Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status
The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
Response to Amendment
In the remarks filed on 10/23/2025. Claims 1-5, 7-14, and 16-21 are pending claims. The applicant amended claims 1, 3, 7, 12, 13, 17, and 20 are amended. No claims were added. Claims 2, 6, and 15 are cancelled.
Response to Arguments
With respect to claims objections:
Applicant’ claim amendments and remarks filed on 10/23/2025 have been fully considered and does overcome some objection such as on claim 2, but does not overcome claim objections on claim 17 as presented in the non-final office action filed 07/23/2025.
With respect to 35 USC § 112 rejections:
Applicant’ claim amendments and remarks filed on 10/23/2025 have been fully considered and does overcome some rejections such as claim 16, but applicant argument on 112b rejection of 7, 13 and 20 due to claim amendment is not persuasive because the amendment does not overcome the previous 112b rejection as presented in the non-final office action filed 07/23/2025 and introduces new issue (see 112b rejection section below) on claims.
With respect to 135 U.S.C. §103 rejections:
Applicant's arguments filed on 10/23/2025 have been received and entered. Applicant's arguments with respect to the newly amended independents “Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103” remarks pages 8-11, have been considered but are not persuasive. Applicant argues that the cited references fail to disclose the limitations of amended claim 1 (i) transmission of classical encoding of an update via specified secure side/openside architecture, (ii) a secure side system that lacks a classical communication network operable to communicate with external devices (iii) teaches the communication devices, but modifying smith to combine with other references would undermine the principal of operation. Examiner acknowledge the applicant’s perspective, However, because of 112(b) highlighted below, the argument are not persuasive since the scope of the claims 1, 12, and 20 are unclear.
Applicant argues that Ikram merely stores the policy files locally and does not disclose transmission of updates. Examiner respectfully disagrees. Ikram discloses generating updated policy files using a patching protocol and making such updates available for use by components [0050], which constitutes causing transmission of an update under BRI. Applicant’s arguments rely on a narrow interpretation of claim scope and therefore, the rejection under 103 are maintained.
Claim Objections
Regarding claim 17, Claim 17 is objected to because of the following informalities. Claim 17 “first QD is isolated from the classical communication network” has been already cited in 1st limitation citied in “the secured-side system comprising the first CD and a first quantum computing device (QD), wherein the secured-side system lacks a classical communication network that is operable to communicate with devices external to the secured-side system” of independent claim 12, does not appear to further limiting those limitations. As such, it is unclear, how claim 17 adds any substantive distinction over the cited portions of claim 12. Thus, examiner suggest to clarify the scope of claim 17. If it is the same limitations of claim 12, then claim 17 should be rewritten in dependent form and properly referred back. Appropriate correction is required.
Note: Examiner has identified above examples and encourages the applicant to carefully review each claims and their respective claim limitations thoroughly to ensure better consistency and clarity throughout the claims. Appropriate correction and clarification are required.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
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.
Claims 1-5, 7-14, and 16-21 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 1 recites “the secured-side system lacks a classical communication network that is operable to communicate with devices external to the secured-side system, and wherein the secured-side system is operable to communicate with a device that is external to the secured-side system via a quantum communication channel” that fail to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter. It discloses the secured side system “lacks a classical communication network operable to communicate externally” “operable to communicate externally via QCC” which is fine conceptually, however, the claim defines the secure side system as “comprising the first CD and a first QD”, thus it is unclear what is “the system” doing vs what the first QD does. Further recites “receiving, by the first QD, a classical encoding of the update for…” if the secured system has “no classical communication network operable to communicate externally” that does not prevent internal communications. The claim does not clearly say how first CD communicates to first QD which creates problem when combines with “lacks classical communication network” because the classical network is undefined and could be interpreted to include internal networks. Further, recites the limitation “causing, by the second QD, a transmission of the classical encoding of the update to a second CD of an open-side system of the content distribution system, wherein the secured-side system is communicatively coupled only to the open-side system, and [[,]]wherein the open-side system comprising the second CD is communicatively coupled to a client device over a classical communication network; and causing, by the second CD, a transmission of the update to the client device.” It say the first QD causes transmission of the classical encoding to the second QD, but then define that “transmission of the classical encoding includes transmitting qubits”. However, that’s not actually “transmitting a classical encoding” rather transmitting a QM encoding representing that classical encoding. Thus, making unclear what transmitting a classical encoding means (is the classical encoding itself being transmitted or the representation of classical encoding via qubits). The language “causing transmission” is unclear that whether second QD directly transmit bits to the second CD, instruct some other component to send or producing a file and then it is sent by another device. The claim limitation also introduces “a second CD of an open side system” then immediately defines secured side system only couples with openside system which makes it ambiguous since secure side system obviously communicates with the first CD and first QD internally, does not clarify what coupling only means. Furthermore, Earlier the limitation recites “transmitting classical encoding of the update” but at the end of the claim it suddenly get changed into “transmitting the update”, It is unclear and inconsistent that if “the update” is the same thing as the “classical encoding of the update” or different. Examiner highlighted as many 112(b) issue for claim 1 as possible, however, there could be more issues that examiner missed, examiner suggest to review all the limitations of claim 1 and rewrite the limitations to make it clearer and more consistent. Also, same applies for claim 12 and 20. Thus, the examiner respectfully requests the applicant clarify the scope of the claimed limitation of claim 1. Dependent claims 1, 3-5, and 7-11 are also rejected for inheriting the deficiencies set forth above for independent claims. Appropriate correction is required.
Claim 3 recites “preparing, by the first QD, the quantum states of the first set of qubits based on the superdense coding protocol and the first set of qubits…” that fail to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter. It is unclear that how first set of qubits can be prepared based on the first set of qubits. Quantum states are prepared of qubits not based on qubits. This phrase does not add clear technical limitation and makes it indefinite. Thus, the examiner respectfully requests the applicant clarify the scope of the claimed limitation of claim 3. Appropriate correction is required.
Claim 4, recites “transmitting, over at least the first QCC, the first set of qubits from the first QD to the second QD, wherein the first QD prepared the quantum states of the first set of qubits and the second QD is enabled to cause the transmission of the classical encoding of the update to the second CD” that fail to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter. It fails to clearly define the relationship between the transmission of qubits between quantum computing devices and the transmission of a classical encoding to a classical computing device. It is well known in the art that qubits stores QM encoding, not classical encoding. The claim does not clearly explain how the transmission of qubits itself results in transmission of the classical encoding. Examiner suggest to clarify whether the second QD receives the classical encoding to transmit to second CD or it decodes the qubits prior to transmission of classical encoding. Thus, the examiner respectfully requests the applicant clarify the scope of the claimed limitation of claim 4. Dependent claim 5 is also rejected for inheriting the deficiencies set forth above for independent claims. Appropriate correction is required.
Claim 7 recites the limitation “wherein the method further comprises transmitting the classical encoding of the update from the first QD to a third CD of a client system via the second QD by the QM encoding of the update” that fail to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter. It discloses the first QD is transmitting classical encoding to the third CD via the second QD, which is unclear and confusing. According to the 1st limitation in claim 1, first QD is located into secure side system and can only communicate to external device via quantum channel. This implies that the first QD cannot transmit classical encoding directly to the third CD via second QD. Instead, the classical encoding must first be converted into the QM encoding before being sent to the second QD, then the second QD may convert the QM encoding back to classical encoding before forwarding to the third CD or second QD may send the received encoding to the third QD which would handle conversion to classical encoding before transmitting to the third CD. For the examination purposes, Examiner interprets that the first QD transmitting QM encoding to second QD, which then converts it to classical encoding and transmits it to the third CD. Thus, the examiner respectfully requests the applicant clarify the scope of the claimed limitation of claim 7. Dependent claims 8 -10 are also rejected for inheriting the deficiencies set forth above for independent claims. Appropriate correction is required.
Claim 12 recites “the secured-side system lacks a classical communication network that is operable to communicate with devices external to the secured-side system and wherein the secured-side system is operable to communicate with a device that is external to the secured-side system via a quantum communication channel” that fail to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter. It discloses the secured side system “lacks a classical communication network operable to communicate externally” “operable to communicate externally via QCC” which is fine conceptually, however, the claim defines the secure side system as “comprising the first CD and a first QD”, thus it is unclear what is “the system” doing vs what the first QD does. Further recites “in response to receiving the QM encoding of the update for the content from the first QD, causing, by the second QD, a transmission of a classical encoding of the update to a second CD…” fail to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter. The language “causing transmission” is unclear that whether second QD directly transmit bits to the second CD, instruct some other component to send or producing a file and then it is sent by another device. It say the second QD causes transmission of the classical encoding to the second CD, but then define that “transmission of the classical encoding includes transmitting qubits”. However, that’s not actually “transmitting a classical encoding” rather transmitting a QM encoding representing that classical encoding. Thus, making unclear what transmitting a classical encoding means (is the classical encoding itself being transmitted or the representation of classical encoding via qubits). Further, recites the limitation “receiving, by a second QD of an open-side system of the content distribution system, wherein the secured-side system is communicatively coupled only to the open-side system, and wherein the open-side system is communicatively coupled to clients of the content distribution system” . The claim limitation also introduces “a second QD of an open side system” then immediately defines secured side system only couples with openside system which makes it ambiguous since secure side system obviously communicates with the first CD and first QD internally, does not clarify what coupling only means. Examiner suggest Examiner highlighted as many 112(b) issue for claim 12 as possible, however, there could be more issues that examiner missed, examiner suggest to review all the limitations of claim 12 and rewrite the limitations to make it clearer and more consistent. Thus, the examiner respectfully requests the applicant clarify the scope of the claimed limitation of claim 12. Dependent claims 12-14, and 16-19 are also rejected for inheriting the deficiencies set forth above for independent claims. Appropriate correction is required.
Claim 13 recites the limitation “generating, by the first QD, the first set of qubits based on the superdense coding protocol and the QM encoding stored in the first set of qubits by preparing quantum states of the first set of qubits based on the superdense coding protocol such that the quantum states of the first set of qubits store the QM encoding of the update” that fail to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter. It is unclear that the first QD is generating the first set of qubits based on the superdense coding protocol and the QM encoding stored in the first set of qubits or the first QD is generating the first set of qubits based on the superdense coding protocol, and after generating first set of qubits, QM encoding is stored in the first set of qubits. For examination purposes, examiner interprets in light of specification Fig 3A, step 104, the first QD is generating the first set of qubits based on the superdense coding protocol, and after generating first set of qubits, QM encoding is stored in the first set of qubits. Thus, the examiner respectfully requests the applicant clarify the scope of the claimed limitation of claim 13. Dependent claim 14 is also rejected for inheriting the deficiencies set forth above for independent claims. Appropriate correction is required
Claim 14 recites the limitation “preparing the first set of bits based on results from measuring the quantum states of the first set of qubits such that the first set of qubits store the classical encoding of the update” that fail to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter. It is internally inconsistent and indefinite because the claim states that qubits store classical encoding, while simultaneously reciting that the classical encoding is prepared using set of bits which cannot be true at the same time. Thus, the examiner respectfully requests the applicant clarify the scope of the claimed limitation of claim 14. Appropriate correction is required.
Claim 20 fail to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter. Claim 20 recites limitation that contradicts the dataflow architecture for the same invention (i.e., origin and transmission mechanism of the classical encoding). Claim 1 requires a classical encoding to be received by a first quantum device (QD) from the first classical computing device (CD) within a secured side system that lacks any classical external network whereas claim 20 requires the same classical encoding to be received by the first quantum computing device from a second quantum computing device (QD) over a quantum communication channel (QCC). These requirement cannot be true for the same claimed first quantum computing device (QD). If the “classical encoding” is encoded into qubits before transmission, then it is no longer a classical encoding, but rather a QM encoding which claim 20 does not recites at that step. Therefore, the claim 20 contradicts the distinction between classical encoding and QM encoding as defined in claim 1 and the specification’s repeated distinction between the two. While quantum channel can carry information representing classical data, the claim do not recite any conversion or decoding prior to the receiving, instead claim 20 requires the classical encoding itself to be received over the quantum channel which contradicts the applicant’s own definitions of QCCs as qubit-based channels. Furthermore, the specification describes alternative embodiments (Classical -> QM and QM-> classical), but claim 20 is internally inconsistent and not clearly aligned with either embodiments since it recites receiving “classical encoding” over QCC. The spec instead teaches receiving qubits storing QM encoding over QCC, then decoded into classical encoding, [0004,0057]. Thus, the examiner respectfully requests the applicant clarify the scope of the claimed limitation of claim 20. Appropriate correction is required.
Note: Examiner has identified above examples and encourages the applicant to carefully review each claims and their respective claim limitations thoroughly to ensure better consistency and clarity throughout the claims. Appropriate correction and clarification are required.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 103 which forms the basis for all obviousness rejections set forth in this Office action:
A patent for a claimed invention may not be obtained, notwithstanding that the claimed invention is not identically disclosed as set forth in section 102, if the differences between the claimed invention and the prior art are such that the claimed invention as a whole would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which the claimed invention pertains. Patentability shall not be negated by the manner in which the invention was made.
Claims 1, 3-5, 7-14, and 16-21 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Griffin (US 20200366316 A1) in view of Ikram (US 20240265096) in further view of Smith (US 20170134100 A1).
Regarding claim 1, Griffin teaches a method for updating content, comprising:
generating, by a first classical computing device (CD) of a system of a content distribution system, the content (Griffin, FIG. 1, the computing device 14 is a classical computing device, while the QCD computing device 16 is a quantum computing device, [0028] The computing device 14 of the computing system 10 of FIG. 1 generates a compressed file 24 (i.e. the content) by compressing data (not shown) using one or more conventional compression formats such as 7Z, TAR.BZ2, TAR.GZ, RAR, or ZIP formats,[0029])
receiving, by the first QD, a classical encoding of the content from the first CD, wherein the classical encoding is stored in a first set of bits that has a first cardinality (Griffin, A first QCD computing device receives a conventionally compressed file (i.e., a classical encoding of a content) that was compressed by a computing device (i.e., a classical computing device). The first QCD computing device performs superdense encoding of the compressed file using one or more first qubits (i.e., first set of bits with first cardinality), see par [0002], fig 1, 2A and fig 6) [In light of specification, see specification of instant application par [0014] and it is well known that compressed files are encoded];
in response to receiving the classical encoding of the update for the content from the first CD, causing, by the first QD, a transmission of the classical encoding of the update to a second QD of the content distribution system over a first quantum communication channel (QCC), wherein the transmission of the classical encoding includes transmitting a first set of qubits that has a second cardinality that is less than the first cardinality of the first set of bits, wherein quantum states of the first set of qubits store a quantum-mechanical (QM) encoding of the update for the content, and wherein the QM encoding of the update was generated based on a superdense coding protocol and the classical encoding; and causing, by the second QD, a transmission of the classical encoding of the update to a second CD, wherein the second CD is communicatively coupled over a classical communication network and causing, by the second CD, a transmission of the update to the client device (Griffin, The QCD computing device 16 (i.e., the first QD) maintains a set of one or more first qubits 18(0)-18(Q), which are in a state of entanglement with a set of one or more second qubits 20(0)-20(Q) that are maintained by a QCD computing device 22 (i.e., second quantum computing device) communicatively coupled (i.e., a first quantum communication channel (QCC)) to the QCD computing device 16, see par [0028] and After performing the superdense coding, the QCD computing device 16 (i.e., the first QD) sends the one or more first qubits 18(0)-18(Q) to the QCD computing device 22 (i.e. the second QD) where sequential qubit mapping occurs based on the first q bits and compressed file 24 is stored see par [0031], then QCD computing receives a request from the computing device 14 for the superdense- encoded compressed file 24’ stored by QCD computing device 22 (i.e. the second QD). When the request happens, the compressed file 24’ is decoded and sent to the computing device 14 (i.e., the first CD) by the QCD computing device 22 (i.e., Second QD) to the computing device 14 via the communications network 12 (i.e., a classical communication network), see par [0032], see fig 1, 2B An operator also be able to enter one or more configuration commands through a keyboard (not illustrated), The quantum computing device 300 can also include a communications interface 314 suitable for communicating with other computing devices, including, in some implementations, classical computing devices, (i.e. multiple computing devices, (i.e., the second CD)), [0066]) [Examiner interprets quantum encoded compressed file have less cardinality of the first set of bits than the first cardinality of the first set of bits since quantum communication protocol known as “superdense encoding,” which allows two classical bits of information to be transmitted from a sender to a recipient by sending only one qubit from the sender to the recipient… entangled qubits to decode the two classical bits of information, see Griffin par [0025] and decoded compressed file 24’ as classical encoding of the content, see 112(b) rejection above);
Although Griffin teaches method of encoding content as disclosed above, Griffin does not explicitly teach updating content using patching protocol.
However, Ikram teaches:
updating content using patching protocol (Ikram, A security system generates updated policy file (i.e., patch file) when rule changes and it is transmitted to the security service which verifies policies stored locally correspond to a current version periodically, upon an event notification, or upon another event., see par [0050]) [ In light of specification Examiner interprets that updated policy file as an update for the content that is created using patching protocol].
Therefore, it would have been obvious to PHOSITA before the effective filing date to modify the teaching of Griffin to include the concept of including the update for the content that uses patching protocol as taught by Ikram for the purpose of evaluating the collected information against the policy rules to determine whether the event is authorized to be performed, [Ikram:0085].
Griffin and Ikram does not explicitly teach:
a computing device (CD) of a secure side system, the secured-side system comprising the first CD and a first quantum computing device (QD), wherein the secured-side system lacks a classical communication network that is operable to communicate with devices external to the secured-side system, and wherein the secured-side system is operable to communicate with a device that is external to the secured-side system via a quantum communication channel; of an open-side system of the content distribution system, wherein the secured-side system is communicatively coupled only to the open-side system, and wherein the open-side system comprising the second CD is communicatively coupled to a client device over a classical communication network
However, Smith teaches:
the secured-side system comprising the first CD and a first quantum computing device (QD), wherein the secured-side system lacks a classical communication network that is operable to communicate with devices external to the secured-side system, and wherein the secured-side system is operable to communicate with a device that is external to the secured-side system via a quantum communication channel (Smith, Each of the communication devices 12 may be a sending device 14 (i.e., the first CD) and/or a receiving device 16 (i.e., first QD) (e.g., may be configured to send classical bits or receive classical bits) Each of the communication devices 12 include qubits 70 that are entangled with qubits 70 of one of the other communication device(s) 12. The entanglement of the qubits 70 is utilized to transmit a digital message of classical bits between the communication devices 12. The message may be transmitted without any corresponding classical communication. Additionally, or alternatively, the communication devices 12 (i.e., the first QD and first CD) may not be connected by any sort of classical communication channel (cable, radio link, free-space laser link, conveyance, transporter, etc.) and/or may not include any classical communication transmitter configured to communicate with other communication devices 12 (i.e., external device) [0016]) [Examiner interpret that communication devices 12 (i.e., the first QD and first CD) do not have any sort of classical communication channel (cable, radio link, free-space laser link, conveyance, transporter, etc.) with other communication devices 12 (i.e., external device) and only communication through quantum channel using qubits as limitation above, see 112(b) rejection above ].
Therefore, it would have been obvious to PHOSITA before the effective filing date to modify the teaching of Griffin and Ikram to include the concept of including a) the secured-side system comprising the first CD and a first quantum computing device (QD), wherein the secured-side system lacks a classical communication network that is operable to communicate with devices external to the secured-side system, and wherein the secured-side system is operable to communicate with a device that is external to the secured-side system via a quantum communication channel as taught by Smith for the purpose of transmitting the message without any corresponding classical communication and showing the communication devices 12 communicating without connecting with any sort of classical communication channel (cable, radio link, free-space laser link, conveyance, transporter, etc.) with other communication devices 12 (i.e., external device) [Smith:0016].
Regarding claim 3, Griffin, Ikram in combination with Smith further teaches the method of claim 1, wherein generating the QM encoding of the content comprises:
preparing, by the first QD, the quantum states of the first set of qubits based on the superdense coding protocol and the first set of qubits such that the quantum states of the first set of qubits store the QM encoding (Griffin, The QCD computing device 16 (i.e. the first QD) maintains a set of one or more first qubits 18(0)-18(Q), which are in a state of entanglement with a set of one or more second qubits 20(0)-20(Q) that are maintained by a QCD computing device 22 (i.e., second quantum computing device) communicatively coupled (i.e., a first quantum communication channel (QCC)) to the QCD computing device 16, see par [0028] and After performing the superdense coding, the QCD computing device 16 (i.e., the first QD) sends the one or more first qubits 18(0)-18(Q) to the QCD computing device 22 (i.e. the second QD) where sequential qubit mapping occurs based on the first q bits and compressed file 24 is stored see par [0031], then QCD computing receives a request from the computing device 14 for the superdense- encoded compressed file 24’ stored by QCD computing device 22. When the request happens, the compressed file 24’ is decoded and sent to the computing device 14 (i.e., the first CD) via communication network, see par [0032], see fig 1, 2B) [In light of specification, Examiner interprets that the first QCD being communicatively coupled to the second QCD as a first QCC, see at specification “one or more QCCs, that communicatively couple the distributor to one or more clients, via quantum-means”, at [0020] see 112(b) rejection above].
In addition, Ikram teaches the updating the content which is supported by the same rationale as claim 1 above.
Regarding claim 4, Griffin, Ikram in combination with Smith further teaches the method of claim 1, wherein causing the transmission of the classical encoding of the content to the second CD comprises:
transmitting, over at least QCC, the first set of qubits from the first QD to the second QD, wherein the first QD prepared the quantum states of the first set of qubits and the second QD is enabled to cause the transmission of the classical encoding of the update to the second CD (Griffin, The QCD computing device 16 (i.e. first QD) maintains a set of one or more first qubits 18(0)-18(Q), which are in a state of entanglement with a set of one or more second qubits 20(0)-20(Q) that are maintained by a QCD computing device 22 (i.e., second QD) communicatively coupled (i.e., a first quantum communication channel (QCC)) to the QCD computing device 16, see par [0028] and After performing the superdense coding, the QCD computing device 16 (i.e., the first QD) sends the one or more first qubits 18(0)-18(Q) to the QCD computing device 22 (i.e. the second QD) where sequential qubit mapping occurs based on the first q bits and compressed file 24 is stored see par [0031], then QCD computing receives a request from the computing device 14 for the superdense- encoded compressed file 24’ stored by QCD computing device 22. When the request happens, the compressed file 24’ is decoded and sent to the computing device 14 (i.e., the second CD) via communication network, see par [0032], see fig 1, 2B An operator also be able to enter one or more configuration commands through a keyboard (not illustrated), The quantum computing device 300 can also include a communications interface 314 suitable for communicating with other computing devices, including, in some implementations, classical computing devices, (i.e. multiple computing devices, (i.e., the second CD)), [0066])) [ In light of specification, Examiner interprets that the first QCD being communicatively coupled to the second QCD as a first QCC, see at specification “one or more QCCs, that communicatively couple the distributor to one or more clients, via quantum-means”, at [0020] and first QD receiving compressed file from first CD transmitting to second QD then transmitting the compressed file (i.e. the content) to the first CD or other classical computing devices (i.e. the second CD) based on the configuration as transmitting, over at least QCC, the first set of qubits from the first QD to the second QD, wherein the first QD prepared the quantum states of the first set of qubits and the second QD is enabled to cause the transmission of the classical encoding of the update to the second CD, see 112(b) rejection above].
In addition, Ikram teaches the updating the content which is supported by the same rationale as claim 1 above.
Regarding claim 5, Griffin, Ikram in combination with Smith further teaches the method of claim 4, wherein a first party operates the first QD, the first CD, the second QD, and the second CD (Griffin, After performing the superdense coding, the QCD computing device 16 (i.e., the first QD) sends to the QCD computing device 22 (i.e. the second QD) where sequential qubit mapping occurs based on the first q bits and compressed file 24 is stored see par [0031], then QCD computing receives a request from the computing device 14 for the superdense- encoded compressed file 24’ stored by QCD computing device 22. When the request happens, the compressed file 24’ is decoded and sent to the computing device 14 (i.e., the first CD) via communication network (i.e., a classical communication network), see par [0032], see fig 1, 2B An operator also be able to enter one or more configuration commands through a keyboard (not illustrated), The quantum computing device 300 can also include a communications interface 314 suitable for communicating with other computing devices, including, in some implementations, classical computing devices, (i.e. multiple computing devices, (i.e., the second CD)), [0066]) [Examiner interprets that the first QD receives compressed file from first CD and the second QD transmit the compressed file to the first CD or other classical computing devices (i.e. the second CD) based on the configuration as a first party operates the first QD, the first CD, the second QD, and the second CD].
Regarding claim 7, Griffin, Ikram in combination with Smith further teaches the method of claim 5 wherein causing the transmission of the classical encoding of the content to the second CD further comprises
generating, by the first QD and based on the superdense coding protocol, the QM encoding of the content by registering the first set of qubits (Griffin, A first QCD computing device (i.e., the first QD) receives a conventionally compressed file (i.e., a classical encoding of a content) that was compressed by a computing device (i.e., a classical computing device). The first QCD computing device performs superdense encoding of the compressed file using one or more first qubits (i.e., first set of bits with first cardinality), see par [0002], fig 1, 2A and fig 6) [In light of specification, examiner interprets that First QD performing superdense encoding of the compressed file using one or more first qubits (i.e., first set of bits with first cardinality) from classical computer as generating, by the first QD and based on the superdense coding protocol, the QM encoding of the content by registering the first set of qubits, see 112(b) rejection above];
wherein the method further comprises transmitting, the classical encoding of the content from the first QD to a third CD of a client system via the second QD by the QM encoding of the update (Griffin, After performing the superdense coding, the QCD computing device 16 (i.e., the first QD) sends to the QCD computing device 22 (i.e. the second QD) where sequential qubit mapping occurs based on the first q bits and compressed file 24 is stored see par [0031], then QCD computing receives a request from the computing device 14 for the superdense- encoded compressed file 24’ stored by QCD computing device 22. When the request happens, the compressed file 24’ is decoded and sent to the computing device 14 (i.e., the first CD) via communication network (i.e., a classical communication network), see par [0032], see fig 1, 2B An operator also be able to enter one or more configuration commands through a keyboard (not illustrated), The quantum computing device 300 can also include a communications interface 314 suitable for communicating with other computing devices, including, in some implementations, classical computing devices, (i.e. multiple computing devices, (i.e., the second CD)), [0066]) [Examiner interprets that the first QD receives compressed file from first CD and the second QD transmit the compressed file to the first CD or other classical computing devices (i.e. the third CD) based on the configuration as a transmitting, the classical encoding of the content from the first QD to a third CD of a client system via the second QD by the QM encoding of the update, see 112(b) rejection above, see 112(b) rejection above ].
wherein the content is stored on the third CD, as input, the classical encoding of the content (Griffin, QCD computing receives a request from the computing device 14 (i.e., the third CD) for the superdense- encoded compressed file 24’ stored by QCD computing device 22. When the request happens, the compressed file 24’ is decoded and sent to the computing device 14 (i.e., the third CD) via communication network (i.e., a classical communication network), see par [0032], see fig 1, 2B An operator also be able to enter one or more configuration commands through a keyboard (not illustrated), The quantum computing device 300 can also include a communications interface 314 suitable for communicating with other computing devices, including, in some implementations, classical computing devices, (i.e. multiple computing devices, (i.e., the third CD)), [0066]) [Examiner interprets that the second QD transmitting the decoded compressed file (i.e. the content) the compressed file to the first CD or other classical computing devices (i.e. the third CD) based on the configuration as the content is stored on the third CD, as input, the classical encoding of the content].
wherein the second QD is coupled to a third QD of the client system via a second QCC, the third QD is communicatively coupled to the third CD via the classical communication network, and the first QD is isolated from the classical communication network and the third CD such that a communicative coupling between the first QD and the third CD is enabled only by the second QD, and further such that the communicative coupling between the first QD and the third CD requires at least one of the first QCC and the second QCC QD and the first CD requires at least one of the first QCC and the second QCC, (Griffin, The QCD computing device 16 (i.e. the second QD) maintains a set of one or more first qubits 18(0)-18(Q), which are in a state of entanglement with a set of one or more second qubits 20(0)-20(Q) that are maintained by a QCD computing device 22 (i.e., third quantum computing device) communicatively coupled (i.e., a second quantum communication channel (QCC)) to the QCD computing device 16 (i.e. second QD), see par [0028] and After performing the superdense coding, the QCD computing device 16 (i.e., the second QD) sends the one or more first qubits 18(0)-18(Q) to the QCD computing device 22 (i.e. the third QD) where sequential qubit mapping occurs based on the first q bits and compressed file 24 is stored see par [0031], then QCD computing receives a request from the computing device 14 (i.e. a third CD) for the superdense- encoded compressed file 24’ stored by QCD computing device 22. When the request happens, the compressed file 24’ is decoded and sent to the computing device 14 (i.e., the third CD) via communication network, see par [0032], see fig 1, 2B. the QCD computing device 16 (i.e., second QD) is communicatively coupled (i.e., the second QCC) to multiple QCD computing devices 22 (i.e., the third QD) by maintaining sets of entangled q bits. The QCD computing device 16 uses the q bit router 32 to manage and map these q bits e.g., 34(0)-34(M) to their corresponding entangled q bits in other devices. The device can perform superdense encoding by transforming the state of its q bits to efficiently transmit information to the other QCDs through these entangled q bits, see par [0030] An operator also be able to enter one or more configuration commands through a keyboard (not illustrated), The quantum computing device 300 can also include a communications interface 314 suitable for communicating with other computing devices, including, in some implementations, classical computing devices, (i.e. multiple computing devices, (i.e., the third CD)), [0066])) [In light of specification, examiner interprets that the quantum computing device 16 can be the second QD transmitting q bits to multiple QCD (i.e., the third QD) and quantum device communicating to multiple classical computing devices (i.e. the third CD) as the "first executing quantum service" and "second executing quantum service," and does not imply a priority, a type, an importance, or other attribute, see at specification at par [0013], see 112(b) rejection above].
Ikram teaches:
wherein the third CD is enabled to update the content by employing a patching protocol that receives (Ikram, A security system generates updated policy file (i.e., patch file) when rule changes and it is transmitted to the security service which verifies policies stored locally correspond to a current version periodically, upon an event notification, or upon another event., see par [0050]) [ In light of specification Examiner interprets that updated policy file as an update for the content that is created using patching protocol].
In addition, Ikram teaches the updating the content which is supported by the same rationale as claim 1 above.
Regarding claim 8, Griffin, Ikram in combination with Smith further teaches the method of claim 7, wherein transmitting classical encoding of the content to the third CD further comprises: transmitting, over the second QCC, the first set of qubits from the second QD to the third QD (Griffin, the QCD computing device 16 (i.e., second QD) is communicatively coupled (i.e., the second QCC) to multiple QCD computing devices 22 (i.e., the third QD) by maintaining sets of entangled q bits. The QCD computing device 16 uses the q bit router 32 to manage and map these q bits e.g., 34(0)-34(M) to their corresponding entangled q bits in other devices. The device can perform superdense encoding by transforming the state of its q bits to efficiently transmit information to the other QCDs through these entangled q bits, see par [0030] An operator also be able to enter one or more configuration commands through a keyboard (not illustrated), The quantum computing device 300 can also include a communications interface 314 suitable for communicating with other computing devices, including, in some implementations, classical computing devices, (i.e. multiple computing devices, (i.e., the third CD)), [0066]) [ In light of specification, examiner interprets that the computing device 16 can be the second QD transmitting q bits to multiple QCD (i.e., the third QD) and quantum device communicating to multiple classical computing devices (i.e. the third CD) as the "first executing quantum service" and "second executing quantum service," and does not imply a priority, a type, an importance, or other attribute, see at specification at par [0013]].
In addition, Ikram teaches the updating the content which is supported by the same rationale as claim 1 above.
Regarding claim 9, Griffin, Ikram in combination with Smith further teaches The method of claim 7, wherein transmitting the classical encoding of the content to the third CD further comprises:
preparing, by the second QD, quantum states of a second set of qubits such that the second set of qubits stores the QM encoding of the content; and transmitting, over the second QCC, the second set of qubits from the second QD to the third QD (Griffin, the QCD computing device 16 (i.e., second QD) is communicatively coupled (i.e., the second QCC) to multiple QCD computing devices 22 (i.e., the third QD) by maintaining sets of entangled q bits. The QCD computing device 16 uses the q bit router 32 to manage and map these q bits e.g., 34(0)-34(M) to their corresponding entangled q bits in other devices. The device can perform superdense encoding by transforming the state of its q bits to efficiently transmit information to the other QCDs through these entangled q bits, see par [0030] An operator also be able to enter one or more configuration commands through a keyboard (not illustrated), The quantum computing device 300 can also include a communications interface 314 suitable for communicating with other computing devices, including, in some implementations, classical computing devices, (i.e. multiple computing devices, (i.e., the third CD)), [0066]) [In light of specification, examiner interprets that the computing device 16 can be the second QD transmitting q bits to multiple QCD (i.e., the third QD) and quantum device communicating to multiple classical computing devices (i.e. the third CD) as the "first executing quantum service" and "second executing quantum service," and does not imply a priority, a type, an importance, or other attribute, see at specification at par [0013] see 112(b) rejection above].
In addition, Ikram teaches the updating the content which is supported by the same rationale as claim 1 above.
Regarding claim 10, Griffin, Ikram in combination with Smith further teaches the method of claim 7, wherein the content includes at least one of
Ikram further teaches:
an executable application installed on the third CD or an operating system (OS) installed on the third CD (Ikram, The rules 221 can include one or more policy files associated with various computing devices and user accounts, see par [0050] and , the one or more electronic computing devices 206 may include desktop or laptop computers, mobile computing devices such as smartphones and tablets, servers, or generally any computing device that runs an operating system, see par [0052]) [ Examiner interprets that being policy files are associated to computing devices as being associated with the files or the content that are associated with the applications that runs on the system].
the update for the content includes a security patch for the content (Ikram, A security system generates updated policy file (i.e., security patch file) when rule changes and it is transmitted to the security service which verifies policies stored locally correspond to a current version periodically, upon an event notification, or upon another event., see par [0050]) [Examiner interprets that updated policy file as an update for the content which includes security patch file].
In addition, Ikram teaches the update for the content includes a security patch for the content which is supported by the same rationale as claim 1 above.
Regarding claim 11, Griffin, Ikram in combination with Smith further teaches the method of claim 1, wherein the second cardinality is one-half the first cardinality (Griffin, A first QCD computing device receives a compressed file (i.e., content) that was compressed using a conventional compression format by a computing device (i.e., a classical computing device). The first QCD computing device performs superdense encoding of the compressed file using one or more first qubits (i.e., first set of bits with first cardinality), see par [0002], fig 1, 2A and fig 6 and the first qubit(s) used in the superdense encoding of the compressed file may be stored by the second QCD computing device using half of the additional storage space that would be required to store the compressed file, see par[0027]) ) [Examiner interprets quantum encoded compressed file have one- half cardinality of the first set of bits (i.e. second cardinality) than the first cardinality of the first set of bits since quantum communication protocol known as “superdense encoding,” which allows two classical bits of information to be transmitted from a sender to a recipient by sending only one qubit from the sender to the recipient… entangled qubits to decode the two classical bits of information, see Griffin par [0025] as well as superdense encoded compressed file uses the half of the storage space than the just compressed file further explains the second cardinality is one-half the first cardinality].
Regarding claim 21, Griffin, Ikram in combination with Smith further teaches the method of claim 7, wherein a second party operates the third QD and the third CD (Griffin, The QCD computing device 16 (i.e., second QD) is communicatively coupled (i.e., the second QCC) to multiple QCD computing devices 22 (i.e., the third QD) by maintaining sets of entangled q bits. The QCD computing device 16 uses the q bit router 32 to manage and map these q bits e.g., 34(0)-34(M) to their corresponding entangled q bits in other devices. The device can perform superdense encoding by transforming the state of its q bits to efficiently transmit information to the other QCDs through these entangled q bits, see par [0030] An operator also be able to enter one or more configuration commands through a keyboard (not illustrated), The quantum computing device 300 can also include a communications interface 314 suitable for communicating with other computing devices, including, in some implementations, classical computing devices, (i.e. multiple computing devices, (i.e., the third CD)), [0066])) [In light of specification, examiner interprets that the quantum computing device 16 can be the second QD transmitting q bits to multiple QCD (i.e., the third QD) and quantum device communicating to multiple classical computing devices (i.e. the third CD) as mentioned in specification the "first executing quantum service" and "second executing quantum service," and does not imply a priority, a type, an importance, or other attribute, see at specification at par [0013] as a second party operates the third QD and the third CD].
Regarding claim 12, Griffin teaches a method for updating content, comprising:
generating, by a first classical computing device (CD) of a secure side system a content distribution system, the content (Griffin, FIG. 1, the computing device 14 is a classical computing device, while the QCD computing device 16 is a quantum computing device, [0028] The computing device 14 of the computing system 10 of FIG. 1 generates a compressed file 24 (i.e. the content) by compressing data (not shown) using one or more conventional compression formats such as 7Z, TAR.BZ2, TAR.GZ, RAR, or ZIP formats,[0029]);
receiving, by a second (QD) of the content distribution system, a quantum-mechanical (QM) encoding of the content from the first CD, wherein the QM encoding is stored in quantum states of a first set of qubits that has a first cardinality (Griffin, The QCD computing device 22 (i.e., a second quantum computing device (QD)), receives the quantum encoded compressed file 24 (i.e., a quantum- mechanical (QM) encoding of content) by maintaining a set of one or more first qubits 18(0)-18(Q), which are in a state of entanglement with a set of one or more second qubits 20(0)-20(Q) (i.e., a first set of qubits that has a first cardinality) from QCD computing device 16 and the compressed file was originally received from Classical computing device (i.e., the first CD) by the QCD computing device 16, see par [0028]) [In light of specification, examiner interprets that compressed file from classical computer as classically encoded content since classical means (non-quantum) bits, see specification of instant application par [0014] and it is well known that compressed files are encoded]; and
in response to receiving the QM encoding of the content from the first QD, causing, by the second QD, a transmission of a classical encoding of the update to a second CD communicatively coupled with a classical communication network, wherein the transmission of the classical encoding includes transmitting a first set of bits that has a second cardinality that is greater than the first cardinality of the first set of qubits, wherein the first set of bits store the classical encoding of the update for the content, and the classical encoding of the update was generated based on a superdense coding protocol and the QM encoding (Griffin, After performing the superdense coding, The QCD computing device 22 (i.e., a first quantum computing device (QD)), receives the quantum encoded compressed file 24 (i.e., a quantum- mechanical (QM) encoding of content which is first set of q bits) by communicatively coupled (i.e., a first quantum communication channel (QCC)) to the QCD computing device 16, see par [0028]) then, the QCD computing device 22 receives a request from the computing device 14 for the superdense- encoded compressed file 24’ stored in QCD computing device 22. When the request happens, the compressed file 24’ is decoded (i.e., first set of bits that has a second cardinality) and sent to the computing device 14 (i.e., the first CD) via communication network, see par [0032], see fig 1, 2B and the first qubit(s) used in the superdense encoding of the compressed file may be stored by the second QCD computing device using half of the additional storage space that would be required to store the compressed file, see par [0027])) [Examiner interprets classically encoded compressed file 24’ has greater cardinality than the received quantum encoded compressed file with first set of q bits since quantum communication protocol known as “superdense encoding,” which allows two classical bits of information to be transmitted from a sender to a recipient by sending only one qubit from the sender to the recipient… entangled qubits to decode the two classical bits of information, see Griffin par [0025] as well as receiving superdense quantum encoded file and decoding into classically encoded file as classical encoding of the content was generated based on a superdense coding protocol and the QM encoding].
Although Griffin teaches method of encoding content as disclosed above, Griffin does not explicitly teach updating content using patching protocol.
However, Ikram teaches:
The method of updating content using patching protocol (Ikram, A security system generates updated policy file (i.e., patch file) when rule changes and it is transmitted to the security service which verifies policies stored locally correspond to a current version periodically, upon an event notification, or upon another event., see par [0050]) [ In light of specification Examiner interprets that updated policy file as an update for the content that is created using patching protocol].
Therefore, it would have been obvious to PHOSITA before the effective filing date to modify the teaching of Griffin to include the concept of including the update for the content that uses patching protocol as taught by Ikram for the purpose of evaluating the collected information against the policy rules to determine whether the event is authorized to be performed, [Ikram:0085].
Griffin and Ikram does not explicitly teach:
the secured-side system comprising the first CD and a first quantum computing device (QD), wherein the secured-side system lacks a classical communication network that is operable to communicate with devices external to the secured-side system and wherein the secured-side system is operable to communicate with a device that is external to the secured-side system via a quantum communication channel; an open-side system of the content distribution system, wherein the secured-side system is communicatively coupled only to the open-side system, and wherein the open-side system is communicatively coupled to clients of the content distribution system
However, Smith teaches:
the secured-side system comprising the first CD and a first quantum computing device (QD), wherein the secured-side system lacks a classical communication network that is operable to communicate with devices external to the secured-side system and wherein the secured-side system is operable to communicate with a device that is external to the secured-side system via a quantum communication channel; an open-side system of the content distribution system, wherein the secured-side system is communicatively coupled only to the open-side system, and wherein the open-side system is communicatively coupled to clients of the content distribution system (Smith, Each of the communication devices 12 may be a sending device 14 (i.e., the first CD) and/or a receiving device 16 (i.e., first QD) (e.g., may be configured to send classical bits or receive classical bits) Each of the communication devices 12 include qubits 70 that are entangled with qubits 70 of one of the other communication device(s) 12. The entanglement of the qubits 70 is utilized to transmit a digital message of classical bits between the communication devices 12. The message may be transmitted without any corresponding classical communication. Additionally, or alternatively, the communication devices 12 (i.e., the first QD and first CD) may not be connected by any sort of classical communication channel (cable, radio link, free-space laser link, conveyance, transporter, etc.) and/or may not include any classical communication transmitter configured to communicate with other communication devices 12 (i.e., external device) [0016]) [Examiner interpret that communication devices 12 (i.e., the first QD and first CD) do not have any sort of classical communication channel (cable, radio link, free-space laser link, conveyance, transporter, etc.) with other communication devices 12 (i.e., external device) and only communication through quantum channel using qubits as limitation above, see 112(b) rejection above].
Therefore, it would have been obvious to PHOSITA before the effective filing date to modify the teaching of Griffin and Ikram to include the concept of including the secured-side system comprising the first CD and a first quantum computing device (QD), wherein the secured-side system lacks a classical communication network that is operable to communicate with devices external to the secured-side system and wherein the secured-side system is operable to communicate with a device that is external to the secured-side system via a quantum communication channel; an open-side system of the content distribution system, wherein the secured-side system is communicatively coupled only to the open-side system, and wherein the open-side system is communicatively coupled to clients of the content distribution system as taught by Smith for the purpose of transmitting the message without any corresponding classical communication and showing the communication devices 12 communicating without connecting with any sort of classical communication channel (cable, radio link, free-space laser link, conveyance, transporter, etc.) with other communication devices 12 (i.e., external device) [Smith:0016].
Regarding claim 13, Griffin, Ikram in combination with Smith further teaches the method of claim 12, further comprising: generating, by the first QD, the first set of qubits based on the superdense coding protocol and the QM encoding stored in the first set of qubits by preparing quantum states of the first set of qubits based on the superdense coding protocol such that the quantum states of the first set of qubits store the QM encoding of the update (Griffin, the QCD computing device 22 (i.e., the first QD) receives a request from the computing device 14 for the superdense- encoded compressed file 24’ stored in QCD computing device 22. When the request happens, the compressed file 24’ is decoded (i.e., first set of bits that has a second cardinality) and sent to the computing device 14 (i.e., the first CD) via communication network, see par [0032], see fig 1, 2B and the first qubit(s) used in the superdense encoding of the compressed file may be stored by the second QCD computing device using half of the additional storage space that would be required to store the compressed file, see par [0027])) [Examiner interprets that receiving superdense quantum encoded file and decoding into classically encoded file as limitation above, see 112(b) rejection above].
In addition, Ikram teaches updating the content which is supported by the same rationale as claim 12 above.
Regarding claim 14, Griffin, Ikram in combination with Smith further teaches The method of claim 13, wherein causing the transmission of the classical encoding of the content to the second CD comprises: generating the classical encoding of the update, wherein generating the classical encoding of the content comprises:
receiving, by the second QD, the first set of qubits from a first quantum communication channel (QCC) (Griffin, The QCD computing device 22 (i.e., a second quantum computing device (QD)), receives the quantum encoded compressed file 24 (i.e., a quantum- mechanical (QM) encoding of content which is first set of q bits) by communicatively coupled (i.e., a first quantum communication channel (QCC)) to the QCD computing device 16, see par [0028])
measuring, by the second QD, the quantum states of the first set of qubits based on the superdense coding protocol; and preparing the first set of bits based on results from measuring the quantum states of the first set of qubits such that the first set of qubits store the classical encoding of the content (Griffin, After performing the superdense coding, the QCD computing device 16 sends the one or more first qubits 18(0)-18(Q) to the QCD computing device 22 (i.e., the second QD) where sequential qubit mapping occurs based on the first q bits and compressed file 24 is stored see par [0031], then the QCD computing device 22 receives a request from the computing device 14 for the superdense- encoded compressed file 24’ stored in QCD computing device 22. When the request happens, the compressed file 24’ is decoded and sent to the computing device 14 (i.e., the first CD) via communication network, see par [0032], see fig 1, 2B) [ Examiner interprets that performing sequential mapping on q bits and storing them and using them to decode into classical bits when requested by classical computing device as measuring and preparing the first set of bits that stores the classical encoding of the content].
In addition, Ikram teaches updating the content which is supported by the same rationale as claim 12 above.
Regarding claim 16, Griffin, Ikram in combination with Smith further teaches the method of claim 12, wherein a first party operates both the first CD and the first QD, a second party operates both the second QD and the second CD, and the classical communication network communicatively couples the second QD and the second CD (Griffin, After performing the superdense coding, the QCD computing device 22 (i.e., the second QD) receives a set of first q bits from the QCD computing device 16 (i.e., the first QD) and the QCD computing device 22 (i.e., the second QD) performs sequential qubit mapping based on the first q bits and compressed file 24 is stored see par [0031], then QCD computing receives a request from the computing device 14 for the superdense- encoded compressed file 24’ stored by QCD computing device 22. When the request happens, the compressed file 24’ is decoded and sent to the computing device 14 (i.e., the first CD) via communication network (i.e., a classical communication network), see par [0032], see fig 1, 2B An operator also be able to enter one or more configuration commands through a keyboard (not illustrated), The quantum computing device 300 can also include a communications interface 314 suitable for communicating with other computing devices, including, in some implementations, classical computing devices, (i.e. multiple computing devices, (i.e., the second CD)), [0066])) [Examiner interprets the computing device 14 (i.e. the first CD) sending classical compressed file to QCD computing device 16 (i.e., the first QD) as a first party and sending quantum compressed file to the QCD computing device 22 (i.e., the second QD) as a first party and the QCD computing device 22 (i.e., the second QD) transmit the decoded compressed file to the computing device 14 (i.e., second CD) through the communication network (i.e. classical communication network) as a second party].
Regarding claim 17, Griffin, Ikram in combination with Smith further teaches the method of claim 16, wherein the first QD is isolated from the classical communication network (Smith, Each of the communication devices 12 may be a sending device 14 (i.e., the first CD) and/or a receiving device 16 (i.e., first QD) (e.g., may be configured to send classical bits or receive classical bits) Each of the communication devices 12 include qubits 70 that are entangled with qubits 70 of one of the other communication device(s) 12. The entanglement of the qubits 70 is utilized to transmit a digital message of classical bits between the communication devices 12. The message may be transmitted without any corresponding classical communication. Additionally, or alternatively, the communication devices 12 (i.e., the first QD and first CD) may not be connected by any sort of classical communication channel (cable, radio link, free-space laser link, conveyance, transporter, etc.) and/or may not include any classical communication transmitter configured to communicate with other communication devices 12 (i.e., external device) [0016]) [Examiner interpret that communication devices 12 (i.e., the first QD and first CD) do not have any sort of classical communication channel (cable, radio link, free-space laser link, conveyance, transporter, etc.) with other communication devices 12 (i.e., external device) and only communication through quantum channel using qubits as the first QD is isolated from the classical communication network]
Therefore, it would have been obvious to PHOSITA before the effective filing date to modify the teaching of Griffin and Ikram to include the concept of including the first QD is isolated from the classical communication network as taught by Smith for the purpose of transmitting the message without any corresponding classical communication and showing the communication devices 12 communicating without connecting with any sort of classical communication channel (cable, radio link, free-space laser link, conveyance, transporter, etc.) with other communication devices 12 (i.e., external device) [Smith:0016].
Regarding claim 18, Griffin, Ikram in combination with Smith further teaches the method of claim 12, wherein the content is stored on the second CD, as input, the classical encoding of the content (Griffin, QCD computing receives a request from the computing device 14 (i.e., the second CD) for the superdense- encoded compressed file 24’ stored by QCD computing device 22. When the request happens, the compressed file 24’ is decoded and sent to the computing device 14 (i.e., the second CD) via communication network (i.e., a classical communication network), see par [0032], see fig 1, 2B An operator also be able to enter one or more configuration commands through a keyboard (not illustrated), The quantum computing device 300 can also include a communications interface 314 suitable for communicating with other computing devices, including, in some implementations, classical computing devices, (i.e. multiple computing devices, (i.e., the second CD)), [0066]) [Examiner interprets that the second QD transmitting the decoded compressed file (i.e. the content) the compressed file to the first CD or other classical computing devices (i.e. the second CD) based on the configuration as the content is stored on the third CD, as input, the classical encoding of the content].
Griffin does not explicitly teach:
the second CD is enabled to update the content by employing a patching protocol that receives, and wherein the content includes at least one of an executable application installed on the first CD or an operating system (OS) installed on the first CD, and the update for the content includes a security patch for the content.
However, Ikram teaches:
wherein the second CD is enabled to update the content by employing a patching protocol that receives (Ikram, A security system generates updated policy file (i.e., patch file) when rule changes and it is transmitted to the security service which verifies policies stored locally correspond to a current version periodically, upon an event notification, or upon another event., see par [0050]) [ In light of specification Examiner interprets that updated policy file as an update for the content that is created using patching protocol].
the content includes at least one of an executable application installed on the first CD or an operating system (OS) installed on the first CD (Ikram, The rules 221 can include one or more policy files associated with various computing devices and user accounts, see par [0050] and , the one or more electronic computing devices 206 may include desktop or laptop computers, mobile computing devices such as smartphones and tablets, servers, or generally any computing device that runs an operating system, see par [0052]) [ Examiner interprets that being policy files are associated to computing devices as being associated with the files or the content that are associated with the applications that runs on the system].
the update for the content includes a security patch for the content (Ikram, A security system generates updated policy file (i.e., security patch file) when rule changes and it is transmitted to the security service which verifies policies stored locally correspond to a current version periodically, upon an event notification, or upon another event., see par [0050]) [Examiner interprets that updated policy file as an update for the content which includes security patch file].
In addition, Ikram teaches the updating the content which is supported by the same rationale as claim 1 above.
Regarding claim 19, Griffin, Ikram in combination with Smith further teaches the method of claim 12, wherein the second cardinality is twice the first cardinality (Griffin, A first QCD computing device receives a compressed file (i.e., classical encoding of a content) that was compressed using a conventional compression format by a computing device (i.e., a classical computing device). The first QCD computing device performs superdense encoding of the compressed file using one or more first qubits (i.e., first set of bits with first cardinality), see par [0002], fig 1, 2A and fig 6 and the first qubit(s) used in the superdense encoding of the compressed file may be stored by the second QCD computing device using half of the additional storage space that would be required to store the compressed file, see par[0027]) ) [Examiner interprets quantum encoded compressed file have less cardinality of the first set of bits than the first cardinality of the first set of bits since quantum communication protocol known as “superdense encoding,” which allows two classical bits of information to be transmitted from a sender to a recipient by sending only one qubit from the sender to the recipient… entangled qubits to decode the two classical bits of information, see Griffin par [0025]].
Regarding claim 20, Griffin teaches a first quantum computing device, comprising:
a first set of qubits that has a second cardinality (Griffin, The first QCD computing device performing superdense encoding of the compressed file using one or more first qubits (i.e., first set of bits with first cardinality), see par [0002], fig 1, 2A and fig 6, and the first qubit(s) used in the superdense encoding of the compressed file may be stored by the second QCD computing device using half of the additional storage space that would be required to store the compressed file (i.e., a first set of qubits that has a second cardinality), see par[0027]) ) [Examiner interprets quantum encoded compressed file have less cardinality of the first set of bits than the first cardinality as a first set of qubits that has a second cardinality since quantum communication protocol known as “superdense encoding,” which allows two classical bits of information to be transmitted from a sender to a recipient by sending only one qubit from the sender to the recipient… entangled qubits to decode the two classical bits of information, see Griffin par [0025]];
a system memory and a processor device communicatively coupled to the system memory, the processor device to: (Griffin, the QCD computing device 154 includes a system memory 156 communicatively coupled to a quantum processor device 158, see par [0047] and fig 7); and
receive, by the first quantum computing device, a classical encoding of an update for a content from a second quantum computing device (QD) over a first quantum communication channel (QCC), the content authored at a first classical computing device (CD), wherein the classical encoding is stored in a first set of bits that has a first cardinality that is greater than the second cardinality of the first set of qubits and the content is stored on a second CD that is enabled to update the content by employing a patching protocol that receives, as input, the classical encoding of the update, wherein the second CD is communicatively coupled with a classical communication network (Griffin, The QCD computing device 16 (i.e., the first QD) maintains a set of one or more first qubits 18(0)-18(Q), which are in a state of entanglement with a set of one or more second qubits 20(0)-20(Q) that are maintained by a QCD computing device 22 (i.e., second quantum computing device) communicatively coupled (i.e., a first quantum communication channel (QCC)) to the QCD computing device 16, see par [0028] and After performing the superdense coding, the QCD computing device 16 (i.e., the first QD) sends the one or more first qubits 18(0)-18(Q) to the QCD computing device 22 (i.e. the secthe second QD) where sequential qubit mapping occurs based on the first q bits and compressed file 24 is stored see par [0031], then QCD computing receives a request from the computing device 14 (i.e. ond CD) for the superdense- encoded compressed file 24’ stored by QCD computing device 22 (i.e. the second QD). When the request happens, the compressed file 24’ is decoded and sent to the computing device 14 (i.e., the second CD) by the QCD computing device 22 (i.e., Second QD) to the computing device 14 via the communications network 12 (i.e., a classical communication network), see par [0032], see fig 1, 2B An operator also be able to enter one or more configuration commands through a keyboard (not illustrated), The quantum computing device 300 can also include a communications interface 314 suitable for communicating with other computing devices, including, in some implementations, classical computing devices, (i.e. multiple computing devices, (i.e., the second CD)), [0066]) [Examiner interprets quantum encoded compressed file have less cardinality of the first set of bits than the first cardinality of the first set of bits since quantum communication protocol known as “superdense encoding,” which allows two classical bits of information to be transmitted from a sender to a recipient by sending only one qubit from the sender to the recipient… entangled qubits to decode the two classical bits of information, see Griffin par [0025] and storing decoded compressed file 24’ as classical encoding of the content by classical computing device 14 (i.e., second CD) that is received from the quantum device 22 (i.e., Second QD) that was originally received from first QD over QCC as receive a classical encoding of a content from a second quantum computing device (QD) over a first quantum communication channel (QCC))];
in response to receiving the classical encoding of the update for the content, cause a transmission of the classical encoding of the update to the second CD, wherein the transmission of the classical encoding includes transmitting the first set of qubits, wherein quantum states of the first set of qubits store a quantum-mechanical (QM) encoding of the update for the content, and wherein the QM encoding of the update was generated based on a superdense coding protocol and the classical encoding (Griffin, The QCD computing device 16 (i.e., the first QD) maintains a set of one or more first qubits 18(0)-18(Q), which are in a state of entanglement with a set of one or more second qubits 20(0)-20(Q) that are maintained by a QCD computing device 22 (i.e., second quantum computing device) communicatively coupled (i.e., a first quantum communication channel (QCC)) to the QCD computing device 16, see par [0028] and After performing the superdense coding, the QCD computing device 16 (i.e., the first QD) sends the one or more first qubits 18(0)-18(Q) to the QCD computing device 22 (i.e. the second QD) where sequential qubit mapping occurs based on the first q bits and compressed file 24 is stored see par [0031], then QCD computing receives a request from the computing device 14 (i.e. the second CD) for the superdense- encoded compressed file 24’ stored by QCD computing device 22 (i.e. the second QD). When the request happens, the compressed file 24’ is decoded and sent to the computing device 14 (i.e., the second CD) by the QCD computing device 22 (i.e., Second QD) to the computing device 14 via the communications network 12 (i.e., a classical communication network), see par [0032], see fig 1, 2B An operator also be able to enter one or more configuration commands through a keyboard (not illustrated), The quantum computing device 300 can also include a communications interface 314 suitable for communicating with other computing devices, including, in some implementations, classical computing devices, (i.e. multiple computing devices, (i.e., the second CD)), [0066]) [Examiner interprets quantum encoded compressed file have less cardinality of the first set of bits than the first cardinality of the first set of bits since quantum communication protocol known as “superdense encoding,” which allows two classical bits of information to be transmitted from a sender to a recipient by sending only one qubit from the sender to the recipient… entangled qubits to decode the two classical bits of information, see Griffin par [0025]];
Although Griffin teaches method of encoding content as disclosed above, Griffin does not explicitly teach updating content using patching protocol.
However, Ikram teaches:
a second CD is enabled to update the content by employing a patching protocol that receives (Ikram, A security system generates updated policy file (i.e., patch file) when rule changes and it is transmitted to the security service which verifies policies stored locally correspond to a current version periodically, upon an event notification, or upon another event., see par [0050]) [ In light of specification Examiner interprets that updated policy file as an update for the content that is created using patching protocol]
Therefore, it would have been obvious to PHOSITA before the effective filing date to modify the teaching of Griffin to include the concept of including a second CD is enabled to update the content by employing a patching protocol as taught by Ikram for the purpose of evaluating the collected information against the policy rules to determine whether the event is authorized to be performed, [Ikram:0085].
Griffin and Ikram does not explicitly teach:
the secured-side system lacks a classical communication network that is operable to communicate with devices external to the secured-side system and wherein the secured-side system is operable to communicate with an open-side system of the content distribution system via the first QCC, wherein the open-side system is communicatively coupled to clients of the content distribution system
However, Smith teaches:
the secured-side system lacks a classical communication network that is operable to communicate with devices external to the secured-side system and wherein the secured-side system is operable to communicate with an open-side system of the content distribution system via the first QCC, wherein the open-side system is communicatively coupled to clients of the content distribution system (Smith, Each of the communication devices 12 may be a sending device 14 (i.e., the first CD) and/or a receiving device 16 (i.e., first QD) (e.g., may be configured to send classical bits or receive classical bits) Each of the communication devices 12 include qubits 70 that are entangled with qubits 70 of one of the other communication device(s) 12. The entanglement of the qubits 70 is utilized to transmit a digital message of classical bits between the communication devices 12. The message may be transmitted without any corresponding classical communication. Additionally, or alternatively, the communication devices 12 (i.e., the first QD and first CD) may not be connected by any sort of classical communication channel (cable, radio link, free-space laser link, conveyance, transporter, etc.) and/or may not include any classical communication transmitter configured to communicate with other communication devices 12 (i.e., external device) [0016]) [Examiner interpret that communication devices 12 (i.e., the first QD and first CD) do not have any sort of classical communication channel (cable, radio link, free-space laser link, conveyance, transporter, etc.) with other communication devices 12 (i.e., external device) and only communication through quantum channel (i.e., the first QCC) using qubits as limitation above, (see 112(b) rejection above) ].
Therefore, it would have been obvious to PHOSITA before the effective filing date to modify the teaching of Griffin to include the concept of including the secured-side system lacks a classical communication network that is operable to communicate with devices external to the secured-side system and wherein the secured-side system is operable to communicate with an open-side system of the content distribution system via the first QCC, wherein the open-side system is communicatively coupled to clients of the content distribution system as taught by Smith for the purpose of transmitting the message without any corresponding classical communication and showing the communication devices 12 communicating without connecting with any sort of classical communication channel (cable, radio link, free-space laser link, conveyance, transporter, etc.) with other communication devices 12 (i.e., external device) [Smith:0016].
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
US 20220215279 A1: “relates to a federated quantum computing distributed architecture”
US 20250187957 A1: “relates to an information processing method, an information processing device, a program, and an effluent treatment system”
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to SAMIKSHYA POUDEL whose telephone number is (703)756-1540. The examiner can normally be reached 7:30 AM - 5PM Mon- Fri.
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, SHEWAYE GELAGAY can be reached at (571)272-4219. 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.
/S.N.P./Examiner, Art Unit 2436 /SHEWAYE GELAGAY/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2436