DETAILED ACTION
Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status
1.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 Arguments
2. According to applicant’s arguments filed on 12/22/2025; claims 1,2,4,7 and 10 have been amended, hereby acknowledged.
3. Applicant's arguments with respect to 101 rejection have been fully considered but they are not persuasive . Applicant argues that claims do not recite an abstract idea, the instant application describes the system may include a user terminal (110), a UAV (130), and a server (120), which includes a database and a processor. In the various embodiments, the method may include registering a user ID and a UAV ID (210), receiving location information of the user terminal and the UAV (220) by the server, receiving a key exchange request (230) from either the user terminal or the UAV, and exchanging a key with the UAV or user terminal based on the location information (240). To enhance security and privacy, the method may further include the generation of anonymous user and UAV IDs.
Therefore, the recited features of independent claims cannot be performed as mental process as the various claims recite additional elements, such as database.
4. Examiner would like to point out that independent claims 1,7 and 10 have been amended to recite: “an electronic device, including a database and processor, wherein the processor is configured to receive a user ID, at least one anonymous user ID corresponding to the user ID and location information of a user terminal from the user terminal, receive an unmanned aerial vehicle (UAV) ID, at least one anonymous UAV ID corresponding to the UAV ID and location information of an UAV from the UAV, and in response to receiving key exchange request information from the user terminal or the UAV, provide a key exchange protocol between the user terminal and the UAV based on the location information of the user terminal and the location information of the UAV; wherein the processor is configured to: generate an authentication value corresponding to the user terminal or the UAV by using the user ID or the UAV ID and a secret value of the electronic device, and store the authentication value in the database; transmit the authentication value to the user terminal or the UAV; and identify information encrypted based on the authentication value and received from the user terminal or the UAV by using the authentication value”.
Here, Examiner notes that the claims are directed to receiving anonymous user ID and location information of a user terminal and anonymous UAV ID and location information of an UAV - - that constitutes methods of organizing human activities, i.e., obtaining various information such as unmanned aerial vehicle (UAV) (e.g., a drone) and the user terminal location information and their ID, in any office or campus shall also be perceived to be done manually by human in an orderly fashion with/without general purpose computer. Each of these limitations are drawn to abstract ideas such as the collection and analysis of data, and presenting the result of the analysis in the form of granting secure communication. They may additionally be construed as being implemented in a computer network. However, all of these steps are similar to those that can be performed by a human mind or require only a generic computer to accomplish. Therefore, when considered singly, and as an ordered combination, i.e., the claim as a whole, these claim limitations do not represent anything more than abstract ideas and thus are drawn to a judicial exception. These limitations do not represent any fundamental improvement to the underlying technology of the computer network since they merely represent steps designed to regulate user access to the network and don’t make any change to the network itself in terms of things such as memory utilization, processor configuration, and etc.
5. Applicant further states that the instant application establishes a secure communication channel between a user and a UAV by using a bidirectional key exchange protocol facilitated by a server, where the key exchange is predicated on the location information of the communicating devices and incorporates anonymous identifiers and authentication mechanisms for enhanced privacy and security.
6. Here, Examiner notes that the claims do not purport to improve the functioning of a computer or effect an improvement in any other technology or technical field. Instead, they do not amount to anything significantly more than an instruction to apply the abstract idea of transmitting/receiving ID and location of user and unmanned aerial vehicle (UAV) using generic devices. The focus of the claims is not on any improvement in computers as tools, but on certain independently abstract ideas that merely use computers and databases as tools.
The claims also specify things such the server perform various control functions related to a generating an authentication value using the user ID or the UAV ID; and a key exchange protocol between the user terminal and the UAV. The key exchange protocol may indicate the user terminal and the UAV exchange keys and ensure security in communication by encrypting a message using the keys. As such, these limitations are drawn to the abstract ideas of the collection and analysis of data, and these limitations do not represent significantly more than abstract ideas, i.e., more than a judicial exception. These limitations may be performed by a generic computer and do not represent a fundamental improvement to the underlying technology of the computer network. So, Examiner finds that the recited limitation is no more than well-understood, routine, and conventional activities previously known in the industry.
7. Regarding 103 rejection, applicant argues that the Fox in view of Van Duren reference fails to teach receiving at least one anonymous user ID and UAV ID.
8. Examiner would like to point out that applicant’s arguments with respect to 103 have been fully considered and are persuasive. Therefore, the 103 rejection for independent claims have been withdrawn. However, upon further consideration, a new ground(s) of rejection is made Fox (US Pub.No.2018/0103036) in view of Lee (KR Pub.No.20200094333).
9. The new secondary reference Lee (KR Pub.No.20200094333) in abstract teaches anonymous user ID and UAV ID.
Double Patenting
10. The non-statutory double patenting rejection is based on a judicially created doctrine grounded in public policy (a policy reflected in the statute) so as to prevent the unjustified or improper time wise extension of the “right to exclude” granted by a patent and to prevent possible harassment by multiple assignees. A non-statutory obviousness-type double patenting rejection is appropriate where the conflicting claims are not identical, but at least one examined application claim is not patentably distinct from the reference claim(s) because the examined application claim is either anticipated by, or would have been obvious over, the reference claim(s). See, e.g., In re Berg, 140 F.3d 1428, 46 USPQ2d 1226 (Fed. Cir. 1998); In re Goodman, 11 F.3d 1046, 29 USPQ2d 2010 (Fed. Cir. 1993); In re Longi, 759 F.2d 887, 225 USPQ 645 (Fed. Cir. 1985); In re Van Ornum, 686 F.2d 937, 214 USPQ 761 (CCPA 1982); In re Vogel, 422 F.2d 438, 164 USPQ 619 (CCPA 1970); and In re Thorington, 418 F.2d 528, 163 USPQ 644 (CCPA 1969).
A timely filed terminal disclaimer in compliance with 37 CFR 1.321(c) or 1.321(d) may be used to overcome an actual or provisional rejection based on a nonstatutory double patenting ground provided the conflicting application or patent either is shown to be commonly owned with this application, or claims an invention made as a result of activities undertaken within the scope of a joint research agreement.
Effective January 1, 1994, a registered attorney or agent of record may sign a terminal disclaimer. A terminal disclaimer signed by the assignee must fully comply with 37 CFR 3.73(b).
11. Claims 1-10 of the instant application are provisionally rejected on the ground of non-statutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claims 1-10 of the co-pending application 18/205,162. Although the claims at issue are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other because the claims of the current application encompass the same subject matter as the co-pending application claims, but with obvious wording variations such as [an electronic device, including a database and processor, wherein the processor is configured to receive a user ID, at least one anonymous user ID corresponding to the user ID and location information of a user terminal from the user terminal, receive an unmanned aerial vehicle (UAV) ID, at least one anonymous UAV ID corresponding to the UAV ID and location information of an UAV from the UAV, and in response to receiving key exchange request information from the user terminal or the UAV, provide a key exchange protocol between the user terminal and the UAV based on the location information of the user terminal and the location information of the UAV]. This is a provisional non-statutory double patenting rejection because the patentably indistinct claims have not in fact been patented.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC §101
12. 35 U.S.C. 101 reads as follows:
Whoever invents or discovers any new and useful process, machine, manufacture, or composition of matter, or any new and useful improvement thereof, may obtain a patent therefor, subject to the conditions and requirements of this title.
13. Claims 1-10 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 101 because the claimed invention is directed to an abstract idea without significantly more analyzed according to 2019 Revised Patent Subject Matter Eligibility Guidance (“2019 PEG”). The claim recites using sensor manager to correlate anomalous behavior data from sensor(s) and determine an identifier for malware that may cause a behavior to occur.
Step 1: The claims 1,7 and 10 do fall into one of the four statutory categories of method and system claims. Nevertheless, the claims still is/are considered as abstract idea for the following prongs and reasons.
Step 2A: Prong 1: The limitation of claims 1,7 and 10 recites: an electronic device, including a database and processor, wherein the processor is configured to receive a user ID, at least one anonymous user ID corresponding to the user ID and location information of a user terminal from the user terminal, receive an unmanned aerial vehicle (UAV) ID, at least one anonymous UAV ID corresponding to the UAV ID and location information of an UAV from the UAV, and in response to receiving key exchange request information from the user terminal or the UAV, provide a key exchange protocol between the user terminal and the UAV based on the location information of the user terminal and the location information of the UAV; as drafted, is a process that, under its broadest reasonable interpretation, covers performance of the limitation in the human mind and / or with pen and paper without a generic computer. Except for words “A device including a processor and memory”….” A computer-readable non-transitory recording medium having a program for executing a method”... in claims 1 and 10 respectively, there is nothing in the claim element precludes the step from practically being performed in human mind and/or with pen and paper. For example, transmit/receive information or IDs of unmanned aerial vehicle (UAV) (e.g., a drone) and a user terminal, and a device thereof. And obtaining various information such as unmanned aerial vehicle (UAV) (e.g., a drone) and the user terminal location information, in any office or campus shall also be perceived to be done manually by human in an orderly fashion with/without general purpose computer. Each of these limitations are drawn to abstract ideas such as the collection and analysis of data, and presenting the result of the analysis in the form of granting secure communication. They may additionally be construed as being implemented in a computer network. However, all of these steps are similar to those that can be performed by a human mind or require only a generic computer to accomplish. Therefore, when considered singly, and as an ordered combination, i.e., the claim as a whole, these claim limitations do not represent anything more than abstract ideas and thus are drawn to a judicial exception. These limitations do not represent any fundamental improvement to the underlying technology of the computer network since they merely represent steps designed to regulate user access to the network and don’t make any change to the network itself in terms of things such as memory utilization, processor configuration, and etc.
Dependent claims 2-6 and 8-9 are drawn to abstract ideas similar to those presented by independent claims. These claims specify things such the server perform various control functions related to a key exchange protocol between the user terminal and the UAV. The key exchange protocol may indicate the user terminal and the UAV exchange keys and ensure security in communication by encrypting a message using the keys. As with the independent claims, these limitations are drawn to the abstract ideas of the collection and analysis of data. When considered both singly and as an ordered combination with their base or independent claims, these limitations do not represent significantly more than abstract ideas, i.e., more than a judicial exception. These limitations may be performed by a generic computer and do not represent a fundamental improvement to the underlying technology of the computer network.
Prong 2: This judicial exception is not integrated into a practical application. In particular, the claims do not recite any additional element to perform beyond routine steps of secure bidirectional communication connection between user terminal and a specific UAV. The steps are recited at a high-level of generality (i.e., as generic terms performing generic computer functions using a processor) such that it amounts no more than mere instructions to apply the exception using generic computer components). Accordingly, this additional element does not integrate the abstract idea into a practical application because it does not impose any meaningful limits on practicing the abstract idea. Therefore, the claims is directed to an abstract idea.
Step 2B: The claims does not include additional elements that are sufficient to amount to significantly more than the judicial exception. As discussed above with respect to integration of the abstract idea into a practical application, the processor is configured to receive a user ID, at least one anonymous user ID corresponding to the user ID and location information of a user terminal from the user terminal, receive an unmanned aerial vehicle (UAV) ID, at least one anonymous UAV ID corresponding to the UAV ID and location information of an UAV from the UAV, and in response to receiving key exchange request information from the user terminal or the UAV, provide a key exchange protocol between the user terminal and the UAV based on the location information of the user terminal and the location information of the UAV, amounts to no more than mere instructions to apply the exception using a generic computer terms. Mere instructions to apply an exception using a generic computer components cannot provide an inventive concept. The claims is / are not patent eligible. Therefore, all the corresponding dependent claims dependent claims 2-6 and 8-9 are also rejected for the same rationale.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
14. 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.
15.Claim(s) 1-10 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Fox (US Pub.No.2018/0103036) in view of Lee (KR Pub.No.20200094333).
16. Regarding claim 1 Fox teaches an electronic device comprising: a database; and a processor, wherein the processor is configured to: receive a user ID, at least one user ID corresponding to the user ID and location information of a user terminal from the user terminal;
receive an unmanned aerial vehicle (UAV) ID, at least one UAV ID corresponding to the UAV ID and location information of an UAV from the UAV (Para:0031 teaches the drone/CPV management authority (DMA) for managing drone operator licenses (DOLs), which contain identifying information about a drone operator and the drone itself. DOLs are useful for enforcing legal restrictions on operation and ensuring safe movement and operation of drones. Para:0083-0085 teaches in order to prove its identity, the drone/CPV has to first register its license with the DMA 405. The DMA 405 returns a cryptographically signed drone token (CSDT), which allows for the drone/CPV to prove its identity in the future. Once the CSDT has been received by the drone it can be used to verify its identity.
Para:108-0109 teaches the DOL may be a license linked to digital drone operator attributes. The drone operator attributes can include, but are not limited to, the drone operator's name, the drone operator's home address and the drone operator's date of birth. In addition to the attributes, the DOL may include, but is not limited to, a class of license, the expiration date of the license, the issue date of the license, unique identifier, restrictions, and special exemptions. The drone/CPV and DOL should be generated by a trusted third-party organization such as a government agency, for example the FAA, or an independent organization.
Fig.3, Para:0079-0081 and Para:0091 teaches CPV/ drone 305 may be one of a plurality of vehicles, each vehicle including a computing device having a unique identity and an operator associated with the vehicle. Drone authentication component 310 may include drone attributes 315, drone license 320, drone public key 325, drone private key 330, and drone DMA token 335);
and in response to receiving key exchange request information from the user terminal or the UAV, provide a key exchange protocol between the user terminal and the UAV based on the location information of the user terminal and the location information of the UAV (Fig.1 and Para:0060 teaches the relay node 135 can be fixed stationary (e.g., ground station) or mobile (e.g., UAV, handheld device, or temporary ground station). The relay node 135 establishes mutually authenticated communications with CPV 105 requesting connection. Para:0259 teaches the relay nodes can be installed or operated by governmental agencies as a part of the nation's critical infrastructure, known as public relay nodes. Private relay nodes can be owned by individuals or private organizations and may exist as open or closed relay nodes. A closed relay node is a node that has restrictive access requirements based on specific drone license attributes. An individual can set up her own closed relay node to enhance her own flight. The relay node in this case would provide data to a drone/CPV with the correct ID, namely her ID.
Para:0268-0269 teaches For local authorization, the relay node has a set of rules to determine which drones are allowed to connect. These rules could restrict connection to a particular type of license, a particular amount of use, or a particular class of owners. The specifications are left to an implementation decision. For external authorization, the cryptographically signed drone token is sent to an authorization server over a secure connection. The authorization server maintains a list of authorized users or a set of rules to validate users. The authorization server uses these rules to provide a yes/no authorized decision which is returned to the relay node. The relay node provides services based on this yes/no decision. Once the drone/CPV has been authenticated and authorized properly the relay node and drone have shared public/private keys. These public/private key pairs allow for the bi-directional exchange of encrypted and authenticated messages between drone and relay node. One possible approach would be for the relay node and drone to exchange encrypted private keys allowing for future symmetric cryptography. Now that cryptographic keys have been securely distributed, bi-directional, authenticated, and encrypted communications can occur).;
wherein the processor is configured to: generate an authentication value corresponding to the user terminal or the UAV by using the user ID or the UAV ID and a secret value of the electronic device, and store the authentication value in the database; transmit the authentication value to the user terminal or the UAV; and identify information encrypted based on the authentication value and received from the user terminal or the UAV by using the authentication value (Para:0088-0089 teaches DMA authentication component 410 will receive data associated with a controller of an authoritative command device, the data including a user license, a plurality of user attributes, a user cryptographic public key, and a user cryptographic private key via a secure channel; determine that the user attributes match the user license and that no user token has been previously issued for the user license; generate a cryptographically signed user token including the user attributes, the user license and the user cryptographic public key; and send the user token to the controller of the authoritative command device. DMA authentication component will also receive data associated with an authoritative command device, the data including a device license, a plurality of device attributes, a device cryptographic public key, and a device cryptographic private key via a secure channel; determine that the device attributes match the device license and that no device token has been previously issued for the device license; generate a cryptographically signed device token including the device attributes, the device license and the device cryptographic public key; and send the device token to the authoritative command device.
Para:0137 teaches the verification process will be performed prior to the issuance of a new DOL. The DOL and drone/CPV operator attributes are stored in various locations which could include, but is not limited to, the drone operator controller, a drone/CPV operator's personal PC, or a third-party organization. A pair of cryptographic keys including a public key and private key are then securely generated for the drone/CPV operator. This can be done locally or via a third-party service. The details for generating cryptographic keys is dependent on the cryptographic algorithms later used. Ideally, for the drone/CPV operator, the key generation occurs on a local device (the drone operator controller, a PC owned by the drone operator, or a secure hardware device). However, this process can occur with the license Authority or the DMA generating keys. At this point, the drone/CPV operator has generated all the necessary information to verify its identity to the DMA and receive a cryptographically signed drone operator token. A cryptographically signed drone operator token is a token that is cryptographically signed and allows for third-parties to verify the DMA signature if they have the CSDT. The cryptographically signed drone operator token also stores the public key for the drone/CPV operator enabling two functions. First, the drone operator public key can be used to encrypt data which only someone with the drone operator private key can decrypt. Second, the drone operator private key can be used to sign data which can be verified by the drone operator public key. Only the drone operator private key is able to produce signatures that will be correctly verified by the corresponding drone operator public key);
Fox teaches all the above claimed limitations but does not expressly teach receiving at least one anonymous user ID of the user; and at least one anonymous ID of the UAV from UAV.
Lee teaches receiving at least one anonymous user ID of the user; and at least one anonymous ID of the UAV from UAV (Abstract teaches the system (100) has a customer terminal (110) that receives golf service information and notifying the customer after transmitting their own signal. The unique signal sent from the customer terminal is detected and de-identified, and an anonymous ID value is given. The golf service information is received and the customer integrated unmanned aerial vehicle (120) for delivery to the terminal, after transmitting the anonymous ID value together with the golf course facility identifier. A database (140) registers golf service information to be provided to customers corresponding to the anonymous ID value in a database for each anonymous ID value. A smart golf service providing server (130) reads golf service information corresponding to the anonymous ID value received from the unmanned aerial vehicle from the database and transmits that to the unmanned aerial vehicle).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of the ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention was filed to modify the teachings of Fox to include obtaining an anonymous ID of the user corresponding to the ID of the user; and an anonymous ID of the UAV corresponding to the ID of the UAV as taught by Lee such a setup will give a predictable result of protect the identity and personal information from being exposed.
17. Regarding claim 2 Fox teaches an electronic device, wherein the processor is configured to: generate a first authentication value corresponding to the user terminal by using the user ID and the secret value of the electronic device and store the first authentication value in the database; transmit the first authentication value to the user terminal; and identify information encrypted based on the first authentication value and received from the user terminal by using the first authentication value (Fig.4 and Para:0083-0088 teaches in order to prove its identity, the drone/CPV has to first register its license with the DMA 405. The DMA 405 returns a CSDT, which allows for the drone/CPV to prove its identity in the future. Once the CSDT has been received by the drone it can be used to verify its identity. The DMA 405 can also be queried by a third-party agency with sufficient court order to verify the registration and licensing. DMA authentication component 410 may receive data associated with a drone/CPV operator, the data including an operator license, a plurality of operator attributes, an operator cryptographic public key, and an operator cryptographic private key via a secure channel; determine that the operator attributes match the operator license and that no operator token has been previously issued for the operator license; generate a cryptographically signed operator token including the operator attributes, the operator license and the operator cryptographic public key; and send the operator token to a drone/CPV operator. DMA authentication component 410 may also receive data associated with a drone/CPV, the data including a drone license, a plurality of drone attributes, a drone cryptographic public key, and a drone cryptographic private key via a secure channel; determine that the drone attributes match the drone license and that no drone token has been previously issued for the drone license; generate a cryptographically signed drone token including the drone attributes, drone license and the drone cryptographic public key; and send the drone token to the drone/CPV. DMA authentication component 410 may also receive data associated with an authoritative command device, the data including a device license, a plurality of device attributes, a device cryptographic public key, and a device cryptographic private key via a secure channel; determine that the device attributes match the device license and that no device token has been previously issued for the device license; generate a cryptographically signed device token including the device attributes, the device license and the device cryptographic public key; and send the device token to the authoritative command device).
18. Regarding claim 3 Fox in view of Lee teaches an electronic device, wherein the information encrypted and received from the user terminal includes at least one anonymous user ID (Fox: Para:0060 and Para:0259 teaches receiving user ID.
Lee: Abstract teaches receiving anonymous user Id).
19. Regarding claim 4 Fox teaches an electronic device, wherein the processor is configured to: generate a second authentication value corresponding to the UAV using the UAV ID and the secret value of the electronic device, and store the second authentication value in the database; transmit the second authentication value to the UAV; and identify information encrypted based on the second authentication value and received from the UAV by using the second authentication value (Fig.4 and Para:0083-0088 teaches in order to prove its identity, the drone/CPV has to first register its license with the DMA 405. The DMA 405 returns a CSDT, which allows for the drone/CPV to prove its identity in the future. Once the CSDT has been received by the drone it can be used to verify its identity. The DMA 405 can also be queried by a third-party agency with sufficient court order to verify the registration and licensing. DMA authentication component 410 may receive data associated with a drone/CPV operator, the data including an operator license, a plurality of operator attributes, an operator cryptographic public key, and an operator cryptographic private key via a secure channel; determine that the operator attributes match the operator license and that no operator token has been previously issued for the operator license; generate a cryptographically signed operator token including the operator attributes, the operator license and the operator cryptographic public key; and send the operator token to a drone/CPV operator. DMA authentication component 410 may also receive data associated with a drone/CPV, the data including a drone license, a plurality of drone attributes, a drone cryptographic public key, and a drone cryptographic private key via a secure channel; determine that the drone attributes match the drone license and that no drone token has been previously issued for the drone license; generate a cryptographically signed drone token including the drone attributes, drone license and the drone cryptographic public key; and send the drone token to the drone/CPV. DMA authentication component 410 may also receive data associated with an authoritative command device, the data including a device license, a plurality of device attributes, a device cryptographic public key, and a device cryptographic private key via a secure channel; determine that the device attributes match the device license and that no device token has been previously issued for the device license; generate a cryptographically signed device token including the device attributes, the device license and the device cryptographic public key; and send the device token to the authoritative command device).
20. Regarding claim 5 Fox in view of Lee teaches an electronic device, wherein the information encrypted and received from the UAV includes at least one anonymous UAV ID (Fig.3, Para:0079-0081 and Para:0091 teaches receiving UAV/drone ID
Lee: Abstract teaches receiving anonymous user Id).
21. Regarding claim 6 Fox teaches an electronic device, wherein the processor is configured to: receive time information corresponding to the location information from the user terminal or the UAV; and store the location information in the database based on whether the time information is valid (para:0125-0126, Para:0135-0135 and Para:0197 teaches receive time information corresponding to the location information).
22. Regarding claim 7 Fox teaches a method of providing a location-based bidirectional key exchange protocol, the method comprising: registering user information corresponding to at least one user terminal based on user ID information received from the at least one user terminal; registering at least one UAV information based on UAV ID information received from at least one UAV; receiving location information on at least one of the at least one user terminal or the at least one UAV; and in response to receiving key exchange request information from any one of the at least one user terminal and the at least one UAV, providing a key exchange protocol between any one of the at least one user terminal and any one of the at least one UAV based on the location information (see, rejection of claim 1).
23. Regarding claim 8 Fox teaches the method, further comprising: in response to receiving the user ID information, transmitting a first authentication value generated by using the user ID information to the at least one user terminal; and in response to receiving the UAV ID information, transmitting a second authentication value generated by using the UAV ID information to the at least one UAV (see, rejection of claims 2 and 4).
24. Regarding claim 9 Fox teaches the method, wherein the receiving the location information further includes: receiving time information corresponding to the location information; and storing the location information based on whether the time information is valid (see, rejection of claim 6).
25. Regarding claim 10 Fox teaches a computer-readable non-transitory recording medium having a program for executing a method for providing a location-based bidirectional key exchange protocol on a computer, wherein the method for providing a location-based bidirectional key exchange protocol includes: registering user information corresponding to at least one user terminal based on user ID information received from the at least one user terminal; registering at least one UAV information based on UAV ID information received from at least one UAV receiving location information on at least one of the at least one user terminal or the at least one UAV; and in response to receiving key exchange request information from any one of the at least one user terminal and the at least one UAV, providing a key exchange protocol between any one of the at least one user terminal and any one of the at least one UAV based on the location information (see, rejection of claim 1).
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 DEREENA T CATTUNGAL whose telephone number is (571)270-0506. The examiner can normally be reached Mon-Fri : 7:30 AM-5 PM 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, Lynn Feild can be reached at 571-272-2092. 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.
/DEREENA T CATTUNGAL/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2431