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and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114.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 12/08/2025 has been entered.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments, see pages 14-15, filed 12/08/2025, with respect to the objection to Figure 2 have been fully considered. The objection to Figure 2 has been withdrawn in response to Applicant’s designation of Figure 2 as prior art.
Applicant’s arguments, see page 15, filed 12/08/2025, with respect to the objection of claims 1, 10-12, 14-15, and 18-19 have been fully considered. The objection of claims 1, 10-12, 14-15, and 18-19 have been withdrawn.
Applicant's arguments, see pages 15-16, filed 12/08/2025, with respect to the rejection of claims 1-8, 10-12, and 14-19 under 35 U.S.C. § 112(a) have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
Applicant first attests that the “quantum key distribution” limitation being moved to the preamble “clarifies that quantum key distribution techniques are background and not the focus of the claimed invention”.
The Examiner respectfully disagrees.
The placement of the claim limitation “a first quantum key distribution device that shares a quantum encryption key with a second quantum key distribution device through quantum key distribution” within the preamble does not cure the previous written description deficiency identified in the Final Rejection mailed 08/06/2025. The claim limitation is still limiting as it claims a first quantum key distribution device that shares a quantum encryption key with a second quantum key distribution device through “quantum key distribution”. Applicant has still not pointed out where the new (or amended) claim is supported, nor does there appear to be a written description of the claim limitation in the application as filed. There is no disclosure of an algorithm or steps/procedure regarding how the inventor intended to have the claimed invention accomplish sharing a quantum key through “quantum key distribution” as explicitly claimed. A mere explanation and generic admission by the Applicant “that such techniques were well known at the time of filing” is not persuasive as it does not demonstrate how the originally filed disclosure is commensurate with the full scope of the claims.
Applicant next attests that the amendment of the claim terms to their original forms that invoke 112(f) satisfy the written description requirement.
The Examiner respectfully disagrees.
There are still remaining written description issues presented within the claims in their original terms and will be presented in the rejection below.
Applicant’s arguments with respect to the rejection of claim(s) 1-8, 10-12, and 14-19 under 35 U.S.C. § 103 have been considered but are moot with regard to the new grounds of rejection presented below in view of Applicant’s admission prior art.
Claim Interpretation
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(f):
(f) Element in Claim for a Combination. – An element in a claim for a combination may be expressed as a means or step for performing a specified function without the recital of structure, material, or acts in support thereof, and such claim shall be construed to cover the corresponding structure, material, or acts described in the specification and equivalents thereof.
The following is a quotation of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph:
An element in a claim for a combination may be expressed as a means or step for performing a specified function without the recital of structure, material, or acts in support thereof, and such claim shall be construed to cover the corresponding structure, material, or acts described in the specification and equivalents thereof.
The claims in this application are given their broadest reasonable interpretation using the plain meaning of the claim language in light of the specification as it would be understood by one of ordinary skill in the art. The broadest reasonable interpretation of a claim element (also commonly referred to as a claim limitation) is limited by the description in the specification when 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is invoked.
As explained in MPEP § 2181, subsection I, claim limitations that meet the following three-prong test will be interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph:
(A) the claim limitation uses the term “means” or “step” or a term used as a substitute for “means” that is a generic placeholder (also called a nonce term or a non-structural term having no specific structural meaning) for performing the claimed function;
(B) the term “means” or “step” or the generic placeholder is modified by functional language, typically, but not always linked by the transition word “for” (e.g., “means for”) or another linking word or phrase, such as “configured to” or “so that”; and
(C) the term “means” or “step” or the generic placeholder is not modified by sufficient structure, material, or acts for performing the claimed function.
Use of the word “means” (or “step”) in a claim with functional language creates a rebuttable presumption that the claim limitation is to be treated in accordance with 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph. The presumption that the claim limitation is interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is rebutted when the claim limitation recites sufficient structure, material, or acts to entirely perform the recited function.
Absence of the word “means” (or “step”) in a claim creates a rebuttable presumption that the claim limitation is not to be treated in accordance with 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph. The presumption that the claim limitation is not interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is rebutted when the claim limitation recites function without reciting sufficient structure, material or acts to entirely perform the recited function.
Claim limitations in this application that use the word “means” (or “step”) are being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, except as otherwise indicated in an Office action. Conversely, claim limitations in this application that do not use the word “means” (or “step”) are not being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, except as otherwise indicated in an Office action.
This application includes one or more claim limitations that do not use the word “means,” but are nonetheless being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, because the claim limitation(s) uses a generic placeholder that is coupled with functional language without reciting sufficient structure to perform the recited function and the generic placeholder is not preceded by a structural modifier.
Such claim limitation(s) are: “a generation unit that generates a random number and generates, based on the random number, an application key used in an encryption process by a cryptographic application”, “a first encryption unit that encrypts, with the first encryption key, the application key transmitted to a second key management device connected to the second quantum key distribution device”, “a setting unit configured to set an encryption method determined by the quantum key distribution network manager as the encryption method of an encryption process using the quantum encryption key” in claim 1; “a third encryption unit that encrypts the application key supplied to a cryptographic application execution device” in claim 4; “a decryption unit that decrypts the encrypted quantum encryption key” in claim 6; “a relay unit that further encrypts the application key encrypted by the first encryption key” in claim 7; “the first encryption unit uses the quantum encryption key as the first encryption key” in claim 8; “a generation unit that generates a random number and generates, based on the random number, an application key used in an encryption process by a cryptographic application”, “an encryption unit that encrypts, with the first encryption key, the application key transmitted to a key management device connected to the second quantum key distribution device”, “a setting unit configured to set an encryption method determined by the quantum key distribution network manager as the encryption method of an encryption process using the quantum encryption key” in claim 18; and “generating, by a generation unit of the hardware security module, a random number, and generating, based on the random number, an application key used in an encryption process by a cryptographic application”, “encrypting, by an encryption unit of the hardware security module, with the first encryption key, the application key transmitted to a key management device connected to the second quantum key distribution device”, “setting, by a setting unit, an encryption method determined by a quantum key distribution network manager as the encryption method of an encryption process using the quantum encryption key” in claim 19.
Because these claim limitation(s) are being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, they are being interpreted to cover the corresponding structure described in the specification as performing the claimed function, and equivalents thereof.
If applicant does not intend to have these limitation(s) interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, applicant may: (1) amend the claim limitation(s) to avoid it/them being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph (e.g., by reciting sufficient structure to perform the claimed function); or (2) present a sufficient showing that the claim limitation(s) recite(s) sufficient structure to perform the claimed function so as to avoid it/them being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
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.
The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112:
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 of carrying out his invention.
Claims 1-8, 10-12, and 14-19 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.
Regarding Claims 1, 18, and 19:
Independent claims 1, 18, and 19 respectively recite and “A quantum cryptographic communication system that includes a first quantum key distribution device that shares a quantum encryption key with a second quantum key distribution device through quantum key distribution”, “a first quantum key distribution device that shares the quantum encryption key with a second quantum key distribution device through quantum key distribution”, and “a first quantum key distribution device that shares the quantum encryption key with a second quantum key distribution device through quantum key distribution”.
Applicant has not pointed out where the new (or amended) claim is supported, nor does there appear to be a written description of the claim limitation in the application as filed. There is no disclosure of an algorithm or steps/procedure regarding how the inventor intended to have the claimed invention accomplish sharing a quantum key through “quantum key distribution” as explicitly claimed. 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 pre-AIA the inventor(s), at the time the application was filed, had possession of the claimed invention.
In MPEP 2161.01, "computer-implemented functional claim language must still be evaluated for sufficient disclosure under the written description". And MPEP 2161.01(I) "generic claim language in the original disclosure does not satisfy the written description requirement if it fails to support the scope of the genus claimed." For computer-implemented inventions, the determination of the sufficiency of disclosure will require an inquiry into the sufficiency of both the disclosed hardware and the disclosed software due to the interrelationship and interdependence of computer hardware and software. The critical inquiry is whether the disclosure of the application relied upon reasonably conveys to those skilled in the art that the inventor had possession of the claimed subject matter as of the filing date.
As in MPEP 2161.01 (I), "The description requirement of the patent statute requires a description of an invention, not an indication of a result that one might achieve if one made that invention."). It is not enough that one skilled in the art could write a program to achieve the claimed function because the specification must explain how the inventor intends to achieve the claimed function to satisfy the written description requirement. See, e.g., Vasudevan Software, Inc. v. MicroStrategy, Inc., 782 F.3d 671, 681-683, 114 USPQ2d 1349, 1356, 1357 (Fed. Cir. 2015).
AS in MPEP 2161.01 “For instance, generic claim language in the original disclosure does not satisfy the written description requirement if it fails to support the scope of the genus claimed. Ariad, 598 F.3d at 1349-50, 94 USPQ2d at 1171 ("[A]n adequate written description of a claimed genus requires more than a generic statement of an invention’s boundaries.") (citing Eli Lilly, 119 F.3d at 1568, 43 USPQ2d at 1405-06); Enzo Biochem, Inc. v. Gen-Probe, Inc., 323 F.3d 956, 968, 63 USPQ2d 1609, 1616 (Fed. Cir. 2002) (holding that generic claim language appearing in ipsis verbis in the original specification did not satisfy the written description requirement because it failed to support the scope of the genus claimed); Fiers v. Revel, 984 F.2d 1164, 1170, 25 USPQ2d 1601, 1606 (Fed. Cir. 1993) (rejecting the argument that "only similar language in the specification or original claims is necessary to satisfy the written description requirement").”
“The Federal Circuit has explained that a specification cannot always support expansive claim language and satisfy the requirements of 35 U.S.C. 112 "merely by clearly describing one embodiment of the thing claimed." LizardTech v. Earth Resource Mapping, Inc., 424 F.3d 1336, 1346, 76 USPQ2d 1731, 1733 (Fed. Cir. 2005). The issue is whether a person skilled in the art would understand applicant to have invented, and been in possession of, the invention as broadly claimed. In LizardTech, claims to a generic method of making a seamless discrete wavelet transformation (DWT) were held invalid under 35 U.S.C. 112, first paragraph, because the specification taught only one particular method for making a seamless DWT and there was no evidence that the specification contemplated a more generic method. "[T]he description of one method for creating a seamless DWT does not entitle the inventor . . . to claim any and all means for achieving that objective." LizardTech, 424 F.3d at 1346, 76 USPQ2d at 1733.”
Independent claims 1, 18, and 19 also respectively recite “a setting unit configured to set an encryption method determined by the quantum key distribution network manager as the encryption method of an encryption process using the quantum encryption key”, “a setting unit configured to set an encryption method determined by a quantum key distribution network manager as the encryption method of an encryption process using the quantum encryption key”, and “setting, by a setting unit, an encryption method determined by a quantum key distribution network manager as the encryption method of an encryption process using the quantum encryption key”. The limitations in question do not satisfy the written description requirement under 35 U.S.C. 112(a) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), first paragraph. The specification does not describe the limitation in sufficient detail so that one of ordinary skill in the art would recognize that the applicant had possession of the claimed invention. The disclosure discusses that the function of setting the encryption method chosen by the quantum key distribution network manager is handled by “setting unit”. However, these descriptions are inadequate to a person having ordinary skill in the art because they do not disclose how the invention performs these functionalities, outside of black-box implementations through the use of “units”. How the particular setting unit recited in the claims is configured to perform the claimed function is entirely absent from the originally filed disclosure, and instead the originally filed disclosure merely states that the unit performs the claimed functions without disclosing sufficient corresponding structure, material, or acts that perform the entire claimed function.
Regarding Claim 7:
Claim 7 refers to “a relay unit that further encrypts the application key encrypted by the first encryption key”. The limitations in question do not satisfy the written description requirement under 35 U.S.C. 112(a) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), first paragraph. The specification does not describe the limitation in sufficient detail so that one of ordinary skill in the art would recognize that the applicant had possession of the claimed invention. The disclosure discusses that the encryption and decryption of the OTP-encrypted application key is handled by the “relay unit”. However, these descriptions are inadequate to a person having ordinary skill in the art because they do not disclose how the invention performs these functionalities, outside of black-box implementations through the use of “units”. How the particular relay unit recited in the claims is configured to perform the claimed function is entirely absent from the originally filed disclosure, and instead the originally filed disclosure merely states that the unit performs the claimed functions without disclosing sufficient corresponding structure, material, or acts that perform the entire claimed function.
Dependent claims fall together accordingly.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(b):
(b) CONCLUSION.—The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph:
The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the applicant regards as his invention.
Claim 1-8, 10-12, and 14-19 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor (or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the applicant), regards as the invention.
Claim limitations “a relay unit” in claim 7, and “a setting unit” in claims 1, 18, and 19 invoke 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph. However, the written description fails to disclose the corresponding structure, material, or acts for performing the entire claimed function and to clearly link the structure, material, or acts to the function. The disclosure is devoid of any structure that performs the function in the claim. Figure 2, 3A/B, 4, 7A/B, 8A/B, 10A/B, 12A/B, 14A/B, and 16-17 contain black box representations and description of embodiments describe the claimed functionalities performed by the various units, but without any further written description of structure or methodology of how these functions are achieved. Therefore, the claim is indefinite and is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, second paragraph.
Applicant may:
(a) Amend the claim so that the claim limitation will no longer be interpreted as a limitation under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph;
(b) Amend the written description of the specification such that it expressly recites what structure, material, or acts perform the entire claimed function, without introducing any new matter (35 U.S.C. 132(a)); or
(c) Amend the written description of the specification such that it clearly links the structure, material, or acts disclosed therein to the function recited in the claim, without introducing any new matter (35 U.S.C. 132(a)).
If applicant is of the opinion that the written description of the specification already implicitly or inherently discloses the corresponding structure, material, or acts and clearly links them to the function so that one of ordinary skill in the art would recognize what structure, material, or acts perform the claimed function, applicant should clarify the record by either:
(a) Amending the written description of the specification such that it expressly recites the corresponding structure, material, or acts for performing the claimed function and clearly links or associates the structure, material, or acts to the claimed function, without introducing any new matter (35 U.S.C. 132(a)); or
(b) Stating on the record what the corresponding structure, material, or acts, which are implicitly or inherently set forth in the written description of the specification, perform the claimed function. For more information, see 37 CFR 1.75(d) and MPEP §§ 608.01(o) and 2181.
Dependent claims fall together accordingly.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
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.
Claim(s) 1-8, 10-12, and 14-19 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Applicant admitted prior art (contained within Applicant’s Published Patent Application No. US 2023/0299953 A1, hereinafter “instant publication”) in view of in view of Fu; Yingfang (US Publication US 2018/0109377 A1) hereinafter Fu, and further in view of Tajima et. al. (Japan Applications JP 2011-44768 A) hereinafter Tajima.
Regarding Claims 1, 18, and 19:
Applicant’s admitted prior art discloses a quantum cryptographic communication system that includes a first quantum key distribution device that shares a quantum encryption key with a second quantum key distribution device through quantum key distribution (Applicant admitted prior art Fig. 2 relay unit 224a shares a quantum encryption key between a first and second quantum key distribution device through quantum key distribution), the system comprising: a quantum key distribution network manager (Applicant admitted prior art Fig. 1 QKDN manager); and a first key management device (Applicant admitted prior art Fig. 1 “KM”; instant publication [0035] “‘KM’ stands for key management and corresponds to a key management system (key management device)”), wherein the first key management device includes: a communication interface that receives the quantum encryption key from the first quantum key distribution device (Applicant admitted prior art Fig. 2 reception unit 222a receives quantum encryption key from QKD device 210a); ... a memory that stores a first encryption key therein (Applicant admitted prior art Fig. 2 encrypted application key DB 228a stores encryption keys); a generation unit that generates a random number and generates, based on the random number, an application key used in an encryption process by a cryptographic application (Applicant instant publication paragraph [0059] discloses that “In the conventional cases, the application key in the plaintext state is placed in a volatile memory immediately after the random number for the application key is generated” therefore generation unit 226a renders obvious the claimed generation unit).
Applicant’s admitted prior art does not explicitly disclose and a first hardware security module, and the first hardware security module includes: … a first encryption unit that encrypts, with the first encryption key, the application key transmitted to a second key management device connected to the second quantum key distribution device; and a setting unit configured to set an encryption method determined by the quantum key distribution network manager as the encryption method of an encryption process using the quantum encryption key, wherein the encryption method of the encryption process using the quantum encryption key is determined by the quantum key distribution network manager, based on at least one of an accumulation quantity of the application keys accumulated in the first key management device and an accumulation quantity of the quantum encryption keys accumulated in the first key management device, and the quantum key distribution network manager determines the encryption method of the encryption process using the quantum encryption key, to be a first encryption method when the accumulation quantity of the application keys is less than or equal to a threshold (GA), determines the encryption method of the encryption process using the quantum encryption key, to be a second encryption method in which a consumption rate of the quantum encryption key is higher than in the first encryption method when the accumulation quantity of the application keys subsequently becomes more than a threshold (GB) which is greater than the threshold (GA), and causes the encryption method of the encryption process using the quantum encryption key to be the second encryption method until the accumulation quantity of the application keys becomes less than or equal to the threshold (GA) again.
Fu teaches a quantum key distribution system containing a first hardware security module (Fu [0049], [0051], [0062] TPMs operate with the HSM to achieve trusted storage, Fig. 9A TPM 902)… a first encryption unit that encrypts, with the first encryption key, the application key transmitted to a second key management device connected to the second quantum key distribution device (Fu [0063] “In the example shown in FIG. 3, communication channels that also include a quantum channel to enable QKD are shown in solid lines (e.g., communication channel 322), whereas communication channels that do not include a quantum channel are shown in dashed lines (e.g., communication channel 324). More specifically, on the QKD-enabled communication channels, communication partners can negotiate encryption keys using the quantum channel and then use the negotiated keys for secure communication”).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the time the invention was effectively filed to combine Applicant’s admitted conventional quantum key distribution system with the hardware security module taught by Fu. The motivation to combine the admitted conventional quantum key distribution system with the hardware security module taught by Fu would be to provide access to common secure cryptographic operations, storage, and tamper resistance which is well known in the art and is explicitly discussed by Fu in paragraph [0049] (“Certain advanced cryptographic technologies can be applied into cloud computing to increase the data security, including the use of hardware security modules (HSMs). An HSM is a hardware appliance that provides secure key storage and cryptographic operations within a tamper-resistant hardware device. HSMs are designed to securely store cryptographic key material and use the key material without exposing it outside the cryptographic boundary of the appliance. Typical HSMs can come in the form of a plug-in card or an external device that attaches directly to a computer or network server” Fu [0049]).
Applicant’s admitted prior art and Fu do not explicitly disclose and a setting unit configured to set an encryption method determined by the quantum key distribution network manager as the encryption method of an encryption process using the quantum encryption key, wherein the encryption method of the encryption process using the quantum encryption key is determined by the quantum key distribution network manager, based on at least one of an accumulation quantity of the application keys accumulated in the first key management device and an accumulation quantity of the quantum encryption keys accumulated in the first key management device, and the quantum key distribution network manager determines the encryption method of the encryption process using the quantum encryption key, to be a first encryption method when the accumulation quantity of the application keys is less than or equal to a threshold (GA), determines the encryption method of the encryption process using the quantum encryption key, to be a second encryption method in which a consumption rate of the quantum encryption key is higher than in the first encryption method when the accumulation quantity of the application keys subsequently becomes more than a threshold (GB) which is greater than the threshold (GA), and causes the encryption method of the encryption process using the quantum encryption key to be the second encryption method until the accumulation quantity of the application keys becomes less than or equal to the threshold (GA) again.
Tajima teaches a quantum key distribution system containing a setting unit configured to set an encryption method determined by the quantum key distribution network manager as the encryption method of an encryption process using the quantum encryption key (Tajima [0054-0056] encryption method switching control unit 132), wherein the encryption method of the encryption process using the quantum encryption key is determined by the quantum key distribution network manager, based on at least one of an accumulation quantity of the application keys accumulated in the first key management device and an accumulation quantity of the quantum encryption keys accumulated in the first key management device (Tajima [0054-0057] accumulation amount of the key file used to determine when to time the switching of the encryption method), and the quantum key distribution network manager determines the encryption method of the encryption process using the quantum encryption key, to be a first encryption method when the accumulation quantity of the application keys is less than or equal to a threshold (GA) (Tajima [0062-0063] when accumulation is low move away from OTP and toward AES to reduce consumption, apply the same logic to both the quantum and application keys), determines the encryption method of the encryption process using the quantum encryption key, to be a second encryption method in which a consumption rate of the quantum encryption key is higher than in the first encryption method when the accumulation quantity of the application keys subsequently becomes more than a threshold GB which is greater than (GA) (Tajima [0064-0066] when accumulation is restored, switch back to OTP to increase consumption, apply the same logic to both the quantum and application keys), and causes the encryption method of the encryption process using the quantum encryption key to be the second encryption method until the accumulation quantity of the application keys becomes less than or equal to the threshold (GA) again (Tajima [0062-0063] the system performs OTP encryption until a disruption occurs and the threshold is fallen below, apply the same logic to both the quantum and application keys).
It would have been further obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art at before the time the invention was effective filed to combine Applicant’s admitted conventional quantum key distribution system with the hardware security module taught by Fu, and further with the encryption method management taught by Tajima. Although Tajima does not explicitly teach the use of “application keys” per se, Tajima teaches a prior known quantum key distribution method, and teaches the same known technique of switching encryption methods based on the current accumulation information of keys generically. One of ordinary skill in the art would have recognized that applying the same known technique of switching the encryption method to be based on either or both of the encryption key accumulation information or the application key accumulation information would have yielded predicted predictable results in altering the consumption rate of keys responsive to the available encryption or application key accumulation rate, and that switching the encryption method prevents the delay of the operation of the encryption system due to a failure of key accumulation (Tajima [0054-0057] “The encryption scheme switching control unit 132 compares the key accumulation amount S of the key file 120 with a predetermined lower threshold Sth1 and a predetermined upper threshold Sth2. At this time, the amount of keys to be consumed is estimated based on the amount of transmission from the amount-of-data monitor 450, and the estimated amount of consumed keys is reduced from the current amount of stored keys S and then compared with the lower threshold value Sth1 and the upper threshold value Sth2. Therefore, before the actual key accumulation amount S reaches the lower threshold Sth1, the switching timing of the encryption scheme can be predicted, and the delay from the monitoring of the key amount to the switching of the encryption scheme can be avoided”). The motivation to further combine Applicant’s admitted conventional quantum key distribution system with the hardware security module taught by Fu, and further with the encryption method management taught by Tajima would be in order to continue operations where suddenly can no longer be produced at an adequate rate as discussed by Tajima in paragraph [0059]. In addition, Tajima describes in paragraph [0066] that the effect of the prior art invention is that when an encryption key cannot be generated to a failure of a particular unit or the like (errors later explicitly discussed in Tajima [0076]), the encryption method is switched to minimize key consumption rates.
Independent claims 18 and 19 disclose substantially the same material to that of claim 1, and therefore are rejected under the same rationales. As of note, the recitation of a key management method in claim 19 is disclosed in Applicant’s admitted prior art Figs. 1-2.
Regarding Claim 2:
The combination of Applicant’s admitted conventional quantum key distribution system, Fu, and Tajima further teaches the system according to claim 1 (Applicant admitted prior art Fig. 2 relay unit 224a shares a quantum encryption key between a first and second quantum key distribution device through quantum key distribution), wherein the first hardware security module shares the first encryption key with a second hardware security module of the second key management device when initial setting of the quantum cryptographic communication system is performed (Fu [0063] and [0066-0067] keys of the quantum cryptographic system can be set to be used between nodes).
Regarding Claim 3:
The combination of Applicant’s admitted conventional quantum key distribution system, Fu, and Tajima further teaches the system according to claim 1 (Applicant admitted prior art Fig. 2 relay unit 224a shares a quantum encryption key between a first and second quantum key distribution device through quantum key distribution), wherein the first hardware security module further encrypts the application key stored in the first key management device (Fu [0068] “Alternatively, trusted client 402 and trusted server 404 can store the encryption keys in a peripheral storage device. To maintain security, before storing the encryption keys in the peripheral device, the encryption keys can be encrypted using a key for trusted storage.”) and the memory further stores therein a second encryption key uses in an encryption process (Fu [0068]).
Regarding Claim 4:
The combination of Applicant’s admitted conventional quantum key distribution system, Fu, and Tajima further teaches the system according to claim 1 (Applicant admitted prior art Fig. 2 relay unit 224a shares a quantum encryption key between a first and second quantum key distribution device through quantum key distribution), wherein the first hardware security module further includes a third encryption unit that encrypts the application key supplied to a cryptographic application execution device that executes the cryptographic application (Fu [0068] “To maintain security, before storing the encryption keys in the peripheral device, the encryption keys can be encrypted using a key for trusted storage. Subsequent to the key exchange, trusted client 402 and trusted server 404 can communicate with each other using the encryption key.”), and the memory further stores therein a third encryption key used in an encryption process (Fu [0068] peripheral storage device).
Regarding Claim 5:
The combination of Applicant’s admitted conventional quantum key distribution system, Fu, and Tajima further teaches the system according to claim 4 (Applicant admitted prior art Fig. 2 relay unit 224a shares a quantum encryption key between a first and second quantum key distribution device through quantum key distribution), wherein the first hardware security module shares the third encryption key with a third hardware security module of the cryptographic application execution device when initial setting of the quantum cryptographic communication system is performed (Fu [0063] and [0066-0068] keys of the quantum cryptographic system can be set to be used between nodes; [0074-0075]).
Regarding Claim 6:
The combination of Applicant’s admitted conventional quantum key distribution system, Fu, and Tajima further teaches the system according to claim 1 (Applicant admitted prior art Fig. 2 relay unit 224a shares a quantum encryption key between a first and second quantum key distribution device through quantum key distribution), wherein the communication interface receives an encrypted quantum encryption key from the first quantum key distribution device (Applicant admitted prior art Fig. 2 reception unit 222a receives quantum encryption key from QKD device 210a and instant publication [0049] discloses that QKD device 210a uses, for example, https, which uses encryption, to transfer the quantum encryption key to the key management device), the first hardware security module further includes a decryption unit that decrypts the quantum encryption key (Fu [0049], [0051], [0086] “To facilitate QKD, transmission module 808 or receiving module 810 can also be coupled to a quantum channel. Encryption/decryption module 812 can be responsible for encrypting to-be-sent messages and decrypting received messages during secure communication sessions.”), and the memory further stores therein a decryption key used in a decryption process (Fu [0068] peripheral storage device is capable of storing the encryption or decryption key).
Regarding Claim 7:
The combination of Applicant’s admitted conventional quantum key distribution system, Fu, and Tajima further teaches the system according to claim 1 (Applicant admitted prior art Fig. 2 relay unit 224a shares a quantum encryption key between a first and second quantum key distribution device through quantum key distribution), further comprising a relay unit that further encrypts the application key encrypted by the first encryption key, with the quantum encryption key (Fu [0068] “To maintain security, before storing the encryption keys in the peripheral device, the encryption keys can be encrypted using a key for trusted storage. Subsequent to the key exchange, trusted client 402 and trusted server 404 can communicate with each other using the encryption key. In some embodiments, to check for platform integrity during the subsequent communications, trusted client 402 and trusted server 404 can include in each message current PCR values encrypted using the encryption key. Note that, by exchanging the trusted measurement reports during the key negotiation process and by including the PCR values in the exchanged messages, trusted client 402 and trusted server 404 can ensure the integrity of each other; and by using QKD for key distribution, trusted client 402 and trusted server 404 can ensure the security of the key distribution process.”), and the communication interface transmits the application key that is double encrypted by the first encryption key and the quantum encryption key to the second key management device (Fu [0068], [0072-0073] other management devices in the cloud are notified of the public-private keypairs).
Regarding Claim 8:
The combination of Applicant’s admitted conventional quantum key distribution system, Fu, and Tajima further teaches the system according to claim 1 (Applicant admitted prior art Fig. 2 relay unit 224a shares a quantum encryption key between a first and second quantum key distribution device through quantum key distribution), wherein the first encryption unit uses the quantum encryption key as the first encryption key (Fu [0063]).
Regarding Claim 10:
The combination of Applicant’s admitted conventional quantum key distribution system, Fu, and Tajima further teaches the system according to claim 1 (Applicant admitted prior art Fig. 2 relay unit 224a shares a quantum encryption key between a first and second quantum key distribution device through quantum key distribution), wherein the quantum key distribution network manager determines the encryption method of the encryption process using the quantum encryption key, to be the first encryption method when the accumulation quantity of the quantum encryption keys is less than or equal to a threshold (QA) (Tajima [0056] encryption method switching control unit takes into account the accumulation amount as a threshold), and determines the encryption method of the encryption process using the quantum encryption key, to be the second encryption method in which the consumption rate of the quantum encryption key is higher than in the first encryption method when the accumulation quantity of the quantum encryption keys is more than the threshold (QA) (Tajima [0056] encryption method switching control unit takes into account the accumulation amount as a threshold).
Regarding Claim 11:
The combination of Applicant’s admitted conventional quantum key distribution system, Fu, and Tajima further teaches the system according to claim 1 (Applicant admitted prior art Fig. 2 relay unit 224a shares a quantum encryption key between a first and second quantum key distribution device through quantum key distribution), wherein the quantum key distribution network manager determines the encryption method of the encryption process using the quantum encryption key, to be the first encryption method when the accumulation quantity of the quantum encryption keys is less than or equal to a threshold (QA) (Tajima [0062-0063] when accumulation is low move away from OTP and toward AES to reduce consumption), determines the encryption method of the encryption process using the quantum encryption key, to be the second encryption method in which the consumption rate of the quantum encryption key is higher than in the first encryption method when the accumulation quantity of the quantum encryption keys subsequently becomes more than a threshold (QB) which is greater than the threshold (QA) (Tajima [0064-0066] when accumulation is restored, switch back to OTP to increase consumption), and causes the encryption method of the encryption process using the quantum encryption key to be the second encryption method until the accumulation quantity of the quantum encryption keys becomes less than or equal to the threshold (QA) again (Tajima [0062-0063] the system performs OTP encryption until a disruption occurs and the threshold is fallen below).
Regarding Claim 12:
The combination of Applicant’s admitted conventional quantum key distribution system, Fu, and Tajima further teaches the system according to claim 1 (Applicant admitted prior art Fig. 2 relay unit 224a shares a quantum encryption key between a first and second quantum key distribution device through quantum key distribution), wherein the quantum key distribution network manager determines the encryption method of the encryption process using the quantum encryption key, to be the first encryption method when the accumulation quantity of the application keys is less than or equal to the threshold (GA) (Tajima [0062-0063] when accumulation is low move away from OTP and toward AES to reduce consumption, apply the same logic to both the quantum and application keys) and determines the encryption method of the encryption process using the quantum encryption key, to be the second encryption method in which the consumption rate of the quantum encryption key is higher than in the first encryption method when the accumulation quantity of the application key is more than the threshold (GA) (Tajima [0064-0066] when accumulation is restored, switch back to OTP to increase consumption, apply the same logic to both the quantum and application keys).
Regarding Claim 14:
The combination of Applicant’s admitted conventional quantum key distribution system, Fu, and Tajima further teaches the system according to claim 1 (Applicant admitted prior art Fig. 2 relay unit 224a shares a quantum encryption key between a first and second quantum key distribution device through quantum key distribution), wherein the quantum key distribution network manager determines the encryption method of the encryption process using the quantum encryption key, to be the first encryption method when the accumulation quantity of the quantum encryption keys is less than or equal to a threshold (QA) and the accumulation quantity of the application keys is less than or equal to the threshold (GA) (Tajima [0056] encryption method switching control unit takes into account the accumulation amount as a threshold, apply the same logic to both the quantum and application keys), and determines the encryption method of the encryption process using the quantum encryption key, to be the second encryption method in which the consumption rate of the quantum encryption key is higher than in the first encryption method when the accumulation quantity of the quantum encryption keys is more than the threshold (QA) or the accumulation quantity of the application keys is more than the threshold (GA) (Tajima [0056] encryption method switching control unit takes into account the accumulation amount as a threshold, apply the same logic to both the quantum and application keys).
Regarding Claim 15:
The combination of Applicant’s admitted conventional quantum key distribution system, Fu, and Tajima further teaches the system according to claim 1 (Applicant admitted prior art Fig. 2 relay unit 224a shares a quantum encryption key between a first and second quantum key distribution device through quantum key distribution), wherein the quantum key distribution network manager determines the encryption method of the encryption process using the quantum encryption key, to be the first encryption method when the accumulation quantity of the quantum encryption keys is less than or equal to a threshold (QA) and the accumulation quantity of the application keys is less than or equal to the threshold (GA) (Tajima [0062-0063] when accumulation is low move away from OTP and toward AES to reduce consumption, apply the same logic to both the quantum and application keys), determines the encryption method of the encryption process using the quantum encryption key, to be the second encryption method in which the consumption rate of the quantum encryption key is higher than in the first encryption method when the accumulation quantity of the quantum encryption keys is more than a threshold (QB) which is greater than the threshold (QA) and the accumulation quantity of the application keys is more than the threshold (GB) which is greater than the threshold (GA) (Tajima [0064-0066] when accumulation is restored, switch back to OTP to increase consumption, apply the same logic to both the quantum and application keys), and causes the encryption method of the encryption process using the quantum encryption key to be the second encryption method until the accumulation quantity of the quantum encryption keys becomes less than or equal to the threshold (QA) and the accumulation quantity of the application keys becomes less than or equal to the threshold (GA) again (Tajima [0062-0063] the system performs OTP encryption until a disruption occurs and the threshold is fallen below, apply the same logic to both the quantum and application keys).
Regarding Claim 16:
The combination of Applicant’s admitted conventional quantum key distribution system, Fu, and Tajima further teaches the system according to claim 1 (Applicant admitted prior art Fig. 2 relay unit 224a shares a quantum encryption key between a first and second quantum key distribution device through quantum key distribution), wherein the first encryption method is advanced encryption standard (Tajima [0062] AES), and the second encryption method is one time pad (Tajima [0062] OTP).
Regarding Claim 17:
The combination of Applicant’s admitted conventional quantum key distribution system, Fu, and Tajima further teaches the system according to claim 16 (Applicant admitted prior art Fig. 2 relay unit 224a shares a quantum encryption key between a first and second quantum key distribution device through quantum key distribution), wherein when the encryption method of the encryption process using the quantum encryption key is set to advanced encryption standard, the quantum key distribution network manager causes an update frequency of the quantum encryption key used in encryption by advanced encryption standard to be smaller as the accumulation quantity of the quantum encryption keys is smaller (Tajima [0062] the AES encryption keys can be fixed to lower the consumption rate of keys, all the way down to a consumption of zero).
Conclusion
The prior art made of record in the submitted PTO-892 Notice of References Cited and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant’s disclosure.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to MIGUEL A LOPEZ whose telephone number is (703)756-1241. The examiner can normally be reached 8:00AM-5:00PM.
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, Jorge Ortiz-Criado can be reached on 5712727624. 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.
/M.A.L./ Examiner, Art Unit 2496
/JORGE L ORTIZ CRIADO/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2496