘454 to include a means to only utilize a heartbeat function such as a bus guardian. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to perform such a modification because successful and safe navigation of autonomous vehicles (AV) may depend on data being transmitted fast and in time between different components of the AV system. Problems such as exceeding channel capacity, congestion, and latency may occur. In addition, communications between AV components may be unsecure and susceptible to eavesdropping, unwanted modifications, faults, or erroneous instructions. Therefore, safeguards are needed, see ‘454 paragraphs 2-5, 47, and 51.
As to independent claim 15, this claim is directed to a non-transitory machine-readable storage medium executing the method of claim 14; therefore, it is rejected along similar rationale.
10. Claim 8 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Goldberg U.S. Patent Application Publication 2019/0106117 (hereinafter ‘117) in view of Scarlata et al. U.S. Patent Application Publication No. 2017/0353319 (hereinafter ‘319) in further view of Stein et al. U.S. Patent Application Publication No. 2021/0044967 (hereinafter ‘967) in further view of Hansel et al. U.S. Patent Application Publication No. 2019/0324454 (hereinafter ‘454) in further view of Kim et al. U.S. Patent Application Publication No. 2017/0134176 (hereinafter ‘176).
As to dependent claim 8, the following is not explicitly taught in ‘117, ‘967, ‘454, and ‘319: “The system as recited in claim 7, wherein the key management function is configured to provide a PUF for key management” however ‘176 teaches utilizes a PUF for key management in paragraph 55.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention of a vehicle controller safety monitor that utilizes communication between components and networks taught in ‘117, ‘967, ‘454, and ‘319 to utilize enclaves a PUF. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to perform such a modification to generate an identifier of a device for security and/or authentication see ‘176 paragraphs 2-5.
11. Claims 12-13 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Goldberg U.S. Patent Application Publication 2019/0106117 (hereinafter ‘117) in view of Scarlata et al. U.S. Patent Application Publication No. 2017/0353319 (hereinafter ‘319) in further view of Stein et al. U.S. Patent Application Publication No. 2021/0044967 (hereinafter ‘967) in further view of Hansel et al. U.S. Patent Application Publication No. 2019/0324454 (hereinafter ‘454) in further view of Sorensen et al. U.S. Patent Application Publication No. 2021/0288822 (hereinafter ‘822).
As to dependent claim 12, the following is not explicitly taught in ‘117, ‘967, ‘454, and ‘319: “The system as recited in claim 1, wherein the input is configured to receive configuration data for configuring the computer platform, the processor being set up to configure the computer platform based on the configuration data, during runtime” however ‘822 teaches sending configuration data during runtime in paragraph 59 and 151.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention of a vehicle controller safety monitor that utilizes communication between components and networks taught in ‘117, ‘967, ‘454, and ‘319 to send configuration data (i.e. signed configuration data) during runtime. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to perform such a modification because vehicle security information should utilize cryptographic signing techniques for processes interacting with a vehicle see ‘822 paragraph 2
As to dependent claim 13, “The system as recited in claim 12, wherein the processor is set up to configure the computer platform based on the configuration data only if the configuration data are signed with a valid signature” is taught in ‘822 paragraph 113.
12. The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant’s disclosure.
Hansel et al. U.S. Patent Application Publication No. 2019/0322288
Lurie et al. U.S. Patent Application Publication No. 2019/0324450Both of these applications are from the same assignee and contain similar inventor groups as the ‘454 Application. In addition these Application have an identical paragraph to paragraph 133 utilized above.
Conclusion
13. Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ELLEN C TRAN whose telephone number is (571) 272-3842. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday.
Examiner interviews are available via telephone 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, Jeff Pwu can be reached at 571-272-6798. 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.
/ELLEN TRAN/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2433 31 July 2026
Prosecution Insights