Final Rejection
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 .
DETAILED ACTION
The amendment filed 02/17/2026 has been entered. Claims 1-5, 9, 11-17, 20-21, 23-25 and 27 remain pending in the application.
Response to Arguments
Applicant' s arguments with respect to claim(s) 1 and all subsequent dependent claims have been considered but are moot in view of the references cited in the most current rejection.
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.
The factual inquiries for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized as follows:
1. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art.
2. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue.
3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art.
4. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness.
This application currently names joint inventors. In considering patentability of the claims the examiner presumes that the subject matter of the various claims was commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the claimed invention(s) absent any evidence to the contrary. Applicant is advised of the obligation under 37 CFR 1.56 to point out the inventor and effective filing dates of each claim that was not commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the later invention in order for the examiner to consider the applicability of 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(C) for any potential 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) prior art against the later invention.
Claim(s) 1-5, 11-13, 16-17, 20-21, 23-25 and 27 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Moran (US 20170257760 A1) in view of Carter (US 20160365932 A1), Kim (KR 20170124448 A, all citations provided from machine translation attached) and Glasgow (NO 891600 L, all citations provided from machine translation attached).
Regarding claim 1, Moran teaches a method for authenticating the proximity of at least two devices (method of authenticating a communication channel between a first device and a second device), the method comprising: generating at least one packet (the IoT device could transmit a cryptographic nonce and a hash of its public key and the nonce) (For example, a criterion may be an identifier for the IoT device 52 or a set of capabilities such as an ability to carry out an act, as communicated via Bluetooth advertising packet 62). (Paragraphs 5, 25, 14, 24, 30, 40, 43, 45, Figs.4-6)
Moran also teaches emitting at least one acoustic wave from at least one emitting device (an acoustic modulator for generating an authentication acoustic wave), each acoustic wave corresponding to a generated packet (The solid body acoustic coupling authentication acoustic wave comprises a hash of the public key corresponding to that previously transmitted and received at the portable device 54), at least one acoustic wave being emitted for all the generated packets, all the emitted acoustic waves forming an acoustic wave superposition (In addition, information that characterises this connection is sent over the acoustic channel 68, for example the hash of a secret established using Diffie-Hellman key exchange, the public key used by the IoT device 52 during connection initialisation, or the MAC address of the IoT device 52). (Paragraphs 22, 30, 40-43, Claim 4, Figs.4-5)
Moran also teaches receiving, with at least one receiving device, the superposition (The pressure on the sensor 22 can activate the vending machine's acoustic amplifier 42 and acoustic modulator to generate an acoustic authentication signal to be received at the smartphone via a solid body acoustic coupling) (Upon receiving the MAC address, the user's mobile can determine which of the list items to load by matching the received MAC to the URL broadcast by that MAC) (receiving, at the second device, an acoustic authentication signal transmitted by the first device via a solid body acoustic coupling established between the first device and the second device thereby providing proof of proximity between both devices and so authenticating the communication channel between the first device and the second device). (Paragraphs 25, 28, 76-80, Figs.4-5)
Moran also teaches assessing the similarity of the received superposition (The smartphone can record this data using the microphone and demodulate it in order to authenticate the vending machine) (Upon receiving the MAC address, the user's mobile can determine which of the list items to load by matching the received MAC to the URL broadcast by that MAC) (upon receiving the acoustic authentication signal at the second device, the second device verifies the acoustic authentication signal against a signal provided on the communication channel from the first device in order to authentication the communication channel). (Paragraphs 25, 28, 30, 33, 40, 76, Claims 7-8, Figs.4-5)
Moran also teaches authenticating proximity of each emitting device and each receiving device when the received superposition (The pressure on the sensor 22 can activate the vending machine's acoustic amplifier 42 and acoustic modulator to generate an acoustic authentication signal to be received at the smartphone via a solid body acoustic coupling. The vending machine therefore uses the contact with the smartphone to transmit conductive acoustic data in the form of an authentication acoustic wave into the smartphone. The smartphone can record this data using the microphone and demodulate it in order to authenticate the vending machine) (Upon receiving the MAC address, the user's mobile can determine which of the list items to load by matching the received MAC to the URL broadcast by that MAC. Then, the user can be confident that the vending machine they are interacting with is the one with which they are in physical contact) (upon receiving the acoustic authentication signal at the second device, the second device may verify the acoustic authentication signal against a signal provided on the communication channel from the first device in order to authenticate the communication channel. Upon verification, the first and second device may communicate on the authenticated communication channel). (Paragraphs 25, 28, 30, 33, 40, 47, 76-80, Claims 1, 7, Figs.4-5)
Moran does not explicitly teach wherein the at least two devices are separated by a distance and a comparator fulfill a predetermined similarity requirement, wherein the comparator corresponds to a combination of all the generated packets and wherein each emitted acoustic wave includes a plurality of configured primary characteristics, the plurality of configured primary characteristics being determined by the generated packet to which the respective acoustic wave corresponds and comprising all of frequency, amplitude, and duration and wherein each configured primary characteristic is variable in a continuous or step wise manner during emission of the respective acoustic wave.
Carter teaches wherein the at least two devices (first and second computing devices A and B/ Device 1 and Device 2) are separated by a distance. (Paragraph 17, Figs.1A-4B)
Carter also teaches a comparator fulfill a predetermined similarity requirement, wherein the comparator corresponds to a combination of all the generated packets. (Paragraphs 40, 43, Fig.7)
Kim teaches wherein each emitted acoustic wave includes a plurality of configured primary characteristics, the plurality of configured primary characteristics being determined by the generated packet to which the respective acoustic wave corresponds and comprising all of frequency, amplitude, and duration. (Page.4, lines 8-11, lines 42-44, Claims 3-4)
Glasgow teaches wherein each configured primary characteristic is variable in a continuous or step wise manner during emission of the respective acoustic wave. (Page.2, lines 31-34)
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date to have modified Moran to incorporate wherein the at least two devices are separated by a distance and a comparator fulfill a predetermined similarity requirement, wherein the comparator corresponds to a combination of all the generated packets as taught by Carter in order to transmit and receive encoded data that is then decoded to establish a secure communication channel to protect user information and further modify Moran to incorporate wherein each emitted acoustic wave includes a plurality of configured primary characteristics, the plurality of configured primary characteristics being determined by the generated packet to which the respective acoustic wave corresponds and comprising all of frequency, amplitude, and duration as taught by Kim in order to identify a situation that an intruder enters a security area and further modify Moran to incorporate wherein each configured primary characteristic is variable in a continuous or step wise manner during emission of the respective acoustic wave as taught by Glasgow in order to determine the distance to a target return signal.
Regarding claim 2, Moran teaches wherein each emitting device and each receiving device being connectable to a network, each emitting device and each receiving device thereby being part of the network (there is provided a system of networked devices implementing a method of authentication) (the IoT device 52 sends over the acoustic channel some information 70 that allows the user's portable device 54 to identify it to establish a faster connection) (the IoT device 52 may send its MAC address 80 or other routing information, so that the user's portable device 54 may establish a connection directly 82 to the IoT device 52). (Paragraphs 80, 43-47, Figs.4-5)
Regarding claim 3, Moran teaches wherein each generated packet is generated in the network (the IoT device could transmit a cryptographic nonce and a hash of its public key and the nonce) (information that characterises this connection is sent over the acoustic channel 68, for example the hash of a secret established using Diffie-Hellman key exchange, the public key used by the IoT device 52 during connection initialisation, or the MAC address of the IoT device 52) (acoustic modulator, which sends its MAC address. Upon receiving the MAC address, the user's mobile can determine which of the list items to load by matching the received MAC to the URL broadcast by that MAC) (receiving, at the second device, an acoustic authentication signal transmitted by the first device via a solid body acoustic coupling established between the first device and the second device thereby providing proof of proximity between both devices and so authenticating the communication channel between the first device and the second device). (Paragraphs 30, 38, 43, 28, 76-80, Figs.4-5)
Regarding claim 4, Moran teaches wherein the received superposition and/or comparator are transmitted within the network to an assessment module from a respective source (the IoT device could transmit a cryptographic nonce and a hash of its public key and the nonce) (information that characterises this connection is sent over the acoustic channel 68, for example the hash of a secret established using Diffie-Hellman key exchange, the public key used by the IoT device 52 during connection initialisation, or the MAC address of the IoT device 52) (acoustic modulator, which sends its MAC address. Upon receiving the MAC address, the user's mobile can determine which of the list items to load by matching the received MAC to the URL broadcast by that MAC). (Paragraphs 30, 38, 43, 28, Figs.4-5)
Regarding claim 5, Moran teaches wherein when the assessment module determines that the superposition do not fulfil a threshold similarity requirement, the assessment module does not authenticate proximity of the at least one emitting device to the at least one receiving device (in order that the portable device 54 can authenticate that the physical identity of the IoT device 52 corresponds to the digital identity received at the portable device 54) (The IoT device 52 therefore uses the contact with the portable device 54 to transmit conductive acoustic data in the form of an authentication acoustic wave into the portable device 54. The portable device 54 can record this data using the microphone and demodulate it in order to authenticate the vending machine) (Further, upon receiving the acoustic authentication signal at the second device, the second device may verify the acoustic authentication signal against a signal provided on the communication channel from the first device in order to authenticate the communication channel. Upon verification, the first and second device may communicate on the authenticated communication channel). (Paragraphs 39-43, 76-80, Figs.4-5) Moran teaches the authentication process as claimed and it is implicitly disclosed that if the threshold similarity requirement (matching MAC to the URL and corresponding digital identity of 54 and 52 and verifying the acoustic authentication signal against a signal provided on the communication channel) is not fulfilled the authentication is not authenticated.
Moran does not explicitly teach the comparator.
Carter teaches the comparator. (Paragraphs 40, 43, Fig.7)
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date to have modified Moran to incorporate the comparator in order to transmit and receive encoded data that is then decoded to establish a secure communication channel to protect user information (See Abstract, Paragraphs 18, 23 of Carter).
Regarding claim 11, Moran teaches wherein, the received superposition has at least one primary characteristic, the primary characteristic comprising at least one of frequency, amplitude and duration, and before the received superposition is assessed, the received superposition is altered to remove at least one property of at least one primary characteristic (an acoustic amplifier 48 comprising an acoustic modulator for generating an authentication acoustic wave, There are several modulation schemes available, from the simplest (Amplitude Modulation), right up to more complex modulation schemes, such as Quadrature Amplitude Modulation (QAM) among several channels coupled together with Orthogonal Frequency Division Multiplexing (OFDM)) (Using an appropriate filter, the smartphone can ignore data being transmitted from unexpected axes) (additional analogue filtering can happen before and/or after the low noise amplifier for further disambiguation and lower power). (Paragraphs 22-23, 31-32, 28, 58-62, Figs.3-5)
Regarding claim 12, Moran teaches removing (filtering) each acoustic wave from the received superposition before the received superposition is assessed. (Paragraphs 31-32, 60-62) Moran teaches a method of filtering transmitted data to further secure the communication channel between devices.
Moran does not explicitly teach wherein each acoustic wave emitted from an emitting device is a first acoustic wave, the method further comprising: emitting, by a receiving device, a second acoustic wave concurrently with each first acoustic wave, wherein all the first acoustic waves and second acoustic waves form the acoustic wave superposition.
Carter teaches wherein each acoustic wave emitted from an emitting device is a first acoustic wave (Third computing device C may modulate an acoustic signal with the data required by fourth computing device D and transmit the signal using its speaker), the method further comprising: emitting, by a receiving device, a second acoustic wave concurrently with each first acoustic wave (Steps are taken to allow third computing device C and fourth computing device D to each transmit and receive data at the same time), wherein all the first acoustic waves and second acoustic waves form the acoustic wave superposition. (Abstract, Paragraphs 16-18, 22, Figs.1A-1B)
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date to have modified Moran’s teaching of removing (filtering) acoustic waves from the received superposition before the received superposition is assessed with Carters teaching of emitting, by a receiving device, a second acoustic wave concurrently with each first acoustic wave, wherein all the first acoustic waves and second acoustic waves form the acoustic wave superposition in order to transmit and receive encoded data that is then decoded to establish a secure communication channel to protect user information (See Abstract, Paragraphs 18, 23 of Carter) Filtering signals (cancelling/enhancing/removing/amplifying) is a commonly known and practiced method in the art and is considered a trivial design choice in respect to the combination of signals to one of ordinary skill in the art.
Regarding claim 13, Moran teaches wherein the predetermined similarity requirement is 100% (upon receiving the acoustic authentication signal at the second device, the second device verifies the acoustic authentication signal against a signal provided on the communication channel from the first device in order to authentication the communication channel). (Paragraph 76, Claims 7-8) Under a broadest reasonable interpretation the authentication process taught by Moran demonstrates that the second device verifies the acoustic authentication signal against a signal provided on the communication channel and that this verification requires a 100% similarity because anything under a 100% verification would result/read as an attack/failure to establish a secure communication channel as this would be obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art.
Regarding claim 16, Moran teaches wherein only a single packet is generated, and wherein there is only a single emitting device, and the single packet is generated at the single emitting device (the IoT device 52 may send its MAC address 80 or other routing information, so that the user's portable device 54 may establish a connection directly 82 to the IoT device 52). (Paragraphs 46,43, 76-80, Figs.5, 6 (Example “C”))
Regarding claim 17, Moran teaches wherein a plurality of packets are generated, and wherein there are a plurality of emitting devices, each emitting device generating at least one of the packets and emitting the packets generated at the respective device as acoustic waves (the IoT device 52 sends an identifier 70 over the acoustic channel, and also broadcasts 76 this identifier in a Bluetooth advertising packet so that the user's portable device 54 can identify the correct IoT device 52 to connect to 78). (Paragraphs 43-45, 76-80, Figs.5, 6 (Example “A”, “B”))
Regarding claim 20, Moran teaches wherein the at least one packet is generated remotely from each emitting device (the IoT device could transmit a cryptographic nonce and a hash of its public key and the nonce) (For example, a criterion may be an identifier for the IoT device 52 or a set of capabilities such as an ability to carry out an act, as communicated via Bluetooth advertising packet 62) (IoT device 10 comprises communication circuitry 16 including, for example, near field communicating (NFC), Bluetooth Low Energy (BLE), WiFi, ZigBee or cellular circuitry (e.g. 3G/4G) for communicating with the remote resource(s)/device(s) e.g. over a wired or wireless communication link 18). (Paragraphs 5, 25, 14-15, 24, 30, 40, 43, 45, Figs.4-6)
Regarding claim 21, Moran teaches wherein the assessment and authentication is carried out at each receiving device; or wherein the assessment and authentication is carried out remotely from each receiving device (receiving, at the second device, an acoustic authentication signal transmitted by the first device via a solid body acoustic coupling established between the first device and the second device thereby providing proof of proximity between both devices and so authenticating the communication channel between the first device and the second device) (upon receiving the acoustic authentication signal at the second device, the second device may verify the acoustic authentication signal against a signal provided on the communication channel from the first device in order to authenticate the communication channel). (Paragraphs 25, 28, 30, 33, 40, 47, 76-80, Claims 1, 7, Figs.4-6)
Regarding claim 23, Moran teaches wherein there are a plurality of receiving devices (52, 54), and at least one receiving device (52, 54) is also an emitting device (The pressure on the sensor can activate the IoT device's acoustic modulator to generate an acoustic authentication signal at step 58 to be received at the portable device 54 via a solid body acoustic coupling authentication acoustic wave, the solid body acoustic coupling authentication acoustic wave comprises a hash of the public key corresponding to that previously transmitted and received at the portable device 54.). (Paragraphs 38-46, 76-80, Claims 1, 7, 9, Figs.4-6)
Regarding claim 24, Moran teaches wherein at least one of the at least one of the emitting devices (52, 54) is also a receiving device (The pressure on the sensor can activate the IoT device's acoustic modulator to generate an acoustic authentication signal at step 58 to be received at the portable device 54 via a solid body acoustic coupling authentication acoustic wave, the solid body acoustic coupling authentication acoustic wave comprises a hash of the public key corresponding to that previously transmitted and received at the portable device 54.). (Paragraphs 38-46, 76-80, Claims 1, 7, 9, Figs.4-6)
Regarding claim 25, Moran teaches an acoustic wave superposition (receiving the acoustic authentication signal at the second device, the second device verifies the acoustic authentication signal against a signal provided on the communication channel from the first device in order to authentication the communication channel (See Fig.6)). (Paragraphs 45, 76, Claims 7-8, Figs.4-6)
Moran does not explicitly teach the comparator.
Carter teaches the comparator. (Paragraphs 40, 43, Fig.7)
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date to have modified Moran to incorporate the comparator in order to transmit and receive encoded data that is then decoded to establish a secure communication channel to protect user information (See Abstract, Paragraphs 18, 23 of Carter).
Regarding claim 27, Moran teaches wherein the at least one generated packet includes information that varies the at least one configured primary characteristic based on the time that the packet was generated (simplest (Amplitude Modulation), right up to more complex modulation schemes, such as Quadrature Amplitude Modulation (QAM) among several channels coupled together with Orthogonal Frequency Division Multiplexing (OFDM)). (Paragraphs 22-23)
Claim(s) 9 and 14-15 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Moran in view of Carter, Kim, Glasgow and Cirit (US 20180198535 A1).
Regarding claim 9, Moran does not explicitly teach wherein each received superposition has at least one configured secondary characteristic, and wherein the configured secondary characteristic comprises at least one of: a complexity rating, a timestamp, a geostamp, ambient sound.
Cirit teaches wherein each received superposition has at least one configured secondary characteristic, and wherein the configured secondary characteristic comprises at least one of: a complexity rating, a timestamp, a geostamp, ambient sound (the processor 160 logs and associates a timestamp for each time each ultrasonic output signal 186 is outputted and a timestamp for each time each ultrasonic signal 188 is detected). (Paragraphs 87-88, Figs.1B, 3, 5-8)
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date to have modified Moran to incorporate wherein each received superposition has at least one configured secondary characteristic, and wherein the configured secondary characteristic comprises at least one of: a complexity rating, a timestamp, a geostamp, ambient sound as taught by Cirit in order to determine whether the computing device is indoors or outdoors (See Paragraph 88 of Cirit).
Regarding claim 14, Moran does not explicitly teach wherein the minimum frequency of each acoustic wave is 15 kHz.
Cirit teaches wherein the minimum frequency of each acoustic wave is 15 kHz (the transmission controller 110 can instruct the ultrasonic output component 115 to emit a high frequency range (above 18 kHz) or an ultrasonic frequency range). (Paragraphs 20-22, Figs.1A, 1B, 3, 5-8)
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date to have modified Moran to incorporate wherein the minimum frequency of each acoustic wave is 15 kHz as taught by Cirit in order to emit frequencies beyond the range of human hearing thus avoiding any user discomfort (See Paragraph 1 of Cirit).
Regarding claim 15, Moran does not explicitly teach wherein the maximum frequency of each acoustic wave is 25 kHz.
Cirit teaches wherein the maximum frequency of each acoustic wave is 25 kHz (the frequency range can extend from 19 kHz to 20 kHz). (Paragraphs 20-22, Figs.1A, 1B, 3, 5-8)
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filling date to have modified Moran to incorporate wherein the maximum frequency of each acoustic wave is 25 kHz as taught by Cirit in order to emit frequencies beyond the range of human hearing thus avoiding any user discomfort (See Paragraph 1 of Cirit).
Conclusion
Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP § 706.07(a). Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a).
A shortened statutory period for reply to this final action is set to expire THREE MONTHS from the mailing date of this action. In the event a first reply is filed within TWO MONTHS of the mailing date of this final action and the advisory action is not mailed until after the end of the THREE-MONTH shortened statutory period, then the shortened statutory period will expire on the date the advisory action is mailed, and any nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) pursuant to 37 CFR 1.136(a) will be calculated from the mailing date of the advisory action. In no event, however, will the statutory period for reply expire later than SIX MONTHS from the mailing date of this final action.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ABDALLAH ABULABAN whose telephone number is (571)272-4755. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday 7:00am-3:00pm 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, Isam Alsomiri can be reached at 571-272-6970. 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.
/ABDALLAH ABULABAN/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3645
Prosecution Insights