Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status
The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
Continued Examination Under 37 CFR 1.114
A request for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, including the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e), was filed in this application after final rejection. Since this application is eligible for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114. Applicant's submission filed on 02/17/2026 has been entered.
Response to Amendments / Arguments
Regarding the rejection(s) of claims under 35 USC 103:
Applicant’s arguments, filed 02/17/2026, in view of the amended claims, have been fully considered and are persuasive. Therefore, the rejection is withdrawn, however upon further review the rejection is maintained under Patel et al. (US 9313179 B1) and Oakley (US 7477741 B1).
DETAILED ACTION
This is a reply to the arguments filed on 02/17/2026, in which, claims 1, 3-13 and 15-20 are pending. Claims 1, 10, and 13 are independent. Claims 2 and 14 are cancelled.
When making claim amendments, the applicant is encouraged to consider the references in their entireties, including those portions that have not been cited by the examiner and their equivalents as they may most broadly and appropriately apply to any particular anticipated claim amendments.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 103 which forms the basis for all obviousness rejections set forth in this Office action:
A patent for a claimed invention may not be obtained, notwithstanding that the claimed invention is not identically disclosed as set forth in section 102, if the differences between the claimed invention and the prior art are such that the claimed invention as a whole would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which the claimed invention pertains. Patentability shall not be negated by the manner in which the invention was made.
Claims 1, 3-13 and 15-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Volkhov (“Techniques, Software, and Applications for Packed Partially Homomorphic Encryption”, referred to as Volkhov) in view of Patel et al. (US 9313179 B1, referred to as Patel)
In reference to claim 1, A computer-implemented method, wherein the computer-implemented method comprises: obtaining N first plaintexts, wherein N is a positive integer greater than or equal to 2 (Volkhov: Page 9-10, Section 3.2 "Packing Approaches" Provides for obtaining multiple plaintexts (referred to as a "plaintext vector a") where the number of plaintexts is at least 2. Provides for packing multiple plaintext values into a single space, which directly corresponds to the claim element.)
Wherein the N first plaintexts comprise signed integers (Volkhov: Page 10, Section 3.2 "CRT-based Packing" Provides for handling signed integers within the plaintext vector, explicitly stating. Demonstrating that the N first plaintexts include signed integers including negative values.)
Splicing the N first plaintexts based on a first predetermined rule to obtain a first target plaintext (Volkhov: Page 10, Section 3.2 "CRT-based Packing" Provides for the process of splicing multiple plaintexts (vector a) based on a predetermined rule (CRT algorithm with distinct primes) to obtain a single target plaintext (a number in the CRT domain).)
Encrypting the first target plaintext by using a predetermined encryption algorithm to obtain a first target ciphertext (Volkhov: Page 6-7, Section 2.1; Page 11, Section 3.3; Page 18-19, Section 5.1 Explicitly describes encrypting the packed plaintext using predetermined encryption algorithms (DGK, Paillier, GM). Page 8-11 Section 3-3.2 Further Provides for the step of encrypting the combined plaintext using DGK or other PHE schemes.)
Volkhov does not explicitly disclose converting first plaintexts being the signed integers into corresponding complement binary representations and wherein splicing the N first plaintexts comprises splicing the complement binary representations corresponding to the signed integers in the N first plaintexts based on the first predetermined rule to obtain the first target plaintext. However, Patel discloses: Converting first plaintexts being the signed integers into corresponding complement binary representations (Patel: Col. 17, lines 40–55 and Col. 18, lines 33–50 Provides for converting signed-integer plaintexts to two's-complement binary representations.) Wherein splicing the N first plaintexts comprises concatenating at least the complement binary representations corresponding to the signed integers in the N first plaintexts based on the first predetermined rule to obtain the first target plaintext (Patel: Col. 18, lines 17–32; Col. 19, lines 1–16 and FIG. 7 Provides for concatenating the two's-complement representation of the signed integer.)
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the teachings of Volkhov, which provides a method for obtaining multiple signed integer plaintexts, splicing them according to predetermined rules using CRT-based packing, and encrypting the resulting target plaintext using homomorphic encryption algorithms, with the teachings of Patel, which introduces converting signed integers into two's complement binary representations and splicing these binary representations to form target plaintexts. One of ordinary skill in the art would recognize the ability to incorporate Patel's two's complement representation approach into Volkhov's plaintext packing system to provide standardized handling of signed integers. One of ordinary skill in the art would be motivated to make this modification in order to ensure consistent and unambiguous representation of negative values across different computing platforms.
In reference to claim 3, The computer-implemented method according to claim 1, wherein the N first plaintexts further comprise unsigned integers (Volkhov: Page 10, Section 3.2 "CRT-based Packing" Provides for both positive (unsigned) and negative (signed) integers in its packing scheme.)
The splicing the N first plaintexts based on a first predetermined rule to obtain a first target plaintext comprises: splicing the complements corresponding to the signed integers in the N first plaintexts and the unsigned integers based on the first predetermined rule to obtain the first target plaintext (Volkhov: Page 10, Section 3.2 "CRT-based Packing" Provides for a unified CRT packing process that handles all elements in the plaintext vector, including both the regular positive values and the specially encoded negative values (complements)
Wherein the complements are complaint binary representations (Patel: Col. 17, lines 12–16, 44–47; Col. 18, lines 33–50 and Col. 19, lines 16–28 Provides for the "complements" being two's-complement binary representations explicitly.)
In reference to claim 5, The computer-implemented method according to claim 1, wherein the first target plaintext comprises the N first plaintexts and a predetermined gap between every two adjacent first plaintexts in the N first plaintexts, the predetermined gap comprises d bits of predetermined numbers, and d is a positive integer (Volkhov: Page 8, Section 3.1 Provides for a packing approach where plaintexts are separated by "precomputed number of zeroes" between them. This directly corresponds to the claimed "predetermined gap".)
In reference to claim 6, The computer-implemented method according to claim 1, wherein all of the N first plaintexts have a same size (Volkhov: Page 10, Section 3.2 (CRT-based Packing); Page 9, Section 3.2 (DFT-based Packing) Provides for a packing scheme where plaintexts are treated uniformly. In the DFT packing, all slots have the same modulus m ("the real plaintext modulus for a single slot"). In the CRT packing, while different primes pi are used, the system is designed to handle plaintexts of consistent size within the overall scheme.)
In reference to claim 7, The computer-implemented method according to claim 1, wherein the computer-implemented method is performed by a first terminal, and the predetermined encryption algorithm is an addition homomorphic encryption algorithm (Volkhov: Page 6, Section 2.1 "Additive Partially Homomorphic Encryption Schemes". Page 20, Section 5.3 "Benchmarks and Performance" Provides for additive homomorphic encryption schemes (AHE), particularly GM, Paillier, and DGK. The paper states that these are all additively homomorphic and describes their properties in detail. Further provides for implementation and benchmarking on computer hardware (specifically an Intel i5 processor).)
In reference to claim 8, The computer-implemented method according to claim 1, the computer-implemented method further comprises: obtaining M groups of second plaintexts, wherein M is a positive integer, each of the M groups of second plaintexts comprises N second plaintexts, and the N second plaintexts are in one-to-one correspondence with the N first plaintexts (Volkhov: Page 11-12, Section 4.1 (Batched Comparisons); Page 15, Section 4.2 (Batched Argmax) Provides for batched protocols where multiple groups of plaintexts are processed..)
Splicing each of the M groups of second plaintexts based on the first predetermined rule to obtain M second target plaintexts (Volkhov: Page 12, Protocol 1 (ParSecureCompareRaw); Page 15, Protocol 3 (ParArgmax) Provides for applying the same packing rule (PAHE encryption with CRT or DFT packing) to multiple groups of plaintexts.)
Encrypting the M second target plaintexts by using the predetermined encryption algorithm to obtain M second target ciphertexts (Volkhov: Page 12, Protocol 1; Page 15, Protocol 3 Provides for multiple groups being encrypted using the same predetermined encryption algorithm (DGK, Paillier, or GM with PAHE packing).)
Sending the first target ciphertext and the M second target ciphertexts to a second terminal (Volkhov: Page 12, Protocol 1; Page 4, Section 1.2; Page 19, Section 5.2 Provides for sending multiple encrypted ciphertexts between terminals (client and server).)
In reference to claim 9, The computer-implemented method according to claim 8, the computer-implemented method further comprises: receiving a third target ciphertext returned by the second terminal, wherein the third target ciphertext is a result of adding the first target ciphertext and the M second target ciphertexts (Volkhov: Page 12, Protocol 1 (ParSecureCompareRaw); Page 15, Protocol 3 (ParArgmax); Page 4, Section 1.2 Provides for the server performing homomorphic operations on received ciphertexts and sending results back to the client.)
Decrypting the third target ciphertext to obtain a third target plaintext (Volkhov: Page 4, Section 1.2; Page 12, Protocol 1; Page 15, Protocol 3 Provides for decryption operations where the client receives encrypted results from the server and decrypts them using their secret key.)
Intercepting the third target plaintext based on a second predetermined rule to obtain N results of correspondingly adding the N first plaintexts and the M groups of second plaintexts (Volkhov: Page 10, Section 3.2 (CRT-based Packing); Page 9-10, Section 3.2 (DFT-based Packing) Provides for the inverse operations for both packing modes.)
In reference to claim 10, A computer-implemented method performed by a second terminal, wherein the computer-implemented method comprises (Volkhov: Page 4, Section 1.2; Page 12, Protocol 1; Page 15, Protocol 3 Provides for methods performed by the server (second terminal) in client-server protocols.)
Receiving a first target ciphertext and M second target ciphertexts from a first terminal, wherein: the first target ciphertext comprises N first plaintexts, N is a positive integer greater than or equal to 2, (Volkhov: Page 9-10, Section 3.2 "Packing Approaches" Provides for obtaining multiple plaintexts (referred to as a "plaintext vector a") where the number of plaintexts is at least 2. Provides for packing multiple plaintext values into a single space, which directly corresponds to the claim element. Page 12, Protocol 1; Page 15, Protocol 3 Further Provides for the server receiving multiple encrypted ciphertexts from the client.)
Wherein the N first plaintexts comprise signed integers (Volkhov: Page 10, Section 3.2 "CRT-based Packing" Provides for handling signed integers within the plaintext vector, explicitly stating. Demonstrating that the N first plaintexts include signed integers including negative values.)
The first target ciphertext comprises a first target plaintext encrypted using a predetermined encryption algorithm (Volkhov: Page 6-7, Section 2.1; Page 11, Section 3.3; Page 18-19, Section 5.1 Explicitly describes encrypting the packed plaintext using predetermined encryption algorithms (DGK, Paillier, GM). Page 8-11 Section 3-3.2 Further Provides for the step of encrypting the combined plaintext using DGK or other PHE schemes.)
The first target plaintext comprises complement binary representations that correspond to the signed integers in the N first plaintexts and that are spliced based on a first predetermined rule (Volkhov: Page 10, Section 3.2 "CRT-based Packing" Provides for using the CRT algorithm to splice plaintexts together, which inherently involves a predetermined sequence.)
The M second target ciphertexts comprise M groups of second plaintexts, M is a positive integer, each of the M groups of second plaintexts comprises N second plaintexts (Volkhov: Page 12, Protocol 1; Page 15, Protocol 3 Provides for the server receiving multiple groups of encrypted plaintexts, where each group contains multiple plaintexts.)
The N second plaintexts are in one-to-one correspondence with the N first plaintexts (Volkhov: Page 12, Protocol 1; Page 15, Protocol 3 Provides for the server's plaintexts (c0, ..., ck-1) correspond to the client's plaintexts (r0, ..., rk-1) in the comparison protocols. The indexing shows one-to-one correspondence between elements in different groups.)
Adding the first target ciphertext and the M second target ciphertexts to obtain a third target ciphertext (Volkhov: Page 3, Section 1.1; Page 6, Section 2.1; Page 12, Protocol 1 Provides for homomorphic addition operations performed by the server on multiple ciphertexts.)
Sending the third target ciphertext to the first terminal (Volkhov: Page 12, Protocol 1; Page 15, Protocol 3; Page 4, Section 1.2 Provides for the server sending computed ciphertext results back to the client (first terminal).)
Volkhov does not explicitly disclose converting first plaintexts being the signed integers into corresponding complement binary representations and wherein splicing the N first plaintexts comprises splicing the complement binary representations corresponding to the signed integers in the N first plaintexts based on the first predetermined rule to obtain the first target plaintext. However, Patel discloses: Converting first plaintexts being the signed integers into corresponding complement binary representations (Patel: Col. 17, lines 40–55 and Col. 18, lines 33–50 Provides for converting signed-integer plaintexts to two's-complement binary representations.) Wherein splicing the N first plaintexts comprises concatenating at least the complement binary representations corresponding to the signed integers in the N first plaintexts based on the first predetermined rule to obtain the first target plaintext (Patel: Col. 18, lines 17–32; Col. 19, lines 1–16 and FIG. 7 Provides for concatenating the two's-complement representation of the signed integer.)
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the teachings of Volkhov, which provides a method for obtaining multiple signed integer plaintexts, splicing them according to predetermined rules using CRT-based packing, and encrypting the resulting target plaintext using homomorphic encryption algorithms, with the teachings of Patel, which introduces converting signed integers into two's complement binary representations and splicing these binary representations to form target plaintexts. One of ordinary skill in the art would recognize the ability to incorporate Patel's two's complement representation approach into Volkhov's plaintext packing system to provide standardized handling of signed integers. One of ordinary skill in the art would be motivated to make this modification in order to ensure consistent and unambiguous representation of negative values across different computing platforms.
In reference to claim 11, The computer-implemented method according to claim 10, wherein the first target ciphertext is obtained by using an addition homomorphic encryption algorithm (Volkhov: Page 6, Section 2.1 "Additive Partially Homomorphic Encryption Schemes". Page 20, Section 5.3 "Benchmarks and Performance" Provides for additive homomorphic encryption schemes (AHE), particularly GM, Paillier, and DGK. The paper states that these are all additively homomorphic and describes their properties in detail. Further provides for implementation and benchmarking on computer hardware (specifically an Intel i5 processor).)
In reference to claim 12, The computer-implemented method according to claim 10, wherein the third target ciphertext comprises a result of correspondingly adding the N first plaintexts and the N second plaintexts in each of the M groups of second plaintexts (Volkhov: Page 10, Section 3.2 (CRT-based Packing); Page 3, Section 1.1 Provides for homomorphic addition operations on packed ciphertexts result in element-wise (corresponding) addition of the underlying plaintexts. When you add two packed ciphertexts, each containing N plaintexts, the result is a packed ciphertext containing the element-wise sums of the corresponding plaintext elements.
In reference to claim 13, A first terminal, comprising: one or more computers; and one or more computer memory devices interoperably coupled with the one or more computers and having tangible, non-transitory, machine-readable media storing one or more instructions that, when executed by the one or more computers, perform one or more operations (Volkhov: Page 4, Section 1.2; Page 19, Section 5.2; Page 20, Section 5.3 Provides for a complete computer system implementation.)
Obtaining N first plaintexts, wherein N is a positive integer greater than or equal to 2 (Volkhov: Page 9-10, Section 3.2 "Packing Approaches" Provides for obtaining multiple plaintexts (referred to as a "plaintext vector a") where the number of plaintexts is at least 2. Provides for packing multiple plaintext values into a single space, which directly corresponds to the claim element.)
Wherein the N first plaintexts comprise signed integers (Volkhov: Page 10, Section 3.2 "CRT-based Packing" Provides for handling signed integers within the plaintext vector, explicitly stating. Demonstrating that the N first plaintexts include signed integers including negative values.)
Splicing the N first plaintexts based on a first predetermined rule to obtain a first target plaintext (Volkhov: Page 10, Section 3.2 "CRT-based Packing" Provides for the process of splicing multiple plaintexts (vector a) based on a predetermined rule (CRT algorithm with distinct primes) to obtain a single target plaintext (a number in the CRT domain).)
Encrypting the first target plaintext by using a predetermined encryption algorithm to obtain a first target ciphertext (Volkhov: Page 6-7, Section 2.1; Page 11, Section 3.3; Page 18-19, Section 5.1 Explicitly describes encrypting the packed plaintext using predetermined encryption algorithms (DGK, Paillier, GM). Page 8-11 Section 3-3.2 Further Provides for the step of encrypting the combined plaintext using DGK or other PHE schemes.)
Volkhov does not explicitly disclose converting first plaintexts being the signed integers into corresponding complement binary representations and wherein splicing the N first plaintexts comprises splicing the complement binary representations corresponding to the signed integers in the N first plaintexts based on the first predetermined rule to obtain the first target plaintext. However, Patel discloses: Converting first plaintexts being the signed integers into corresponding complement binary representations (Patel: Col. 17, lines 40–55 and Col. 18, lines 33–50 Provides for converting signed-integer plaintexts to two's-complement binary representations.) Wherein splicing the N first plaintexts comprises concatenating at least the complement binary representations corresponding to the signed integers in the N first plaintexts based on the first predetermined rule to obtain the first target plaintext (Patel: Col. 18, lines 17–32; Col. 19, lines 1–16 and FIG. 7 Provides for concatenating the two's-complement representation of the signed integer.)
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the teachings of Volkhov, which provides a method for obtaining multiple signed integer plaintexts, splicing them according to predetermined rules using CRT-based packing, and encrypting the resulting target plaintext using homomorphic encryption algorithms, with the teachings of Patel, which introduces converting signed integers into two's complement binary representations and splicing these binary representations to form target plaintexts. One of ordinary skill in the art would recognize the ability to incorporate Patel's two's complement representation approach into Volkhov's plaintext packing system to provide standardized handling of signed integers. One of ordinary skill in the art would be motivated to make this modification in order to ensure consistent and unambiguous representation of negative values across different computing platforms.
In reference to claim 15, The first terminal according to claim 13, wherein the N first plaintexts further comprise unsigned integers (Volkhov: Page 10, Section 3.2 "CRT-based Packing" Provides for both positive (unsigned) and negative (signed) integers in its packing scheme.)
The splicing the N first plaintexts based on a first predetermined rule to obtain a first target plaintext comprises: splicing the complements corresponding to the signed integers in the N first plaintexts and the unsigned integers based on the first predetermined rule to obtain the first target plaintext (Volkhov: Page 10, Section 3.2 "CRT-based Packing" Provides for a unified CRT packing process that handles all elements in the plaintext vector, including both the regular positive values and the specially encoded negative values (complements))
Wherein the complements are complaint binary representations (Patel: Col. 17, lines 12–16, 44–47; Col. 18, lines 33–50 and Col. 19, lines 16–28 Provides for the "complements" being two's-complement binary representations explicitly.)
In reference to claim 17, The first terminal according to claim 13, wherein the first target plaintext comprises the N first plaintexts and a predetermined gap between every two adjacent first plaintexts in the N first plaintexts, the predetermined gap comprises d bits of predetermined numbers, and d is a positive integer (Volkhov: Page 8, Section 3.1 Provides for a packing approach where plaintexts are separated by "precomputed number of zeroes" between them. This directly corresponds to the claimed "predetermined gap".)
In reference to claim 18, The first terminal according to claim 13, wherein all of the N first plaintexts have a same size (Volkhov: Page 10, Section 3.2 (CRT-based Packing); Page 9, Section 3.2 (DFT-based Packing) Provides for a packing scheme where plaintexts are treated uniformly. In the DFT packing, all slots have the same modulus m ("the real plaintext modulus for a single slot"). In the CRT packing, while different primes pi are used, the system is designed to handle plaintexts of consistent size within the overall scheme.)
In reference to claim 19, The first terminal according to claim 13, wherein the predetermined encryption algorithm is an addition homomorphic encryption algorithm (Volkhov: Page 6, Section 2.1 "Additive Partially Homomorphic Encryption Schemes". Page 20, Section 5.3 "Benchmarks and Performance" Provides for additive homomorphic encryption schemes (AHE), particularly GM, Paillier, and DGK. The paper states that these are all additively homomorphic and describes their properties in detail. Further provides for implementation and benchmarking on computer hardware (specifically an Intel i5 processor).)
In reference to claim 20, The first terminal according to claim 13, wherein the one or more operations further comprise: obtaining M groups of second plaintexts, wherein M is a positive integer, each of the M groups of second plaintexts comprises N second plaintexts, and the N second plaintexts are in one-to-one correspondence with the N first plaintexts (Volkhov: Page 11-12, Section 4.1 (Batched Comparisons); Page 15, Section 4.2 (Batched Argmax) Provides for batched protocols where multiple groups of plaintexts are processed..)
Splicing each of the M groups of second plaintexts based on the first predetermined rule to obtain M second target plaintexts (Volkhov: Page 12, Protocol 1 (ParSecureCompareRaw); Page 15, Protocol 3 (ParArgmax) Provides for applying the same packing rule (PAHE encryption with CRT or DFT packing) to multiple groups of plaintexts.)
Encrypting the M second target plaintexts by using the predetermined encryption algorithm to obtain M second target ciphertexts (Volkhov: Page 12, Protocol 1; Page 15, Protocol 3 Provides for multiple groups being encrypted using the same predetermined encryption algorithm (DGK, Paillier, or GM with PAHE packing).)
Sending the first target ciphertext and the M second target ciphertexts to a second terminal (Volkhov: Page 12, Protocol 1; Page 4, Section 1.2; Page 19, Section 5.2 Provides for sending multiple encrypted ciphertexts between terminals (client and server).)
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 103 which forms the basis for all obviousness rejections set forth in this Office action:
A patent for a claimed invention may not be obtained, notwithstanding that the claimed invention is not identically disclosed as set forth in section 102, if the differences between the claimed invention and the prior art are such that the claimed invention as a whole would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which the claimed invention pertains. Patentability shall not be negated by the manner in which the invention was made.
Claims 4, 16 and 22 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Volkhov (“Techniques, Software, and Applications for Packed Partially Homomorphic Encryption”, referred to as Volkhov) in view of Patel et al. (US 9313179 B1, referred to as Patel)
In reference to claim 4, The computer-implemented method according to claim 1, wherein the splicing the N first plaintexts based on a first predetermined rule to obtain a first target plaintext comprises: splicing the N first plaintexts based on a predetermined sequence to obtain the first target plaintext (Oakley: Col. 5, lines 1–52; FIG. 5; Col. 5, line 53 – Col. 6, line 4; Col. 6, lines 5–27; and Col. 6, lines 35–42 Provides for ordering the units to be spliced according to a predetermined ascending or descending sequence prior to concatenation into the output stream.)
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the teachings of Volkhov in view of Patel, which together provide a method for converting signed integers into two's complement binary representations and splicing them according to predetermined rules to obtain target plaintexts for encryption, with the teachings of Oakley, which introduces ordering the units to be spliced according to a predetermined ascending or descending sequence prior to concatenation. One of ordinary skill in the art would recognize the ability to incorporate Oakley's sequence-based ordering approach into the combined plaintext splicing system to provide a structured and reproducible arrangement of plaintext components. One of ordinary skill in the art would be motivated to make this modification in order to ensure consistent and deterministic reconstruction of individual plaintexts from the combined target plaintext by establishing a predictable ordering convention.
In reference to claim 16, The first terminal according to claim 13, wherein the splicing the N first plaintexts based on a first predetermined rule to obtain a first target plaintext comprises: splicing the N first plaintexts based on a predetermined sequence to obtain the first target plaintext (Oakley: Col. 5, lines 1–52; FIG. 5; Col. 5, line 53 – Col. 6, line 4; Col. 6, lines 5–27; and Col. 6, lines 35–42 Provides for ordering the units to be spliced according to a predetermined ascending or descending sequence prior to concatenation into the output stream.)
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the teachings of Volkhov in view of Patel, which together provide a method for converting signed integers into two's complement binary representations and splicing them according to predetermined rules to obtain target plaintexts for encryption, with the teachings of Oakley, which introduces ordering the units to be spliced according to a predetermined ascending or descending sequence prior to concatenation. One of ordinary skill in the art would recognize the ability to incorporate Oakley's sequence-based ordering approach into the combined plaintext splicing system to provide a structured and reproducible arrangement of plaintext components. One of ordinary skill in the art would be motivated to make this modification in order to ensure consistent and deterministic reconstruction of individual plaintexts from the combined target plaintext by establishing a predictable ordering convention.
In reference to claim 22, The computer-implemented method according to claim 10, wherein the first target plaintext comprises at least the complement binary representations that correspond to the signed integers in the N first plaintexts and that are concatenated based on a predetermined sequence comprising at least a descending order or an ascending order of the N first plaintexts (Oakley: Col. 5, lines 1–52; FIG. 5; Col. 5, line 53 – Col. 6, line 4; Col. 6, lines 5–27; and Col. 6, lines 35–42 Provides for ordering the units to be spliced according to a predetermined ascending or descending sequence prior to concatenation into the output stream.)
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the teachings of Volkhov in view of Patel, which together provide a method for converting signed integers into two's complement binary representations and splicing them according to predetermined rules to obtain target plaintexts for encryption, with the teachings of Oakley, which introduces ordering the units to be spliced according to a predetermined ascending or descending sequence prior to concatenation. One of ordinary skill in the art would recognize the ability to incorporate Oakley's sequence-based ordering approach into the combined plaintext splicing system to provide a structured and reproducible arrangement of plaintext components. One of ordinary skill in the art would be motivated to make this modification in order to ensure consistent and deterministic reconstruction of individual plaintexts from the combined target plaintext by establishing a predictable ordering convention.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. See PTO-892.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to AIDAN EDWARD SHAUGHNESSY whose telephone number is (703)756-1423. The examiner can normally be reached on Monday-Friday from 7:30am to 5pm.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Jeffrey Nickerson, can be reached at telephone number (469) 295-9235. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300.
Information regarding the status of an application may be obtained from Patent Center and the Private Patent Application Information Retrieval (PAIR) system. Status information for published applications may be obtained from Patent Center or Private PAIR. Status information for unpublished applications is available through Patent Center and Private PAIR for authorized users only. Should you have questions about access to the Private PAIR system, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free).
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) Form at https://www.uspto.gov/patents/usptoautomated-interview-request-air-form.
/A.E.S./Examiner, Art Unit 2432
/Jeffrey Nickerson/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2432
Prosecution Insights