DETAILED ACTION
This office action is in response to the RCE filed on 01/15/2026.
Claims 1, 5-6, 9, 11, 13, 15, 18, 20 are amended.
Claims 3-4, 10, and 17 are cancelled.
Claims 1-2, 5-9, 11-16, 18-21 are presented for examination.
Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status
The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
Continued Examination Under 37 CFR 1.114
A request for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, including the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e), was filed in this application after final rejection. Since this application is eligible for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114. Applicant's submission filed on 01/15/2026 has been entered.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to the claims filed in Remarks pg 7-11 on 01/15/2026 regarding the 35 USC 103 rejections have been considered but are moot because the new ground of rejection does not rely on any reference applied in the prior rejection of record for any teaching or matter specifically challenged in the argument.
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, 7, 9, 11, 13, 15, 18-21 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Ramo et al. (hereinafter Ramo, US 2012/0135723 A1) in view of Ross et al. (hereinafter Ross, US 2006/0156398 A1) in view of Pecka et al. (hereinafter Pecka, US 2016/0226844 A1).
Regarding Claim 1, Ramo discloses A method comprising: receiving, by a first messaging application (Ramo: Fig. 2A awareness services module 111) executing on a first node of a mesh network (Ramo: para.0003 mesh network), content for a first message from a first agent executing on the first node (Ramo: Fig. 9 step 909, and Fig. 7 step 701 para.0111 “In step 701, the awareness services module 111 receives a request to either publish or subscribe to information provided over an ad-hoc mesh network. In one embodiment, the request is received from, for instance, one or more applications (e.g., application 201) executing on a wireless node 101a.” the awareness module receives from a plurality of applications messages to publish or subscription queries, that is, the content is the information that is sent within a query for either the query or query response for the publish subscribe system.),
wherein the content for the first message is for a first message group (Ramo: para.0124 “At step 915, node 901 initiates a query for published information responsive to its data schema instance. In one embodiment, the query acts as a way to convey the subscription to other nodes (e.g., nodes 901 and 905). It is contemplated that more than one query can carry the subscription and that a single query can carry multiple subscriptions. Furthermore, a query message may include multiple nested data items include subscription information, one or more queries, one or more query responses, other data items (e.g., including unrelated data items), and/or other messages or signaling information transmitted over the ad-hoc mesh network 109.” A composite query message with a plurality of requests and responses for different subscriptions is broadcasted, thereby including a first and second message for different messaging groups, node 903 and 905. See also para.0100 describing users being able to be associated with a plurality of communities.); and
transmitting, by the first messaging application, a composite message (Ramo: para.0124 query containing nested queries and query responses of multiple subscriptions for multiple communities) to a second messaging application executed by a second node of the mesh network (Ramo: para.0124 any of nodes 901, 903, or 905 that is receiving the query), the composite message including: a first message group section comprising the first message (Ramo: para.0124 the query or query response that are nested for a subscription for a publish/subscribe mechanism for a community), and
a second message group section comprising a second message for subscribers of a second message group (Ramo: para.0124 the query or query response that are nested for a publish/subscribe mechanism for a different subscription for different communities as the query can contain multiple subscriptions) (Ramo: para.0124 “At step 915, node 901 initiates a query for published information responsive to its data schema instance. In one embodiment, the query acts as a way to convey the subscription to other nodes (e.g., nodes 901 and 905). It is contemplated that more than one query can carry the subscription and that a single query can carry multiple subscriptions. Furthermore, a query message may include multiple nested data items include subscription information, one or more queries, one or more query responses, other data items (e.g., including unrelated data items), and/or other messages or signaling information transmitted over the ad-hoc mesh network 109.” A composite query message with a plurality of requests and responses for different subscriptions is broadcasted, thereby including a first and second message for different messaging groups, node 903 and 905. See also para.0100 describing users being able to be associated with a plurality of communities).
Although Ramo discloses multiple agents on the same node subscribing and publishing information in para.0111-0112, it does not explicitly disclose wherein at least a portion of the first message group section is encrypted with a first cryptographic key that is associated with the first message group; a second message group section comprising a second message including content from a second agent for subscribers of a second message group, wherein at least a portion of the second message group section is encrypted with a second cryptographic key that is associated with the second message group, (i.e. combining messages from 2 different applications.) and wherein the first message group section is separate from the second message group section.
Ross discloses transmitting, by the first messaging application (Ross: Fig. 1 Aggregation Agent 120), a composite message (Ross: Fig. 0015 single alert message) to a second messaging application (Ross: Fig. 1 Control console 140) executed by a second node (Ross: Fig. 1 MGT system) (Ross: para.0053 “For example, the aggregating agent may aggregate the data, 512, taking multiple alert messages and preparing a single alert message with all the alert data….The aggregating agent may also sign the data message, 516, and transmit the data to the management console on a security server, 518.” The multiple messages may be aggregated into a single message and sent),
the composite message including a first message group section comprising the first message and a second message group section comprising a second message including content from a second agent (Ross: para.0012 “Just as multiple consoles may be associated with a single agent, a single console may manage multiple agents, and thus be associated with the multiple agents.” Para.0015 “Aggregating and correlating the alert information may include combining multiple alerts from an agent into a single alert message (cross-message aggregation), combining alerts from multiple agents into a single alert message (cross-agent aggregation), a combination of these two, analyzing the alerts and intelligently combining selected ones of the alerts into a single alert message, and generating a tag to associate an alert with an agent.” para.0048 “The message may then be forwarded on to the two (or potentially one or more than two) consoles.” The composite message includes alerts from a plurality of agents on the Host system in Fig. 1, for a plurality of different consoles at the MGT system. Each alert by each agent is associated with a different group of consoles and combined into a single alert message.).
Therefore it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to combine Ramo with Ross in order to incorporate the composite message including the composite message including a first message group section comprising the first message and a second message group section comprising a second message including content from a second agent.
One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to combine because of the expected benefit of improving bandwidth usage in the network (Ross: para.0015).
However Ramo-Ross does not explicitly disclose wherein at least a portion of the first message group section is encrypted with a first cryptographic key that is associated with the first message group; wherein at least a portion of the second message group section is encrypted with a second cryptographic key that is associated with the second message group, and wherein the first message group section is separate from the second message group section.
Pecka discloses wherein at least a portion of the first message group section is encrypted with a first cryptographic key that is associated with the first message group (Pecka: para.0011 “According to principles described herein, a user can divide a message, such as an email, into multiple parts. Each part is encrypted with a different key and is assigned a part identifier. The encrypted message is then sent to multiple recipients. Additionally, the key for each part and the identifier for each part are sent to a security authority. Additionally, the sender provides the security authority with access privileges for each of the recipients. The access privileges define which of the parts of the message a particular recipient is authorized to access.” Fig. 1 key 106-1, part 1 of the message that is for a particular recipient, a first message group, is encrypted with a first key.);
wherein at least a portion of the second message group section is encrypted with a second cryptographic key that is associated with the second message group (Pecka: para.0011 “According to principles described herein, a user can divide a message, such as an email, into multiple parts. Each part is encrypted with a different key and is assigned a part identifier. The encrypted message is then sent to multiple recipients. Additionally, the key for each part and the identifier for each part are sent to a security authority. Additionally, the sender provides the security authority with access privileges for each of the recipients. The access privileges define which of the parts of the message a particular recipient is authorized to access.” Fig. 1 key 106-2 the part 2 of the message for a different message group for a different recipient is encrypted with a second key), and
wherein the first message group section is separate from the second message group section (Pecka: para.0013 “FIG. 1 is a diagram showing illustrative parts of a message that can be separately encrypted. According to the present example, a message 102 is divided into multiple parts 104, each part 104 being associated with a key 106 and an identifier 108. The message 102 is also associated with recipient access data 110.”, Fig. 1 message 102 is divided into different sections par1 and part 2.).
Therefore it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to combine Ramo-Ross with Pecka in order to incorporate wherein at least a portion of the first message group section is encrypted with a first cryptographic key that is associated with the first message group; wherein at least a portion of the second message group section is encrypted with a second cryptographic key that is associated with the second message group, and wherein the first message group section is separate from the second message group section.
One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to combine because of the expected benefit of improved security when sending a combined message (Pecka: para.0011-0012).
Regarding Claim 7, Ramo-Ross-Pecka discloses claim 1 as set forth above.
Ramo further discloses wherein the composite message includes a third message that is not associated with any message group (Ramo: Para.0075 “When the wireless node 101 is in the active state 259, the community layer 205 encrypts and decrypts community messages as usual for private communities, and enables all outgoing and incoming community specific messages for public communities (e.g., communities with no restrictions on membership)” in addition to messages that can be nested as part of the same query, there are public messages that are not part of any private community.).
Regarding Claim 9, Ramo discloses A method comprising: receiving, by a messaging application executing on a node of a mesh network, a composite message, the composite message (Ramo: pra.0124 “In this case, the query is transmitted to both the node 903 and node 905 over the ad-hoc mesh network 109.” The nodes receive the query, the composite message) including:
a first message group section comprising a first message including first content for subscribers of a first message group, and a second message group section comprising a second message including second content for subscribers of a second message group (Ramo: para.0124 “In one embodiment, the query acts as a way to convey the subscription to other nodes (e.g., nodes 901 and 905). It is contemplated that more than one query can carry the subscription and that a single query can carry multiple subscriptions. Furthermore, a query message may include multiple nested data items include subscription information, one or more queries, one or more query responses, other data items (e.g., including unrelated data items), and/or other messages or signaling information transmitted over the ad-hoc mesh network 109.” A nested query contains queries that correspond to a plurality of different subscriptions, each subscription being for a different group.); and
delivering, by the messaging application, the first content from the first message to at least one agent executing on the node, wherein the at least one agent is included in the first message group (Ramo: para.0119 “If the response message is received by the subscribing wireless node 101 a (step 809), the awareness services module 111 determines whether the response message is a duplicate of one or more messages that have already been received (step 811). If it is not a duplicate message, the awareness service module 111 determines whether the response message includes the same filter ID specified by the subscribing application (step 813). …If the filter ID matches or substantially matches, the awareness services module 111 stores the information or data items in the response message (or indicated by the response message) in the valuespace without further filtering. On storing the data items, the awareness services module 111 notifies the subscribing application or applications that the subscribed information is available in the valuespace (819) and resets the query timer to determine when next to query for newly available published information (step 821).” The module 111 of the subscribing node then notifies the application 201 of the response received from the query. Fig. 2A.).
Although Ramo discloses that published information is returned as a response to a query in para.0049, and query responses can combined in para.0124, it does not explicitly disclose the composite message including: a first message group section comprising a first message including first content published by a first publisher for subscribers of a first message group, wherein at least a portion of the first message group section is encrypted with a first cryptographic key that is associated with the first message group, and a second message group section comprising a second message including second content published by a second publisher for subscribers of a second message group, wherein at least a portion of the second message group section is encrypted with a second cryptographic key that is associated with the second message group, wherein the second message group section is separate from the first message group section.
Ross discloses the composite message including: a first message group section comprising a first message including first content published by a first publisher for members of a first message group, and a second message group section comprising a second message including second content published by a second publisher for members of a second message group (Ross: para.0012 “Just as multiple consoles may be associated with a single agent, a single console may manage multiple agents, and thus be associated with the multiple agents.” Para.0015 “Aggregating and correlating the alert information may include combining multiple alerts from an agent into a single alert message (cross-message aggregation), combining alerts from multiple agents into a single alert message (cross-agent aggregation), a combination of these two, analyzing the alerts and intelligently combining selected ones of the alerts into a single alert message, and generating a tag to associate an alert with an agent.” para.0048 “The message may then be forwarded on to the two (or potentially one or more than two) consoles.” The composite message includes alerts from a plurality of agents on the Host system in Fig. 1, for a plurality of different consoles at the MGT system. Each alert by each agent is associated with a different group of consoles and combined into a single alert message.)
Therefore it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to combine Ramo with Ross in order to incorporate the composite message including: a first message group section comprising a first message including first content published by a first publisher for members of a first message group, and a second message group section comprising a second message including second content published by a second publisher for members of a second message group
One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to combine because of the expected benefit of improving bandwidth usage in the network (Ross: para.0015)
However Ramo-Ross does not explicitly disclose wherein at least a portion of the first message group section is encrypted with a first cryptographic key that is associated with the first message group, and wherein at least a portion of the second message group section is encrypted with a second cryptographic key that is associated with the second message group, wherein the second message group section is separate from the first message group section.
Pecka discloses wherein at least a portion of the first message group section is encrypted with a first cryptographic key that is associated with the first message group (Pecka: para.0011 “According to principles described herein, a user can divide a message, such as an email, into multiple parts. Each part is encrypted with a different key and is assigned a part identifier. The encrypted message is then sent to multiple recipients. Additionally, the key for each part and the identifier for each part are sent to a security authority. Additionally, the sender provides the security authority with access privileges for each of the recipients. The access privileges define which of the parts of the message a particular recipient is authorized to access.” Fig. 1 key 106-1, part 1 of the message that is for a particular recipient, a first message group, is encrypted with a first key.); and
wherein at least a portion of the second message group section is encrypted with a second cryptographic key that is associated with the second message group (Pecka: para.0011 “According to principles described herein, a user can divide a message, such as an email, into multiple parts. Each part is encrypted with a different key and is assigned a part identifier. The encrypted message is then sent to multiple recipients. Additionally, the key for each part and the identifier for each part are sent to a security authority. Additionally, the sender provides the security authority with access privileges for each of the recipients. The access privileges define which of the parts of the message a particular recipient is authorized to access.” Fig. 1 key 106-2 the part 2 of the message for a different message group for a different recipient is encrypted with a second key),
wherein the second message group section is separate from the first message group section (Pecka: para.0013 “FIG. 1 is a diagram showing illustrative parts of a message that can be separately encrypted. According to the present example, a message 102 is divided into multiple parts 104, each part 104 being associated with a key 106 and an identifier 108. The message 102 is also associated with recipient access data 110.”, Fig. 1 message 102 is divided into different sections par1 and part 2.).
Therefore it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to combine Ramo-Ross with Pecka in order to incorporate wherein at least a portion of the first message group section is encrypted with a first cryptographic key that is associated with the first message group, and wherein at least a portion of the second message group section is encrypted with a second cryptographic key that is associated with the second message group, wherein the second message group section is separate from the first message group section.
One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to combine because of the expected benefit of improved security when sending a combined message (Pecka: para.0011-0012).
Regarding Claim 11, Ramo-Ross-Pecka discloses claim 9 as set forth above.
While Ramo discloses the concept of encrypting and decrypting messages based on keys for a community in para.0104, Ramo-Ross does not explicitly disclose decrypting, by the messaging application, the first message with a first cryptographic key.
Pecka further discloses decrypting, by the messaging application, the first message with a first cryptographic key (Pecka: para.0036 “ At step 314, the recipient 302 receives the key to part X. At step 316, the recipient 302 uses the key to decrypt part X. The recipient can then view the message.” The key used to encrypt the part of the message for that recipient is used to decrypt the part of the message. Fig. 2 212, 224).
Therefore it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to combine Ramo-Ross with Pecka in order to incorporate decrypting, by the messaging application, the first message with a first cryptographic key.
One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to combine because of the expected benefit of improved security when sending a combined message (Pecka: para.0011-0012).
Regarding Claim 13, Ramo-Ross-Pecka discloses claim 9 as set forth above.
Ramo further discloses wherein the composite message includes a third message that is not associated with any message group (Ramo: Para.0075 “When the wireless node 101 is in the active state 259, the community layer 205 encrypts and decrypts community messages as usual for private communities, and enables all outgoing and incoming community specific messages for public communities (e.g., communities with no restrictions on membership)” in addition to messages that can be nested as part of the same query, there are public messages that are not part of any private community.); and
the method further comprises delivering, by the messaging application and to the at least one agent, third content from the third message (Ramo: para.0092 “For example, the list of active communities includes those communities to which the wireless node 101 belongs (e.g., communities that are private such as a community of personal friends) and those communities that are public and open to all nodes 101 (e.g., a general community of all wireless nodes on the ad-hoc network 109 in which system wide messages may be exchanged).” Para.0124 “At step 919, the node 903 receives the same query and determines that it's publish item is responsive and transmits a response message received by both the node 901 and node 905.” para.0063 “As shown in FIG. 2B, the awareness layer 203 includes a control logic 221 and item storage 223. The control logic 221, for instance, provides the logic for creating, publishing, subscribing to, querying, and/or receiving awareness information over the ad-hoc mesh network 109.” Node 903 obtains the query and determines that it corresponds to the query, i.e. a member of that community and processes the message via the community module and/or awareness layer).
Regarding Claim 15 Ramo discloses One or more non-transitory computer readable media storing instructions (Ramo: para.0148) that, when executed by one or more processors of a first node of a mesh network (Ramo: para.0003 mesh network, para.0004-0005 processor of node), cause the one or more processors to execute a first messaging application (Ramo: Fig. 2A awareness services module 111) performing operations comprising:
receiving content for a first message from a first agent executing on the first node (Ramo: Fig. 9 step 909, and Fig. 7 step 701 para.0111 “In step 701, the awareness services module 111 receives a request to either publish or subscribe to information provided over an ad-hoc mesh network. In one embodiment, the request is received from, for instance, one or more applications (e.g., application 201) executing on a wireless node 101a.” the awareness module receives from a plurality of applications messages to publish or subscription queries),
wherein content for the first message is for one or more agents that are subscribed to a first message group (Ramo: para.0074 “Accordingly, the community layer 205 will be able to encrypt outgoing community specific messages and to decrypt incoming community specific messages. As noted previously, community membership may also be based, at least in part, on a publish or subscription status to information shared over the ad-hoc mesh network 109.” Message are encrypted to that they are only provided to agents that are subscribed to a community, a first message group);
generating a first composite message including: a first message group section comprising the first message, and a second message group section comprising a second message including content for subscribers of a second message group (Ramo: para.0124 “At step 915, node 901 initiates a query for published information responsive to its data schema instance. In one embodiment, the query acts as a way to convey the subscription to other nodes (e.g., nodes 901 and 905). It is contemplated that more than one query can carry the subscription and that a single query can carry multiple subscriptions. Furthermore, a query message may include multiple nested data items include subscription information, one or more queries, one or more query responses, other data items (e.g., including unrelated data items), and/or other messages or signaling information transmitted over the ad-hoc mesh network 109.” A composite query message with a plurality of requests and responses for different subscriptions is broadcasted, thereby including a first and second message for different messaging groups, node 903 and 905. See also para.0100 describing users being able to be associated with a plurality of communities),
and sending the first composite message to a second messaging application executed by a second node of the mesh network (Ramo: para.0124 “ In this case, the query is transmitted to both the node 903 and node 905 over the ad-hoc mesh network 109.” The query is then sent to other nodes of the mesh).
However Ramo does not explicitly disclose wherein at least a portion of the first message group section is encrypted with a first cryptographic key that is associated with the first message group, a second message group section comprising a second message including content from a second agent for subscribers of a second message group, wherein at least a portion of the second message group section is encrypted with a second cryptographic key that is associated with the second message group, wherein the first message group section is separate from the second message group section;
Ramo discloses generating a first composite message including: a first message group section comprising the first message and a second message group section comprising a second message including content from a second agent for members of a second message group (Ross: para.0012 “Just as multiple consoles may be associated with a single agent, a single console may manage multiple agents, and thus be associated with the multiple agents.” Para.0015 “Aggregating and correlating the alert information may include combining multiple alerts from an agent into a single alert message (cross-message aggregation), combining alerts from multiple agents into a single alert message (cross-agent aggregation), a combination of these two, analyzing the alerts and intelligently combining selected ones of the alerts into a single alert message, and generating a tag to associate an alert with an agent.” para.0048 “The message may then be forwarded on to the two (or potentially one or more than two) consoles.” The composite message includes alerts from a plurality of agents on the Host system in Fig. 1, for a plurality of different consoles at the MGT system. Each alert by each agent is associated with a different group of consoles and combined into a single alert message.).
Therefore it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to combine Ramo with Ross in order to incorporate generating a first composite message including: a first message group section comprising the first message and a second message group section comprising a second message including content from a second agent for members of a second message group.
One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to combine because of the expected benefit of improving bandwidth usage in the network (Ross: para.0015).
However Ramo-Ross does not explicitly disclose wherein at least a portion of the first message group section is encrypted with a first cryptographic key that is associated with the first message group, wherein at least a portion of the second message group section is encrypted with a second cryptographic key that is associated with the second message group, wherein the first message group section is separate from the second message group section.
Pecka discloses wherein at least a portion of the first message group section is encrypted with a first cryptographic key that is associated with the first message group (Pecka: para.0011 “According to principles described herein, a user can divide a message, such as an email, into multiple parts. Each part is encrypted with a different key and is assigned a part identifier. The encrypted message is then sent to multiple recipients. Additionally, the key for each part and the identifier for each part are sent to a security authority. Additionally, the sender provides the security authority with access privileges for each of the recipients. The access privileges define which of the parts of the message a particular recipient is authorized to access.” Fig. 1 key 106-1, part 1 of the message that is for a particular recipient, a first message group, is encrypted with a first key.),
wherein at least a portion of the second message group section is encrypted with a second cryptographic key that is associated with the second message group (Pecka: para.0011 “According to principles described herein, a user can divide a message, such as an email, into multiple parts. Each part is encrypted with a different key and is assigned a part identifier. The encrypted message is then sent to multiple recipients. Additionally, the key for each part and the identifier for each part are sent to a security authority. Additionally, the sender provides the security authority with access privileges for each of the recipients. The access privileges define which of the parts of the message a particular recipient is authorized to access.” Fig. 1 key 106-2 the part 2 of the message for a different message group for a different recipient is encrypted with a second key),
wherein the first message group section is separate from the second message group section (Pecka: para.0013 “FIG. 1 is a diagram showing illustrative parts of a message that can be separately encrypted. According to the present example, a message 102 is divided into multiple parts 104, each part 104 being associated with a key 106 and an identifier 108. The message 102 is also associated with recipient access data 110.”, Fig. 1 message 102 is divided into different sections par1 and part 2.).
Therefore it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to combine Ramo-Ross with Pecka in order to incorporate wherein at least a portion of the first message group section is encrypted with a first cryptographic key that is associated with the first message group; wherein at least a portion of the second message group section is encrypted with a second cryptographic key that is associated with the second message group, and wherein the first message group section is separate from the second message group section.
One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to combine because of the expected benefit of improved security when sending a combined message (Pecka: para.0011-0012).
Regarding Claim 18, Ramo-Ross-Pecka discloses claim 15 as set forth above.
Ramo further discloses wherein the first composite message further includes a third message that is to be delivered to any agent (Ramo: Para.0075 “When the wireless node 101 is in the active state 259, the community layer 205 encrypts and decrypts community messages as usual for private communities, and enables all outgoing and incoming community specific messages for public communities (e.g., communities with no restrictions on membership)” in addition to messages that can be nested as part of the same query, there are public messages that are not part of any private community.).
Regarding Claim 19, Ramo-Ross discloses claim 15 as set forth above.
Ramo further discloses wherein the operations further comprise: obtaining a second composite message including a third message to be provided to one or more agents that are subscribed to the first message group and a fourth message to be provided to one or more agents that are subscribed to the second message group (Ramo: para.0124 “At step 915, node 901 initiates a query for published information responsive to its data schema instance. In one embodiment, the query acts as a way to convey the subscription to other nodes (e.g., nodes 901 and 905). It is contemplated that more than one query can carry the subscription and that a single query can carry multiple subscriptions. Furthermore, a query message may include multiple nested data items include subscription information, one or more queries, one or more query responses, other data items (e.g., including unrelated data items), and/or other messages or signaling information transmitted over the ad-hoc mesh network 109.” Similarly, the query response can be nested to a plurality of different subscriptions as well as a plurality of query responses. Therefore in step 919 in para.0124 “At step 919, the node 903 receives the same query and determines that it's publish item is responsive and transmits a response message received by both the node 901 and node 905.” Can contain a plurality of query responses, at least one of which corresponds to the first query and for the group node 901 is part of, and the second can be that for a different group.); and
sending content from the third message to the first agent (Ramo: para.0124 “The node 901 receives the response and restarts its query time because it has received responsive information (step 921). The node 905 again ignores the message because it has not initiated an instance of a matching or substantially matching data schema (step 923).” The node the response is for receives the query response.).
However Ramo does not explicitly disclose obtaining a second composite message including; a third message that has been published and is to be provided to one or more agents that are subscribed to the first message group, and a fourth message that has been published and is to be provided to one or more agents that are subscribed to the second message group.
Ross discloses obtaining a second composite message including; a third message that has been published and is to be provided to one or more members of the first message group, and a fourth message that has been published and is to be provided to one or more members of the second message group (Ross: para.0012 “Just as multiple consoles may be associated with a single agent, a single console may manage multiple agents, and thus be associated with the multiple agents.” Para.0015 “Aggregating and correlating the alert information may include combining multiple alerts from an agent into a single alert message (cross-message aggregation), combining alerts from multiple agents into a single alert message (cross-agent aggregation), a combination of these two, analyzing the alerts and intelligently combining selected ones of the alerts into a single alert message, and generating a tag to associate an alert with an agent.” para.0048 “The message may then be forwarded on to the two (or potentially one or more than two) consoles.” The composite message includes alerts from a plurality of agents on the Host system in Fig. 1, for a plurality of different consoles at the MGT system. Each alert by each agent is associated with a different group of consoles and combined into a single alert message.)
Therefore it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to combine Ramo with Ross in order to incorporate obtaining a second composite message including; a third message that has been published and is to be provided to one or more members of the first message group, and a fourth message that has been published and is to be provided to one or more members of the second message group.
One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to combine because of the expected benefit of improving bandwidth usage in the network (Ross: para.0015).
Regarding Claim 20, Ramo-Ross-Pecka discloses claim 19 as set forth above.
Ramo further discloses wherein the operations further comprise decrypting the third message using a first cryptographic key (Ramo: Para.0074 “Accordingly, the community layer 205 will be able to encrypt outgoing community specific messages and to decrypt incoming community specific messages. As noted previously, community membership may also be based, at least in part, on a publish or subscription status to information shared over the ad-hoc mesh network 109.” Para.0104 “In case of a private community, the community layer 205 decrypts the reply message using the appropriate encryption keys stored in the community directory 243.” Using the correct encryption key, the message response is decrypted.)
However Ramo-Ross does not explicitly disclose wherein the operations further comprise decrypting the third message using the first cryptographic key
Pecka further discloses wherein the operations further comprise decrypting the third message using the first cryptographic key (Pecka: para.0036 “ At step 314, the recipient 302 receives the key to part X. At step 316, the recipient 302 uses the key to decrypt part X. The recipient can then view the message.” The key used to encrypt the part of the message for that recipient is used to decrypt the part of the message. Fig. 2 212, 224).
Therefore it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to combine Ramo-Ross with Pecka in order to incorporate wherein the operations further comprise decrypting the third message using the first cryptographic key.
One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to combine because of the expected benefit of improved security when sending a combined message (Pecka: para.0011-0012).
Regarding Claim 21, Ramo-Ross-Pecka discloses claim 1 as set forth above.
Ramo further disclose wherein the message comprises: an unencrypted header that includes a first message group identifier (Ramo: para.0073 “In addition, the encryption/decryption module 245 may encrypt or decrypt message data using, for instance, a temporary key that is periodically derived from the authentication key K associated with the CID. These measures hinder the discovery of the CID by outsiders that do not have the authentication key. By way of example, the community layer 205 inserts a special header into the messages that it receives from the awareness layer 203. The special header, for instance, contains a list of anonymized community identifiers corresponding to the communities to which the message is relevant.” The encrypted payload is associated with a special header that has community identifiers for a particular message); and
an encrypted payload encrypted by the first cryptographic key (Ramo: para.0073 “In addition, the encryption/decryption module 245 may encrypt or decrypt message data using, for instance, a temporary key that is periodically derived from the authentication key K associated with the CID.” The message data is encrypted with a cryptographic key).
While Ramo discloses combing/nesting of community messages in para.0124, and discloses encryption and an unencrypted header in para.0073, Ramo-Ross does not explicitly disclose wherein the first message group section comprises: an unencrypted header that includes a first message group identifier; and an encrypted payload encrypted by the first cryptographic key.
Pecka discloses wherein the first message group section comprises: a message identifier (Pecka: para.0018 “Each part 104 is associated with an identifier 108 that identifies that part 104. The identifier 108 is used to reference a particular part 104.” Each message is associated with a message identifier); and
an encrypted payload encrypted by the first cryptographic key (Pecka: para.0011 “According to principles described herein, a user can divide a message, such as an email, into multiple parts. Each part is encrypted with a different key and is assigned a part identifier. The encrypted message is then sent to multiple recipients. Additionally, the key for each part and the identifier for each part are sent to a security authority. Additionally, the sender provides the security authority with access privileges for each of the recipients. The access privileges define which of the parts of the message a particular recipient is authorized to access.” Fig. 1 key 106-1, part 1 of the message that is for a particular recipient, a first message group, is encrypted with a first key.).
Therefore it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to combine Ramo-Ross with Pecka in order to incorporate wherein the first message group section comprises: a message identifier, an encrypted payload encrypted by the first cryptographic key, such that each part of the combined message comprises the unencrypted header that includes a first message group identifier as well as encrypted payload.
One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to combine because of the expected benefit of improved security when sending a combined message (Pecka: para.0011-0012).
Claim(s) 2, 16 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Ramo et al. (hereinafter Ramo, US 2012/0135723 A1) in view of Ross et al. (hereinafter Ross, US 2006/0156398 A1) in view of Pecka et al. (hereinafter Pecka, US 2016/0226844 A1) in view of Szigeti et al. (hereinafter Szigeti, US 2023/0081708 A1).
Regarding Claim 2 Ramo-Ross-Pecka discloses claim 1 as set forth above.
However Ramo-Ross-Pecka does not explicitly disclose prior to the transmitting, verifying, by the first messaging application, that a policy permits the first agent to deliver the first message to the first message group.
Szigeti discloses prior to the transmitting, verifying, by the first messaging application, that a policy permits the first agent to deliver the first message to the first message group (Szigeti: Fig. 4 para.0056 “At 408, at least one of the cloud-native application or the IBN architecture 106 may determine, based at least in part on the resolution, a third set of access policies that defines whether the first applications are allowed or restricted from communicating with the second applications in the network service mesh and the IBN architecture. For instance, the third set of access policies may be matching access policies 128 that are consistently applied policies across the network service mesh 108 and the IBN architecture 106.” When establishing encrypted tunnels for communication between microservices, access polies are obtained and resolved to determine which microservices are allowed to communicate with each other by the NSE of each node, seen in Fig. 2E.).
Therefore it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine Ramo-Ross-Pecka with Szigeti in order to incorporate prior to the transmitting, verifying, by the first messaging application, that a policy permits the first agent to deliver the first message to the first message group.
One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to combine because of the expected benefit of improved network security (Szigeti: para.0002).
Regarding Claim 16, Ramo-Ross discloses claim 15 as set forth above.
Ramo further discloses the first agent to provide the first message to one or more agents that are subscribed to the first message group (Ramo: para.0124 “ In this case, the query is transmitted to both the node 903 and node 905 over the ad-hoc mesh network 109.” The query is then sent to other nodes of the mesh).
However Ramo- further discloses wherein the operations further comprise: determining whether a policy permits the first agent to provide the first message to one or more agents that are subscribed to the first message group; and wherein the sending is performed in response to determining that the policy permits the first agent to provide the first message to one or more agents that are subscribed to the first message group.
Szigeti discloses wherein the operations further comprise: determining whether a policy permits the first agent to provide the first message to one or more agents that are of the first message group (Szigeti: Fig. 4 para.0056 “At 408, at least one of the cloud-native application or the IBN architecture 106 may determine, based at least in part on the resolution, a third set of access policies that defines whether the first applications are allowed or restricted from communicating with the second applications in the network service mesh and the IBN architecture. For instance, the third set of access policies may be matching access policies 128 that are consistently applied policies across the network service mesh 108 and the IBN architecture 106.” When establishing encrypted tunnels for communication between microservices, access polies are obtained and resolved to determine which groups of microservices are allowed to communicate with each other by the NSE of each node, seen in Fig. 2E.); and
wherein the sending is performed in response to determining that the policy permits the first agent to provide the first message to one or more agents that are of the first message group (Szigeti: para.0062 “At 512, the network service mesh 108 may apply the third set of access policies to communications in the network service mesh.” The access policy for communication rules are applied, which allows for a first group of nodes to communicate to another in para.0056 after the policies have been resolved, therefore only sending when the policy allows the destination).
Therefore it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine Ramo with Szigeti in order to incorporate wherein the operations further comprise: determining whether a policy permits the first agent to provide the first message to one or more agents that are of the first message group and wherein the sending is performed in response to determining that the policy permits the first agent to provide the first message to one or more agents that are of the first message group, and apply this technique to the subscribed messages groups of Ramo.
One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to combine because of the expected benefit of improved network security (Szigeti: para.0002).
Claim(s) 5-6, 12 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Ramo et al. (hereinafter Ramo, US 2012/0135723 A1) in view of Ross et al. (hereinafter Ross, US 2006/0156398 A1) in view of Pecka et al. (hereinafter Pecka, US 2016/0226844 A1) in view of Farrugia et al. (hereinafter Farrugia, US 2013/0067211 A1).
Regarding Claim 5 Ramo-Ross-Pecka discloses claim 1 as set forth above.
However Ramo-Ross-Pecka does not explicitly disclose further comprising encrypting the content for the first message and additional data with the first cryptographic key.
Farrugia discloses further comprising encrypting the content for the first message and additional data with the first cryptographic key (Farrugia: para.0048 “In the CBC case, the initialization or initial vector (IV) must be of the same size as the BSA block size. So the update here is done as in the classical CBC method, but with larger block size (which is the BSA size). Note that the use of an IV generally is conventional in CBC mode. IV is a block of random data added at the beginning of the message before encryption. It makes each message unique, to enhance security. It may be a timestamp, for example.” An initialization vector is appended to the message prior to encryption).
Therefore it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to combine Ramo-Ross-Pecka with Farrugia in order to incorporate further comprising encrypting the content for the first message and additional data with the first cryptographic key.
One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to combine because of the expected benefit of improved security (Farrugia: para.0048).
Regarding Claim 6, Ramo-Ross-Pecka discloses claim 1 as set forth above.
However Ramo-Ross-Pecka does not explicitly disclose further comprising encrypting the first message with the first cryptographic key based on an encryption initialization vector, wherein the composite message includes the encryption initialization vector.
Farrugia discloses further comprising encrypting the first message with the first cryptographic key based on an encryption initialization vector, wherein the composite message includes the encryption initialization vector. (Farrugia: para.0048 “In the CBC case, the initialization or initial vector (IV) must be of the same size as the BSA block size. So the update here is done as in the classical CBC method, but with larger block size (which is the BSA size). Note that the use of an IV generally is conventional in CBC mode. IV is a block of random data added at the beginning of the message before encryption. It makes each message unique, to enhance security. It may be a timestamp, for example.” An initialization vector is appended to the message prior to encryption).
Therefore it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to combine Ramo-Ross-Pecka with Farrugia in order to incorporate further comprising encrypting the first message with the first cryptographic key based on an encryption initialization vector, wherein the composite message includes the encryption initialization vector.
One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to combine because of the expected benefit of improved security (Farrugia: para.0048).
Regarding Claim 12, Ramo-Ross discloses claim 11 as set forth above.
While Ramo-Ross discloses decrypting the messaging using key, it does not explicitly disclose wherein decrypting the first message further comprises decrypting the first message with the first cryptographic key based on an encryption initialization vector, and wherein the composite message includes the encryption initialization vector.
Farrugia discloses wherein decrypting the first message further comprises decrypting the first message with the first cryptographic key based on an encryption initialization vector, and wherein the composite message includes the encryption initialization vector (Farrugia: para.0048 “In the CBC case, the initialization or initial vector (IV) must be of the same size as the BSA block size. So the update here is done as in the classical CBC method, but with larger block size (which is the BSA size). Note that the use of an IV generally is conventional in CBC mode. IV is a block of random data added at the beginning of the message before encryption. It makes each message unique, to enhance security. It may be a timestamp, for example.” Para.0053 “This applies the concept of internal CBC mode to the above first implementation. Internal CBC mode can be easily extended to the above second and third implementations. Note that in all the cases in other embodiments the internal CBC mode ciphertext can be decrypted from the right to the left (last block to first block) instead of from the left to the right (first block to last block), as in the classical CBC mode case.” An initialization vector is appended to the message prior to encryption, and then decrypted based on the message encrypted using the vector.).
Therefore it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date to combine Ramo-Ross with Farrugia in order to incorporate wherein decrypting the first message further comprises decrypting the first message with the first cryptographic key based on an encryption initialization vector, and wherein the composite message includes the encryption initialization vector.
One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to combine because of the expected benefit of improved security (Farrugia: para.0048).
Claim(s) 8, is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Ramo et al. (hereinafter Ramo, US 2012/0135723 A1) in view of Ross et al. (hereinafter Ross, US 2006/0156398 A1) in view of Pecka et al. (hereinafter Pecka, US 2016/0226844 A1) in view of Savage et al. (hereinafter Savage, US 2018/0019869 A1).
Regarding Claim 8, Ramo-Ross-Pecka discloses claim 7 as set forth above.
However Ramo- Ross-Pecka does not explicitly disclose wherein the third message is encrypted by the first messaging application with a default cryptographic key that is not associated with any message group.
Savage discloses wherein the third message is encrypted by the first messaging application with a default cryptographic key that is not associated with any message group (Savage: para.0006 “In one aspect, a disclosed method for secure messaging between distributing computing nodes includes receiving an encrypted message from a node, decrypting the message using a default key, sending a message, rotating a group key, and distributing a key rotation message. The message received may be to discover a master of a group. The message sent may welcome the node into the group as a member. The welcome message may be encrypted with the default key and may include information to determine the group key. The group key may be rotated based on expiration of a group key rotation window. The group key may become a prior group key and the rotated group key may be a current group key. The key rotation message may be encrypted with one of the default key or the prior group key, and may include information to determine the current group key.” Messages can be encrypted with a default key and not a group key).
Therefore it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine Ramo- Ross-Pecka with Savage in order to incorporate wherein the third message is encrypted by the first messaging application with a default cryptographic key that is not associated with any message group.
One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to combine because of the expected benefit of improved security even for public messages (Savage: para.0006 and abstract).
Claim(s) 14 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Ramo et al. (hereinafter Ramo, US 2012/0135723 A1) in view of Ross et al. (hereinafter Ross, US 2006/0156398 A1) in view of Pecka et al. (hereinafter Pecka, US 2016/0226844 A1) in view of Savage et al. (hereinafter Savage, US 2018/0019869 A1).
Regarding Claim 14 Ramo-Ross-Pecka discloses claim 13 as set forth above.
However Ramo-Ross-Pecka does not explicitly disclose further comprising decrypting, by the messaging application, the third message included in the composite message with a default cryptographic key that is not associated with any message group to generate the third content from the third message.
Savage discloses further comprising decrypting, by the messaging application, the third message included in the composite message with a default cryptographic key that is not associated with any message group to generate the third content from the third message (Savage: para.0006 “In one aspect, a disclosed method for secure messaging between distributing computing nodes includes receiving an encrypted message from a node, decrypting the message using a default key, sending a message, rotating a group key, and distributing a key rotation message. The message received may be to discover a master of a group. The message sent may welcome the node into the group as a member. The welcome message may be encrypted with the default key and may include information to determine the group key. The group key may be rotated based on expiration of a group key rotation window. The group key may become a prior group key and the rotated group key may be a current group key. The key rotation message may be encrypted with one of the default key or the prior group key, and may include information to determine the current group key.” Messages can be encrypted with a default key and not a group key).
Therefore it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine Ramo-Ross-Pecka with Savage in order to incorporate further comprising decrypting, by the messaging application, the third message included in the composite message with a default cryptographic key that is not associated with any message group to generate the content from the third message.
One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to combine because of the expected benefit of improved security even for public messages (Savage: para.0006 and abstract).
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. Srinivasan et al. US 20180227239, combining messages in queue, see para21, 0024 and Fig. 3A.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to EUI H KIM whose telephone number is (571)272-8133. The examiner can normally be reached 7:30-5 M-R, M-F alternating.
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, Kamal B Divecha can be reached on 5712725863. 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.
/EUI H KIM/Examiner, Art Unit 2453
/KAMAL B DIVECHA/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2453