DETAILED ACTION
Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status
The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to claim(s) 1, 4-6, 8, 10-13, 16-20 have been considered in light of the amendments and are persuasive, see pages 5-6 of the response filed Match 16, 2026. The new ground of rejection does not rely on any reference applied in the prior rejection of record for any teaching or matter specifically challenged in the argument.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 101
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.
Claims 1, 4-6, 8, 10-13, and 16-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 101 because the claimed invention is directed to an abstract idea without significantly more.
A. Claim 1 is analyzed according to Subject Matter Eligibility (SME) flowchart. Claim 1 is directed to a method. According to step 1, the method of claim 1 fits one of the statutory categories. Claim 1 comprises steps calculating tweaks and encrypting/decrypting. Claim 1 further comprises a plurality of applications, a plurality of tweaks, a plurality of secrets. Claim 1 qualifies as a process. Claim 12 is analyzed according to SME flowchart. According to step 1, the system of claim 12 fits one of the statutory categories. Claim 12 is directed a data processing system comprising a processor to execute instructions and memory to store instructions and steps of calculating tweaks and encrypting/decrypting. Claim 12 further comprises a plurality of applications, a plurality of tweaks, a plurality of secrets, and encrypting/decrypting. Claim 12 qualifies a manufacture.
B. When considering step 2A, prong 1, claim 1 recites an abstract idea. The type of abstract idea is categorized under a mathematical calculation. Claim 1 recites a plurality of applications and storing the fetch secret values, load secret values and store secret values for each application. The mathematical calculations of a fetch tweak, load tweak and store tweak for each application. Respectively, calculate load tweak as exclusive OR (XOR) combination of the fetch secret and load secret. The further limitations of a plurality of applications, encrypting data using the store tweak and decrypting data using the instruction fetch tweak does not impact the mathematical calculations. Dependent claims 4-6, 8, 10-11, recite a different secret for each application, the secret known to a security monitor, security monitor switching secrets which is data swapping, changing the physical address of memory, selecting secrets depending on privilege mode, and using a dedicated hardware block of the processor for tweak calculations based on address range of memory. The further limitations of the above dependent claims does not impact the functions of the mathematical calculations.
When considering step 2A, prong 1, claim 12 recites an abstract idea. The type of abstract idea is categorized under a mathematical calculation. Claim 12 recites a data processing system comprising a processor configured to execute instructions, which indicates a computer. Claim 12 further recites a plurality of applications and storing the fetch secret values, load secret values and store secret values for each application. The mathematical calculations of a fetch tweak, load tweak and store tweak for each application. Respectively, calculate load tweak as exclusive OR (XOR) combination of the fetch secret and load secret. The further limitations of a plurality of applications, encrypting data using the store tweak and decrypting data using the instruction fetch tweak does not impact the mathematical calculations. Dependent claims 13, 16-20, recite inputting decrypted data to registers, selecting secrets depending on privilege level, security monitor responsibility for security and the secret known to a security monitor, , rederiving of secret with value of physical address of memory, replacing old secrets which is data swapping and different secret for application of plurality of applications. The further limitations of the above dependent claims does not impact the functions of the mathematical calculations. The additional limitations of claims of 13, 16-20 describe the inputs to calculate the secrets which does not impact the functions of the mathematical calculations. The other additional limitations recite features of the field of use which does not impact the functions of the mathematical calculations.
C. The additional features of claim 1 are considered in step 2A, prong 2. The additional features of claim 1 are considered for determination of whether the claims are integrated in a practical application. The first additional limitation is a plurality of applications, and each application requiring access to memory. The second additional limitation is the plurality of secrets in hardware registers of the processor. The third application limitation encrypting data using the store tweak and decrypting data using the instruction fetch tweak does not impact the abstract idea because encrypting/decrypting are forms of mathematical concepts. The plurality of applications is groups of software, and software code being stored in memory is well-known. Hardware register are well-known storage devices within computer processors. Thus, the additional features of claim 1 fail to integrate the claims into a practical application.
The additional features of dependent claims 4-6, 8, 10-11, are considered as follows. Dependent claim 4 recites a different secret for each application, providing multiple inputs for the mathematical calculations. Dependent claim 5 recites the secret known to another entity, a security monitor. Labeling which entity also has the secret is preprocessing solution activity. Further limitations of dependent claim security monitor switching secrets which .is data swapping and preprocessing solution activity. Dependent claim 8 recites further mathematical calculations suing the physical address of memory as an input to the calculation. This is also preprocessing solution activity. Dependent claim 10 teaches selecting between the secrets condition to mode which is also a mathematical calculation. Lastly, dependent clam 11 recites using a dedicated hardware block of the processor for tweak calculations and using memory address as input to mathematical calculations. The hardware block is well known apparatus and further computation is preprocessing solution activity. The further limitations of the above dependent claims does not integrate the claims into a practical application.
The additional features of claim 12 are considered in step 2A, prong 2. The additional features of claim 1 are considered for determination of whether the claims are integrated in a practical application. The first additional limitation is a plurality of applications, and each application requiring access to memory. The second additional limitation is the plurality of secrets in hardware registers of the processor. The third application limitation encrypting data using the store tweak and decrypting data using the instruction fetch tweak does not impact the abstract idea because encrypting/decrypting are forms of mathematical concepts. The plurality of applications is groups of software, and software code being stored in memory is well-known. Hardware registers are well-known storage devices within computer processors. Thus, the additional features of claim 1 fail to integrate the claims into a practical application.
The additional features of dependent claims 13, 16-20, are considered as follows. Dependent claim 13 storing data to hardware registers and hardware registers are well known for storing in computer. Dependent claim 16 recites different secrets stored for each corresponding privilege level, which selected including multiple inputs for the mathematical calculations. Selecting inputs for the mathematical calculations preprocessing solution activity. Dependent claim 17 recites attaching function to a security monitor and secret only known to the security monitor. Labeling which entity has the secret is preprocessing solution activity. Dependent claim 18 recites further mathematical calculations using the physical address of memory as an input to the calculation. This is also preprocessing solution activity. Dependent claim 19 teaches security monitor and replacing old secrets with new secrets. Updating inputs for the mathematical calculations is also a mathematical calculation. Updating is post processing solution activity. Dependent claim 20 recites selecting between the secrets condition to mode which is also a mathematical calculation. The further limitations of preprocessing and postprocessing activity of the above dependent claims does not integrate the claims into a practical application.
D. The additional limitations of claim 1 are considered in Step 2B. Claim 1 does not recite additional limitations that amount to significantly more than the judicial exception. One additional limitation is a processor. A processor is well-known hardware for executing instructions. Second additional limitations are hardware registers. Hardware registers is well memory structure for a storing data used by a processor executing instructions. The processor and register files does not integrate the invention in a technological field or a particular machine. A third additional limitation is decrypting instructions and encrypting data. Decrypting instructions is also a mathematical calculations and decrypting is also a mathematical calculation. A fourth additional limitation is storing in memory and retrieving from memory, accessing memory is well-known. The additional limitations of claim 1 fails to be significantly more than the abstract idea. They also describe an improvement to computer technology.
Dependent claim 4 recites a different secret for each application, providing those multiple secrets for inputs to mathematical calculations, which is essentially a mathematical calculation itself. Dependent claim 5 recites the secret known to another entity, which is a security monitor without further functionality. Labeling which entity also has the secret is preprocessing solution activity. Further limitations of dependent claim 6 recite security monitor switching secrets which is data swapping and preprocessing solution activity. Dependent claim 8 recites further mathematical calculations using the physical address of memory as an input to the mathematical calculation. The mathematical calculations of claim 8 preprocessing solution activity. Dependent claim 10 teaches selecting between the secrets conditional to mode which is also a mathematical calculation. Lastly, dependent clam 11 recites using a dedicated hardware block of the processor for tweak calculations and using memory address as input to mathematical calculations. The hardware block is well known apparatus and further computation is preprocessing solution activity. The further limitations of the above dependent claims does not amount is significantly more that the abstract idea. The features of dependent claims 4-6 ,8, 10-11 fail to recite significantly more than the abstract idea and fail to provide an improvement to computer technology.
The additional limitations of claim 2 are considered in Step 2B. Claim 12 does not recite additional limitations that amount to significantly more than the judicial exception. One additional limitation is a processor. A processor is well-known hardware for executing instructions. Second additional limitations are hardware registers. Hardware registers is well memory structure for a storing data used by a processor executing instructions. The processor and register files does not integrate the invention in a technological field or a particular machine. A third additional limitation is decrypting instructions and encrypting data. Decrypting instructions is also a mathematical calculations and decrypting is also a mathematical calculation. A fourth additional limitation is storing in memory and retrieving from memory, accessing memory is well-known. The additional limitations of claim 1 fails to be significantly more than the abstract idea. They also describe an improvement to computer technology.
The additional features of dependent claims 13, 16-20, are considered as follows. Dependent claim 13 storing data to hardware registers and hardware registers are well known for storing in computer. Dependent claim 16 recites different secrets stored for each corresponding privilege level, which selected including multiple inputs for the mathematical calculations. Selecting inputs for the mathematical calculations preprocessing solution activity. Dependent claim 17 recites attaching function to a security monitor and secret only known to the security monitor. Labeling which entity has the secret is preprocessing solution activity. Dependent claim 18 recites further mathematical calculations using the physical address of memory as an input to the calculation. This is also preprocessing solution activity. Dependent claim 19 teaches security monitor and replacing old secrets with new secrets. Updating inputs for the mathematical calculations is also a mathematical calculation. Updating is post processing solution activity. Dependent claim 20 recites selecting between the secrets condition to mode which is also a mathematical calculation. The further limitations of the above dependent claims 13, 16-20 does not amount is significantly more that the abstract idea. The features of dependent claims 13, 16-20 fail to recite significantly more than the abstract idea and fail to provide an improvement to computer technology.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to PATRICE L WINDER whose telephone number is (571)272-3935. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 10am-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, KAMAL B DIVECHA can be reached at (571)272-5863. 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.
/Patrice L Winder/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2453
Prosecution Insights