DETAILED ACTION
Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status
The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
Continued Examination Under 37 CFR 1.114
A request for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, including the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e), was filed in this application after allowance or after an Office action under Ex Parte Quayle, 25 USPQ 74, 453 O.G. 213 (Comm'r Pat. 1935). 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, prosecution in this application has been reopened pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114. Applicant's submission filed on 7/1/2026 has been entered.
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted on 7/1/2026 was filed after the mailing date of the notice of allowance on 4/20/2026. The submission is in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statement is being considered by the examiner.
Claim Objections
Claim 6, 9, 27, and 43 are objected to because of the following informalities:
Claim 6 is objected to for missing a comma after “according to claim 5” and before “wherein.”
Claim 9 is objected to for missing a comma after “according to claim 8” and before “wherein.”
Claim 27 is objected to for missing a comma after “according to claim 26” and before “further comprising.”
Claim 43 is objected to for missing a comma after “according to claim 25” and before “comprising.”
Appropriate action is 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.
Claim 2, 7 and 35 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.
Regarding claim 2, the claim recites “comprising of at least one authoriser entity, at least one sender entity and the at least one boundary control device,” which is indefinite as it is unclear whether the system or electronic entities comprise these devices.
Regarding claim 7, the applicant uses passive or inactive language rendering the claim indefinite as it is unclear whether certain actions are being taken or not, For example: the applicant recites "so as to prevent" which renders it indefinite as it is unclear if the communication is prevented or not.
Regarding claim 35, the applicant uses passive or inactive language rendering the claim indefinite as it is unclear whether certain actions are being taken or not, For example: the applicant recites "so as to create" which renders it indefinite as it is unclear if the payload has been created or not.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 1-32 and 34- 48 are objected to for containing allowable subject matter. Claim 33 has been previously cancelled.
As allowable subject matter has been indicated, applicant's reply must either comply with all formal requirements or specifically traverse each requirement not complied with. See 37 CFR 1.111(b) and MPEP § 707.07(a). In the instant case, the applicant should amend to address the examiner’s rejections listed above.
The following is an examiner’s statement of reasons for allowance:
The prior art, Mars et al (US 2020/0077246), discloses a system includes broadcasting with a first radio, identification signals, scanning with the first radio, ephemeral ID signals, detecting with the first radio a first ephemeral ID signal from a first device, determining with the first radio whether a session exists with the first device, in response to the first ephemeral ID, initiating pairing between a second radio and the first device when the session does not exist, thereafter scanning with the first radio for ephemeral ID signals, and detecting with the first radio a second ephemeral ID signal from a second device, thereafter completing pairing the second radio and the first device, receiving with the first radio from the first smart-device a first token, determining in the first radio whether the first token is valid, and effecting with the first radio a user-perceptible action with a peripheral in response to the first token being valid.
The prior art, Toufic (EP-1641215-A2), discloses a system for bridging user identities between at least a first and a second security domain, comprising a bridge associated with the first security domain for intercepting messages for service in the second domain from users in the first domain. The bridge authenticates the user identities against a local authentication source by using an established key relationship and binds a security token with the message. A gateway is associated with the second domain for gating inbound access and outbound communication with a service in the second domain and for receiving the authenticated message and verifying the authenticity of the security token by using a certificate of the trusted authentication source and authorising access to the service upon confirmation of the authorisation, such that the authorisation is independent of the identity of the user.
However, none of the prior arts of record, either alone or in combination, discloses all the limitations of the independent claim, 1 and 25, including, but not limited to: “assuring a payload for transfer across a network boundary via a Boundary Control Device using a system comprising at least one computer processor and at least one data storage device, the at least one data storage device comprising instructions operative by the at least one processor, the method comprising; providing an electronic authorisation token configured to authorise the payload to be transferred, the electronic authorisation token comprising at least one element relating to properties of the payload and at least one entropy element arranged to ensure that multiple electronic authorisation tokens authorising the same payload properties are unique; and transmitting the electronic authorisation token to the predetermined Boundary Control Device.”
Therefore, independent claims 1 and 25 are allowable over the prior arts of record. Likewise, the associated claims which depend from independent claims 1 and 25 are allowable by virtue of their dependence on the independent claims.
Any comments considered necessary by applicant must be submitted no later than the payment of the issue fee and, to avoid processing delays, should preferably accompany the issue fee. Such submissions should be clearly labeled “Comments on Statement of Reasons for Allowance.”
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Sung et al (US 11,151,565): discloses a real and virtual identity verification circuit, a system thereof and an electronic transaction method. The circuit is capable of being built in or connected with an electronic device to allow a user to carry out electronic identity verification with his or her unique biological characteristic on a remote server. The real and virtual identity verification circuit comprises a memory unit, an acquisition unit, a processing unit and a communication unit. A verification key code is stored by the memory unit. The acquisition unit acquires the biological characteristic and generates a corresponding biological characteristic code. The processing unit processes the verification key code and the biological characteristic code according to a deal process to generate a corresponding unverified code, and the communication unit transmits the unverified code to the server and awaits a verification result of the electronic identity verification.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to KENDALL DOLLY whose telephone number is (571)270-1948. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 7am-3pm (EST).
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.
/KENDALL DOLLY/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2436
Prosecution Insights