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 .
Response to Amendments / Arguments
Regarding the rejection(s) of claims under 35 USC 103:
Applicant’s arguments, filed 02/03/2026, have been fully considered and are persuasive. Therefore the Lee reference has been withdrawn. However, the rejection is further maintained under Yap et al. (US 20150169472 A1, referred to as Yap).
DETAILED ACTION
This is a reply to the arguments filed on 02/03/2026, in which, claims 1-20 are pending. Claims 1, 17, and 19 are independent.
When making claim amendments, the applicant is encouraged to consider the references in their entireties, including those portions that have not been cited by the examiner and their equivalents as they may most broadly and appropriately apply to any particular anticipated claim amendments.
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, 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 1-8 and 14-18 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Knezevic et al. (US 20210165746 A1, referred to as Knezevic), in view of Yap et al. (US 20150169472 A1, referred to as Yap).
In reference to claim 1, A method comprising: receiving a data block from a buffer (Knezevic: Fig. 2-3, [0026] and [0042] Provides for a memory region including a tweak control value being used for encryption.)
Combining a memory address and a identifier to generate a tweak (Knezevic: Fig. 2-3, [0029], [0032] and [0038]-[0039] Provides for generating a tweak by using the tweak control value which corresponds to where the data is being read from, with the memory address of where the encryption is going to be stored.) Encrypting the data block using the tweak in a tweakable block cipher (Knezevic: Fig. 2-3 [0030], [0034] and [0039] Provides for using the generated tweak in a tweakable block cipher to encrypt the received plaintext.) Storing the encrypted data block in a memory at a location corresponding to the memory address (Knezevic: Fig. 1, [0025], [0030]-[0031] and [0066] Provides for storing the encrypted data at the address used to generate the tweak.)
Knezevic does not explicitly disclose that the identifier is a buffer identifier. However, Yap discloses:
Where in the identifier comprises a buffer identifier and Wherein the buffer identifier identifies one of the buffer or a portion of the buffer from which the data block is received; (Yap: [0013]-[0017] and [0024]-[0030] Provides for an identifier (channel address) that identifies the specific buffer from which a sub block was received.)
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 teachings of Knezevic, which provides a method for encrypting data blocks using tweakable block ciphers with tweaks generated from memory addresses and tweak control values, with the teachings of Yap, which introduces buffer identifiers to identify specific buffers or buffer portions from which data is received. One of ordinary skill in the art would recognize the ability to incorporate Yap's buffer identification system into Knezevic's tweak generation process to enhance the specificity and security of the encryption mechanism. One of ordinary skill in the art would be motivated to make this modification in order to provide more differentiation of data based on its source buffer.
In reference to claim 2, The method of claim 1, wherein encrypting the data block comprises using a tweakable block cipher in electronic code book mode (Knezevic: Fig. 2 and 3 Provides for electronic code book block ciphers that are used to create the encrypted tweak and encrypt the plaintext.)
In reference to claim 3, The method of claim 1, wherein encrypting the data block comprises encrypting using a symmetric block cipher (Knezevic: [0030]-[0031] and [0072] Provides for using symmetric algorithms for encryption, including specific examples like triple DES and AES, which are symmetric block ciphers.)
In reference to claim 7, The method of claim 5, further comprising: combining the memory address and the new buffer identifier to generate a new tweak (Knezevic: [0029]-[0032] Provides for combining the memory address and tweak control value to generate a tweak, which can include the newly generated tweak control value.) Encrypting the data block using the new tweak in a tweakable block cipher, wherein the frequency distribution of the encrypted data block with the first tweak is different from the frequency distribution of the encrypted data block with the new tweak (Knezevic: [0030]-[0031] and [0050]-[0052] Provides for using different tweaks, even for the same data and address. This teaches a difference in the encrypted data that would result in different frequency distributions.)
In reference to claim 8, The method of claim 1, wherein the buffer identifier is a 64-bit value (Knezevic: [0033] Provides for bit lengths being applied to tweak control values.)
In reference to claim 14, The method of claim 1, wherein the memory is an external memory (Knezevic: [0025] Provides for external storage devices as part of the memory types that can be used with the invention.)
In reference to claim 15, The method of claim 1, wherein combining comprises concatenating a binary representation of the memory address with a binary representation of the buffer identifier (Knezevic: [0029], [0033] and [0039] Provides for concatenation as a method for combining the memory address and tweak control value, and the context teaches that these are binary representations.)
In reference to claim 16, The method of claim 1, wherein combining comprises applying an exclusive OR operation to the memory address and the buffer identifier (Knezevic: [0029]-[0030] and [0038]-[0040] Provides for using XOR in the logical combinations to combine the address and the tweak control value.)
In reference to claim 17, A tweakable block cipher comprising a memory storing executable instructions configured to, when executed by processing circuitry of the tweakable block cipher, cause the processing circuitry to perform operations comprising: receiving a data block from a buffer (Knezevic:Fig. 2-3, [0026] and [0042] Provides for a memory region including a tweak control value being used for encryption.)
Combining a memory address and a identifier to generate a tweak (Knezevic: Fig. 2-3, [0029], [0032] and [0038]-[0039] Provides for generating a tweak by using the tweak control value which corresponds to where the data is being read from, with the memory address of where the encryption is going to be stored.)
Encrypting the data block using the tweak in a tweakable block cipher (Knezevic: Fig. 2-3 [0030], [0034] and [0039] Provides for using the generated tweak in a tweakable block cipher to encrypt the received plaintext.)
Storing the encrypted data block in a memory at a location corresponding to the memory address (Knezevic: Fig. 1, [0025], [0030]-[0031] and [0066] Provides for storing the encrypted data at the address used to generate the tweak.)
Knezevic does not explicitly disclose that the identifier is a buffer identifier. However, Yap discloses:
Where in the identifier comprises a buffer identifier and Wherein the buffer identifier identifies one of the buffer or a portion of the buffer from which the data block is received; (Yap: [0013]-[0017] and [0024]-[0030] Provides for an identifier (channel address) that identifies the specific buffer from which a sub block was received.)
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 teachings of Knezevic, which provides a method for encrypting data blocks using tweakable block ciphers with tweaks generated from memory addresses and tweak control values, with the teachings of Yap, which introduces buffer identifiers to identify specific buffers or buffer portions from which data is received. One of ordinary skill in the art would recognize the ability to incorporate Yap's buffer identification system into Knezevic's tweak generation process to enhance the specificity and security of the encryption mechanism. One of ordinary skill in the art would be motivated to make this modification in order to provide more differentiation of data based on its source buffer.
In reference to claim 18, The tweakable block cipher of claim 17, wherein combining comprises concatenating a binary representation of the memory address with a binary representation of the buffer identifier (Knezevic: [0029]-[0030] and [0038]-[0040] Provides for using XOR in the logical combinations to combine the address and the tweak control value.)
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, 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 4-6 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Knezevic et al. (US 20210165746 A1, referred to as Knezevic), in view of Yap et al. (US 20150169472 A1, referred to as Yap), in further view of Lemay et al. (US 20220206958 A1, referred to as Lemay).
In reference to claim 4, The method of claim 1, further comprising: allocating the buffer to the data block; and generating the buffer identifier when the k (Lemay: [0078]-[0082] Provides for the process of allocating memory (buffer) for data and generating metadata (buffer identifier) during the allocation process. ) 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 teachings of Knezevic in view of Yap, which together provide a method for encrypting data blocks using tweakable block ciphers with buffer-specific identifiers incorporated into tweak generation, with the teachings of Lemay, which introduces buffer allocation processes with metadata generation during allocation. One of ordinary skill in the art would recognize the ability to incorporate Lemay's buffer allocation and identifier generation methodology into the combined encryption system to establish buffer identifiers at the point of memory allocation. One of ordinary skill in the art would be motivated to make this modification in order to streamline the encryption workflow by creating buffer identifiers during the allocation phase.
In reference to claim 5, The method of claim 4, further comprising: re-allocating the buffer to the data block; and generating a new buffer identifier when the buffer is re-allocated (Lemay: [0228]-[0231] Provides for re-allocation of memory during garbage collection, which involves moving objects (data blocks) between different memory spaces and generating new encryption keys when data is relocated.)
In reference to claim 6, The method of claim 5, wherein generating a new buffer identifier comprises generating a new buffer identifier notwithstanding the memory address (Lemay: [0514]-[0515] Provides for changing the version field in a pointer and its associated metadata while keeping the memory address the same.)
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, 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 9-13 and 19-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Knezevic et al. (US 20210165746 A1, referred to as Knezevic), in view of Yap et al. (US 20150169472 A1, referred to as Yap), in further view of Maalouf et al. (US 20210142214 A1, referred to as Maalouf).
In reference to claim 9, Knezevic in view of Yap discloses the method of claim 1, which teaches receiving, processing, and encrypting data blocks using a nonce and a memory address to generate a tweak for a tweakable block cipher. Knezevic in view of Yaps does not explicitly disclose that the data block comprises activation data of a machine learning inference model. However, Maalouf discloses:
The method of claim 1, wherein the data block is comprised of activation data of a machine learning inference model (Maalouf: [0033], [0034], [0041], [0067] Provides for activation data of a machine learning model describes the architecture of the CNN, which processes activation data through its layers during inference to produce the final output).
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 teachings of Knezevic in view of Yap, which involve encryption techniques using a tweak based on data from a nonce value and a memory address, with the teachings of Maalouf, which provide detailed descriptions of using activation data from machine learning models, particularly CNNs, as part of the data handling and processing operations. One of ordinary skill in the art would recognize the ability to apply Knezevic and Yap’s encryption methods to the machine learning activation data described by Maalouf. One of ordinary skill in the art would be motivated to make this modification in order to ensure the security of sensitive machine learning data during processing.
In reference to claim 10, Knezevic in view of Yapdiscloses the method of claim 1 which teaches handling and encryption of data blocks using using a nonce value and a memory address to generate a tweak for a tweakable block cipher but does not explicitly disclose the details of the data blocks being part of activation data specifically tailored for use within a machine learning system, nor the use of an activation buffer through which this data is passed from one layer to another. However, Maalouf discloses:
The method of claim 1, wherein the data block is part of activation data and the buffer is an activation buffer and wherein the activation data is passed from one layer of a machine learning system to another layer of the machine learning system through the activation buffer (Maalouf: [0034] Provides detailed architecture of a CNN, showing how activation data is processed across different network layers, explicitly teaching the use of activation buffers to transfer activation data. Maalou paragraphs [0036] - [0041] Further elaborates on how the CNN processes this activation data during both training and inference phases.)
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 teachings of Knezevic in view of Yap, which includes advanced encryption methods using data from memory, with the teachings of Maalouf, which detail managing activation data within a machine learning framework using buffers. One of ordinary skill in the art would recognize the ability to apply Knezevic and Yap’s encryption strategies to the specifically structured activation data of a machine learning system as described by Maalouf. One of ordinary skill in the art would be motivated to make this modification to enhance the security of sensitive machine learning data while maintaining efficient data flow between neural network layers.
In reference to claim 11, The method of claim 10, further comprising generating a new buffer identifier for each inference run (Knezevic: [0026] and [0042] Provides for generating new tweak control values, either by incrementing a counter or changing to a new value.)
However, Knezevic in view of Yap does not explicitly disclose that each inference run are of the machine learning system. However, Maalouf discloses paragraphs [0061], [0066], [0070] which provides for a machine learning system that different parts or sections of the buffer are labeled or identified based on their correspondence to different parts of the gesture.
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 teachings of Knezevic in view of Yap, which includes generating new tweak control values for data operations, with the teachings of Maalouf, which describe the dynamic labeling of buffer segments in a machine learning context. One of ordinary skill in the art would recognize the ability to generate new buffer identifiers for each machine learning inference run to optimize data handling and enhance operational security. One of ordinary skill in the art would be motivated to make this modification to ensure that each inference run is processed with a unique, context-specific identifier, thereby preserving the integrity of data throughout the machine learning process.
In reference to claim 12, The method of claim 11, wherein generating a new buffer identifier comprises combining a fixed buffer identifier with a current increment of an inference counter that increments for each inference run (Knezevic: [0026] and [0042] Provides for generating new tweak control values after it has been used, by incrementing a counter on a fixed value.) However Knezevic in view of Yap does not explicitly disclose that each inference run are of the machine learning system. However, Maalouf discloses paragraphs [0061], [0066], [0070] which provides for a machine learning system that different parts or sections of the buffer are labeled or identified based on their correspondence to different parts of the gesture.
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 teachings of Knezevic in view of Yap, which includes generating new tweak control values using a fixed identifier for data operations, with the teachings of Maalouf, which describe the dynamic labeling of buffer segments in a machine learning context. One of ordinary skill in the art would recognize the ability to generate new buffer identifiers for each machine learning inference run to optimize data handling and enhance operational security. One of ordinary skill in the art would be motivated to make this modification to ensure that each inference run is processed with a unique, context-specific identifier, thereby preserving the integrity of data throughout the machine learning process.
In reference to claim 13, Knezevic in view of Yap in further view of Maalouf disclose the method of claim 10, which teaches transferring activation data through an activation buffer in a machine learning model. Maalouf further discloses: The method of claim 10, wherein the activation data is configured for a rectified linear unit activation function (Maalouf: [0034] Provides for the use of ReLU layers in the CNN, directly aligning with the claim that the activation data is configured for a rectified linear unit activation function.)
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 teachings of Knezevic in view of Yap, which handles data encryption and management within computing systems, with the teachings of Maalouf, which provides detailed implementations of CNNs including the use of ReLU activation functions. One of ordinary skill in the art would recognize the ability to incorporate ReLU as the activation function within the structured data processing of Knezevic and Yap’s system to optimize neural network computations. One of ordinary skill in the art would be motivated to make this modification in order to enhance the functionality and efficiency of neural networks.
In reference to claim 19, An addressable memory; a buffer (Knezevic: Fig. 2-3, [0026] and [0042] Provides for a memory region including a tweak control value being used for encryption.)
A tweakable block cipher to receive a data block from the buffer, to combine a memory address to the addressable memory and a identifier to generate a tweak, and to encrypt the data block using the tweak (Knezevic: Fig. 2-3, [0029], [0032] and [0038]-[0039] Provides for generating a tweak by using the tweak control value which corresponds to where the data is being read from, with the memory address of where the encryption is going to be stored. Knezevic Fig. 2-3 and paragraphs [0030], [0034] and [0039] further provides for using the generated tweak in a tweakable block cipher to encrypt the received plaintext.)
A storage interface to store the encrypted data block in the addressable memory at a location corresponding to the memory address (Knezevic: Fig. 1, [0025], [0030]-[0031] and [0066] Provides for storing the encrypted data at the address used to generate the tweak. Knezevic paragraphs [0025] further provides for external storage devices as part of the memory types that can be used with the invention.)
Knezevic does not explicitly disclose that the identifier is a buffer identifier. However, Yap discloses:
Where in the identifier comprises a buffer identifier and Wherein the buffer identifier identifies one of the buffer or a portion of the buffer from which the data block is received; (Yap: [0013]-[0017] and [0024]-[0030] Provides for an identifier (channel address) that identifies the specific buffer from which a sub block was received.)
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 teachings of Knezevic, which provides a method for encrypting data blocks using tweakable block ciphers with tweaks generated from memory addresses and tweak control values, with the teachings of Yap, which introduces buffer identifiers to identify specific buffers or buffer portions from which data is received. One of ordinary skill in the art would recognize the ability to incorporate Yap's buffer identification system into Knezevic's tweak generation process to enhance the specificity and security of the encryption mechanism. One of ordinary skill in the art would be motivated to make this modification in order to provide more differentiation of data based on its source buffer.
Knezevic in view of Yap does not explicitly disclose this method being performed on a machine learning system. However, Maalouf discloses [0025], [0026] and [0093] which provides for a memory component within a machine learning system that stores various types of information, which directly aligns with the claim of an addressable memory. Maalouf paragraphs [0061], [0066] and [0070] further provide that different parts or sections of the buffer are labeled or identified based on their correspondence to different parts of the gesture.
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 teachings of Knezevic in view of Yap, which handles the creation and management of encrypted data using tweakable block ciphers, with the teachings of Maalouf, which delineates the storage and handling of data within a machine learning system. One of ordinary skill in the art would recognize the ability to apply Knezevic and Yap’s method of generating tweaks for encrypted data storage in the context of a machine learning system as taught by Maalouf. One of ordinary skill in the art would be motivated to make this modification to enhance the security and integrity of data used in machine learning applications, particularly where sensitive or proprietary data is involved.
In reference to claim 20, The machine learning system of claim 19 further comprising a processor to execute layers of a neural network (Maalouf: [0025]-[0026] and [0033]-[0036] Provides for a processor that processes data and controls operations, including executing layers of a neural network.) The processor further allocating the buffer to the data block, generating the buffer identifier when the buffer is allocated to the data block, and providing the buffer identifier to the tweakable block cipher (Knezevic: [0026] and [0042] Provides for allocating tweak control values to specific memory regions or addresses.)
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. See PTO-892.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to AIDAN EDWARD SHAUGHNESSY whose telephone number is (703)756-1423. The examiner can normally be reached on Monday-Friday from 7:30am to 5pm.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Jeffrey Nickerson, can be reached at telephone number (469) 295-9235. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300.
Information regarding the status of an application may be obtained from Patent Center and the Private Patent Application Information Retrieval (PAIR) system. Status information for published applications may be obtained from Patent Center or Private PAIR. Status information for unpublished applications is available through Patent Center and Private PAIR for authorized users only. Should you have questions about access to the Private PAIR system, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free).
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) Form at https://www.uspto.gov/patents/usptoautomated-interview-request-air-form.
/A.E.S./Examiner, Art Unit 2432
/Jeffrey Nickerson/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2432
Prosecution Insights