DETAILED ACTION
Response to Arguments
1. Applicant's arguments filed 1/26/2026 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
In the remarks, applicant argues in substance:
That– As seen above, claim 1 recites, among other things, wherein the software
license is embedded in the at least one electronic device during production and does not require a network connection for deployment and does not require a network connection for validation. In the Office Action, the Examiner acknowledged¹ that neither Shin nor Burr discloses or suggests such a feature.
In response to applicant’s arguments- As stated in the prior office action, It is the combination of Shin, Burr, and Lemelev that teaches the claimed language, neither Shin, Burr, nor Lemelev alone. The claims have been examined in their broadest most reasonable interpretation in light of the applicant’s specification. Lemelev in paragraph 0036 discloses that the computer program codes can execute entirely on a user's computer, partly on the user's computer, as a stand-alone software package, partly on the user's computer and partly on a remote computer, or entirely on the remote computer or a server.
That– Lemelev is silent about when license validation occurs, where license
validation occurs, or whether license validation requires network connectivity
In response to applicant’s arguments- Par. 0055 discloses “Once the product keys 116 are entered into a Software package or the Software applications 112 using the software interface, the product keys 116 can connect with a software vendor license server or the license server 108 to validate the product keys 116 over the network 106. The Software package or the Software applications 112 can obtain or receive license limits 122 that apply to the licenses 114 of the users.” Regarding network connectivity Lemelev additionally states in par.0049 “The product keys 116 can represent a software key, a license key, an activation key, or a product serial number. Activation of the software applications 112 can be done or performed offline by entering the product keys. “because the validation occurs through on device mechanisms, the system operates independently of any active network connection. Accordingly, Lemely discloses in its broadest most reasonable interpretation enabling offline license validation via a license embedded in the device prior to distribution.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 103 which forms the basis for all obviousness rejections set forth in this Office action:
A patent for a claimed invention may not be obtained, notwithstanding that the claimed invention is not identically disclosed as set forth in section 102, if the differences between the claimed invention and the prior art are such that the claimed invention as a whole would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which the claimed invention pertains. Patentability shall not be negated by the manner in which the invention was made.
2. Claims 1-12 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Pub.No.: US 2011/0296175 A1 to Shin in view of Patent No.: US 9,047,161 B1 to Burr et al(hereafter referenced as Burr), in further view of Pub.No.: US 2017/0091430 A1 to Lemelev et al(hereafter referenced as Lemelev).
Regarding claim 1, Shin discloses “a method of enforcing software licensing of a software file embedded in at least one electronic device” (user installs distribution agent application to distribute software license[Fig.3/item 302]) , “the method comprising: during production of the at least one electronic device: generating a software license” (Publisher generates license and sends to distributor [Fig.5/item 518]).
Shin does not explicitly disclose “wherein the software license includes at least a license duration”; generating, using the software license, the software file; and storing the software file in a memory device of the at least one electronic device;; and after deployment of the at least one electronic device: determining, without using a corresponding hardware unique ID of the at least one electronic device, whether the software license is valid.”
However, Burr in an analogous art discloses “wherein the software license includes at least a license duration”(archive log includes time/ date stamps and other relevant data in order to timeline or otherwise accurately account for the duration of a software deployment and its association with a given license Burr[Col.4/lines 8-11]); “generating, using the software license, the software file” (archiving license and data 336 comprises regular compiling the license files and the logged data with the historical information, for example from the common directory, such that a historical determination of each license may be generated Burr[Col.7/lines 14-18]) ; “storing the software file in a memory device of the at least one electronic device”(archiving component 136 manages the copied and stored license-files Burr[Col.4/lines 54-55]); “after deployment of the at least one electronic device: determining, without using a corresponding hardware unique ID of the at least one electronic device, whether the software license is valid.”(redeployment verification 470 comprises providing the vendor with the new information regarding the software and the server operation Burr[Col.9/lines 5-8]).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was filed to modify Shin’s licenses distributing process with Burrs discovery, consolidation, and archival of licenses in order to provide additional security. One of ordinary skill would have been motivated to combine because Shin teaches a licensing process utilizing asymmetric key cryptography , Burr discloses a licensing process encompassing discovery, consolidation, archiving, and both are from the same field of endeavor.
Neither Shin nor Burr explicitly discloses “wherein the software license is embedded in the at least one electronic device during production and does not require a network connection for deployment or validation”
However, Lemelev in an analogous art discloses “wherein the software license is embedded in the at least one electronic device during production (The term “module” referred to herein can include software, hardware, or a combination thereof in the embodiments of the present invention in accordance with the context in which the term is used. For example, the software can be machine code, firmware, embedded code, and application software Lemelev [par.0027]) and does not require a network connection for deployment or validation”( the unique device identification is extracted from a network-connected device with a software application installed and not activated on the network-connected device Lemelev[par.0012]), “wherein the software license is embedded in the at least one electronic device during production and does not require a network connection for deployment and does not require a network connection for validation”(The computer program codes can execute entirely on a user's computer, partly on the user's computer, as a stand-alone software package, partly on the user's computer and partly on a remote computer, or entirely on the remote computer or a server [par.0036]).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was filed to modify Shin’s licenses distributing process and Burrs discovery, consolidation, and archival of licenses with Lemelev’s license registration process from a network-connected device with a Software application installed and not activated on the network-connected device in order to provide additional security. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to combine because Shin teaches a licensing process utilizing asymmetric key cryptography , Burr discloses a licensing process encompassing discovery, consolidation, archiving, Lemelev teaches a licensing process from a network-connected device with a Software application installed and not activated on the network-connected device and all are from the same field of endeavor.
Regarding claim 2 in view of claim 1, the references combined disclose “comprising: during production of the at least one electronic device: before storing the software file in the memory device, encrypting the software file” (encryption process an application publisher generates an asymmetric key pair having an encryption key and a decryption key Shin [Fig.1]) ; “after deployment of the at least one electronic device: decrypting the software file; and determining the license duration of the software license” (decryption process using private key Shin[Fig.1]).
Regarding claim 3 in view of claim 1, the references combined disclose “comprising: after deployment of the at least one electronic device: disabling output data of the at least one electronic device when the software license is determined to be invalid”(i.e., if suspension license is not verified, failed and over to AB end Shin[Fig.6A]).
Regarding claim 4 in view of claim 3, the references combined disclose “comprising: after deployment of the at least one electronic device: outputting data representing license information”(i.e., license archiving stores license information Shin [Fig.3/item 330]).
Regarding claim 5 in view of claim 1, the references combined disclose “comprising: after deployment of the at least one electronic device: storing, after a first use of the at least one electronic device, data representing a unique data pattern in a one-time programmable device of the at least one electronic device” (i.e. license archiving stores license information Shin [Fig.3/item 330]), “wherein the data representing the unique data pattern prevents the software license from being reused on the same electronic device again or after the license duration.”(authentication signature process Shin[Fig.5/item 514]).
Regarding claim 6 in view of claim 1, the references combined disclose “comprising: after deployment of the at least one electronic device: counting time with a timer to determine if the license duration has been exceeded” (archive log includes time/ date stamps and other relevant data in order to timeline or otherwise accurately account for the duration of a software deployment and its association with a given license Burr[Col4./lines 8-11]).
Regarding claim 7 in view of claim 1, the references combined disclose “comprising: after deployment of the at least one electronic device: counting a number of video frames to determine if the license duration has been exceeded” (archive log includes time/ date stamps and other relevant data in order to timeline or otherwise accurately account for the duration of a software deployment and its association with a given license Burr[Col4./lines 8-11]).
Regarding claim 8, Shin discloses “a method of renewing a software license of a software file embedded in a plurality of electronic devices” (user installs distribution agent application to distribute software license[Fig.3/item 302]), the method comprising: generating the software license” (Publisher generates license and sends to distributor [Fig.5/item 518]).
Shin does not explicitly disclose “wherein the software license includes at least a license duration and hardware unique IDs corresponding to the plurality of electronic devices; transmitting the software license to a customer; storing the same software license in corresponding memory devices of the plurality of electronic devices, and determining whether the software license is valid.
However, Burr in an analogous art discloses “wherein the software license includes at least a license duration and hardware unique IDs corresponding to the plurality of electronic devices”(archive log includes time/ date stamps and other relevant data in order to timeline or otherwise accurately account for the duration of a software deployment and its association with a given license Burr[Col.4/lines 8-11]); transmitting the software license to a customer (license archiving Burr[Fig.3/item 330]) ; “storing the same software license in corresponding memory devices of the plurality of electronic devices” (Publisher generates license and sends to distributor Burr[Fig.5/item 518]).; “and determining whether the software license is valid”(license markers 324 comprises finding any files with data regarding the Software version the license is correlated, the date of installation, the frequency of operation or access, and other general data. More specific data, Such as the dates of validity of the license or the dates of operation of the license in conjunction with a software deployment are part of the method of locating license markers 324 Bur[Col.6/lines 43-50]).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was filed to modify Shin’s licenses distributing process with Burrs discovery, consolidation, and archival of licenses in order to provide additional security. One of ordinary skill would have been motivated to combine because Shin teaches a licensing process utilizing asymmetric key cryptography , Burr discloses a licensing process encompassing discovery, consolidation, archiving, and both are from the same field of endeavor.
Neither Shin nor Burr explicitly discloses “wherein the software license is embedded in the memory devices of the electronic devices without requiring a network connection for deployment and does not require a network connection for validation”
However, Lemelev in an analogous art discloses ““wherein the software license is embedded in the memory devices of the electronic devices (The term “module” referred to herein can include software, hardware, or a combination thereof in the embodiments of the present invention in accordance with the context in which the term is used. For example, the software can be machine code, firmware, embedded code, and application software Lemelev [par.0027]) without requiring a network connection for deployment and does not require a network connection for validation”( the unique device identification is extracted from a network-connected device with a software application installed and not activated on the network-connected device Lemelev[par.0012] also see The computer program codes can execute entirely on a user's computer, partly on the user's computer, as a stand-alone software package, partly on the user's computer and partly on a remote computer, or entirely on the remote computer or a server Lemelev [par.0036]).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was filed to modify Shin’s licenses distributing process and Burrs discovery, consolidation, and archival of licenses with Lemelev’s license registration process from a network-connected device with a Software application installed and not activated on the network-connected device in order to provide additional security. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to combine because Shin teaches a licensing process utilizing asymmetric key cryptography , Burr discloses a licensing process encompassing discovery, consolidation, archiving, Lemelev teaches a licensing process from a network-connected device with a Software application installed and not activated on the network-connected device and all are from the same field of endeavor.
Regarding claim 9 in view of claim 8, the references combined disclose “ comprising: before transmitting the software license to a customer: encrypting the software license(encryption process An application publisher generates an asymmetric key pair having an encryption key and a decryption key Shin [Fig.1]); and applying a digital signature to the encrypted software license” (digital signature using private key Shin[Fig.1]).
Regarding claim 10 in view of claim 9, the references combined disclose “wherein determining whether the software license is valid includes: verifying the digital signature(digital signature using private key Shin[Fig.1]); “decrypting the software license” (decryption process using private key Shin[Fig.1]); “verifying a license ID; and verifying a device hardware unique ID with the at least one hardware unique ID of the software license.” (redeployment verification 470 comprises providing the vendor with the new information regarding the software and the server operation Burr[Col.9/lines 5-8]).
Regarding claim 11 in view of claim 10, the references combined disclose “wherein verifying the device hardware unique ID with the at least one hardware unique ID of the software license includes: comparing the device hardware unique ID stored in the electronic device with a hardware unique ID of the software license.” (redeployment verification 470 comprises providing the vendor with the new information regarding the software and the server operation Burr[Col.9/lines 5-8]).
Regarding claim 12 in view of claim 11, the references combined disclose “comprising: when the device hardware unique ID stored in the electronic device matches a hardware unique ID of the software license: incrementing a license validity time by the license duration of the software file” (i.e., if suspension license is not verified, failed and over to AB end Shin[Fig.6A]).
3. Claims 13-17 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Patent No.: US 9,047,161 B1 to Burr et al(hereafter referenced as Burr), in further view of Pub.No.: US 2017/0091430 A1 to Lemelev et al(hereafter referenced as Lemelev).
Regarding claim 13, Burr discloses “a method of enforcing software licensing of a software file embedded in at least one electronic device, the method comprising: during production of the at least one electronic device: generating a software license” (archiving license and data 336 comprises regular compiling the license files and the logged data with the historical information, for example from the common directory, such that a historical determination of each license may be generated [Col.7/lines 14-18]), “wherein the software license includes at least a license duration”(Additionally, inventorying the licenses by retrieving the archive 450 comprises determining the status, including expiration dates for the licenses as found in the logged data [Col.9/21-24]); “generating, using the software license, the software file; storing the software file in a memory device of the at least one electronic device” (archiving license and data 336 comprises regular compiling the license files and the logged data with the historical information, for example from the common directory, such that a historical determination of each license may be generated [Col.7/lines 14-18]),
Burr does not explicitly disclose “wherein the software license is embedded in the at least one electronic device during production and does not require a network connection for deployment and does not require a network connection for validation; after deployment of the at least one electronic device: determining, without using a corresponding hardware unique ID of the at least one electronic device, whether the software license is valid; and counting time with a timer to determine if the license duration has been exceeded.”
However, Lemelev discloses “wherein the software license is embedded in the at least one electronic device during production and does not require a network connection for deployment and does not require a network connection for validation” (the computer program codes can execute entirely on a user's computer, partly on the user's computer, as a stand-alone software package, partly on the user's computer and partly on a remote computer, or entirely on the remote computer or a server Lemelev [par.0036]); after deployment of the at least one electronic device (the unique device identification is extracted from a network-connected device with a software application installed and not activated on the network-connected device Lemelev[par.0012]): “determining, without using a corresponding hardware unique ID of the at least one electronic device, whether the software license is valid; and counting time with a timer to determine if the license duration has been exceeded.”(license server 108 can store activation dates 516 of the software applications 112 and can start license duration counters 518, which are used to indicate durations when the licenses 114 are valid or activated. The licenses 114 can be valid or activated for any durations Lemelev [par.0126]).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was filed to modify Burrs discovery, consolidation, and archival of licenses with Lemelev’s license registration process from a network-connected device with a Software application installed and not activated on the network-connected device in order to provide additional security. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to combine because, Burr discloses a licensing process encompassing discovery, consolidation, archiving, Lemelev teaches a licensing process from a network-connected device with a Software application installed and not activated on the network-connected device and both are from the same field of endeavor.
Regarding claim 14 in view of claim 13, neither Burr nor Lemelev explicitly disclose “comprising: during production of the at least one electronic device: before storing the software file in the memory device, encrypting the software file; after deployment of the at least one electronic device: decrypting the software file; and determining the license duration of the software license”
However, Shin in an analogous art discloses “comprising: during production of the at least one electronic device: before storing the software file in the memory device, encrypting the software file” (encryption process an application publisher generates an asymmetric key pair having an encryption key and a decryption key Shin [Fig.1]); after deployment of the at least one electronic device: decrypting the software file; and determining the license duration of the software license” (decryption process using private key Shin[Fig.1]).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was filed to modify Burrs discovery, consolidation, and archival of licenses and Lemelev’s license registration process from a network-connected device with a Software application installed and not activated on the network-connected device, with Shin’s licenses distributing process in order to provide additional security.
One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to combine because, Burr discloses a licensing process encompassing discovery, consolidation, archiving, Lemelev teaches a licensing process from a network-connected device with a Software application installed and not activated on the network-connected device, Shin discloses a license distributing process utilizing encryption and decryption process and all are from the same field of endeavor.
Regarding claim 15 in view of claim 13, the references combined disclose “comprising: after deployment of the at least one electronic device: disabling output data of the at least one electronic device when the software license is determined to be invalid” (i.e., if suspension license is not verified, failed and over to AB end Shin[Fig.6A]).
Regarding claim 16 in view of claim 15, the references combined disclose “comprising: after deployment of the at least one electronic device: outputting data representing license information”(i.e., license archiving stores license information Shin [Fig.3/item 330]).
Regarding claim 17 in view of claim 13, the references combined disclose “comprising: after deployment of the at least one electronic device: storing, after a first use of the at least one electronic device” (i.e. license archiving stores license information Shin [Fig.3/item 330]), “data representing a unique data pattern in a one-time programmable device of the at least one electronic device, wherein the data representing the unique data pattern prevents the software license from being reused on the same electronic device again or after the license duration” (authentication signature process [Fig.5/item 514]).
Conclusion
THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. 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 MICHAEL D ANDERSON whose telephone number is (571)270-5159. The examiner can normally be reached Mon-Fri 9am-6pm.
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, Jeffrey Pwu can be reached at (571) 272-6798. 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.
/MICHAEL D ANDERSON/Examiner, Art Unit 2433
/JEFFREY C PWU/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2433