ENTERPRISE SECURITY IN METERS

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 . The amendment of claims 1-24, filed on 2/27/206, is acknowledged and considered. Claims 1-16 and 21-24 are pending. Claims 1 and 13 are independent claims. Claims 17-20 are cancelled by Applicant. Claims 21-24 are new. 3. Claims 1-16 has overcome the rejection on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting, necessitated by the Terminal Disclaimer. Priority 4. The present application has relationship to: PRO 62858586, filing date 6/7/2019 and CON 16895043, filing date 6/8/2020 Allowable Subject Matter 5. Claims 1-12 are allowed over art. 6. The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter: The previous rejection, under Davis and Garrison combination, was overcome by the current amendment. For example, Davis teaches a plurality of meters connected to the network [Davis: para 0106, 0292] wherein each meter of the plurality of meters including, a communication device for coupling the meter to the network and receiving the security configuration for the meter, and [Davis: para 0111-0112, 0116-0125]. There includes a device that may be a server that sends a notification to a smart meter [Davis: para 0117]. As for Garrison teaches downloading (that is, updating) firmware in a utility meter with use of a system and method of relaying updates via a two-way communications network. Different meters may require different types of firmware updates. Also, a given meter may require different firmware images depending on which of a plurality of processors are to be updated. As such, firmware downloads are preferably configured for distribution among all endpoints in a network to help communicate the updates to the desired meters. The meter can be configured to install the update or the meter acts as a host or repeater for relaying the updates to other meters for which the updates are targeted [Garrison: para 0028]. Further, Garrison discusses the upgrade server attempts point-to-point communications with individual devices to determine whether all of the fragments have been accurately received. After all segments (fragments) have been accurately received, the update server can activate the firmware within the device. Such advanced metering system may preferably comprise a plurality of end devices, at least some of which end devices comprise metrology devices, and comprise a network including a central facility comprising an update server and a collection engine. Such collection engine preferably may include an orchestration manager for distributing metrology device data communications functionality. Further, such network is preferably configured for bi-directional communications between the central facility and each of the plurality of end devices, and configured so as to notify selected of the plurality of such end devices of a pending firmware image download, broadcast such firmware image download as a series of individual fragments, establish communications between the central facility and such selected plurality of such end devices, and determine whether all of such individual fragments of such firmware image download have been accurately received [Garrison: para 0029-0030]. Both Davis and Garrison fails to teach the current claimed invention. Further searching failed to disclose prior art that reads on the features of a network that enables the transmission of data between the devices and includes meters connected thereto, wherein a security server coupled to the network including a first memory that stores security configurations for the meters, where each meter of the meters include a communication device to couple the meter to the network, receives the security configuration for the meter and includes a second memory to store the security configuration in a local database. Further, the security server sends a notification to each meter when a security configuration has changes and the meter pulls the changed security configuration after receiving the notification such that the communication device of each meter is configured to pull the security configuration from the security server without the security server knowing the network address of the meter. Therefore, none of the references alone or in combination disclose or suggest the invention as claimed according to claims 1-12. Response to Arguments 7. Applicant's arguments filed 7/27/2026 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive. Claims 1-16 has overcome the rejection on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting, necessitated by an approved Terminal Disclaimer. Regarding the arguments (pg.7-8) for claims 1-5 and 7-12, directed to the amendment of “the communication device of each meter is configured to pull the security configuration from the security server without the security server knowing the network address of the meter” of claim 1. The argument is moot as claims 1-12 are deemed to be in condition for allowance. Regarding the arguments (pg.9-10) for claims 1-13, regarding the communication device transmits a security event to the security server for storage in a log and the event is transmitted via a directory protocol. The claimed “a directory protocol”, is not implicitly defined or provide what constitutes as transmitting data via a directory protocol. As such, data transmission via a directory protocol may broadly be via a form of an organized or stored and grouped procedure. Malpani was brought forth to teach this feature “wherein the communication device transmits a security event to the security server for storage in a log and the security event is transmitted via a directory protocol”. Malpani teaches computer systems implement security policies to protect their information and service resources from unauthorized accesses. Such systems may audit directory and file accesses or server events and record such events in security logs. The logs may be reviewed to help flag security breaches. Users of such systems configure the security audits to track certain events and decide to forego tracking other events [Malpani: para 0002]. The audit directory and file accesses or server events and record such events in security logs suggest the directory protocol. As such, one would be motivated to implement security policies to protect their information and service resources from unauthorized accesses. Malpani obviously suggest “wherein the communication device transmits a security event to the security server for storage in a log and the security event is transmitted via a directory protocol”. Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103 In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status. The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 103 which forms the basis for all obviousness rejections set forth in this Office action: A patent for a claimed invention may not be obtained, notwithstanding that the claimed invention is not identically disclosed as set forth in section 102, if the differences between the claimed invention and the prior art are such that the claimed invention as a whole would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which the claimed invention pertains. Patentability shall not be negated by the manner in which the invention was made. The factual inquiries for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized as follows: 1. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art. 2. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue. 3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art. 4. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness. 6. Claim(s) 13-16 and 21-24 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Davis [US 20180373304] in view of Malpani [US 20070011746]. As per claim 13: Davis, et al. teaches a system comprising: a network for coupling devices and enabling the transmission of data between the devices; [Davis: para 0118] a plurality of meters connected to the network; and [Davis: para 0106, 0292] at least one security server coupled to the network including a first memory, the first memory configured to store security configurations for the plurality of meters, [Davis: para 0107; a smart meter is configured as a ZigBee Smart Energy coordinator and Trust Centre responsible for generation of the network key and managing the access of nodes to its Smart Energy HAN. The power management device configured as a ZigBee Smart Energy node and embedded during manufacture with a link key and a Smart Energy security certificate. The link key and security certificate are preferably stored in non-volatile memory in power management device. As such, security configurations may broadly be in the form of secure or protected data associated to the meter, such as the key and security certificate. The security server may broadly be in the form of a power management device since this device is coupled to the network and holds the key and security certificate (i.e. security configurations)] wherein each meter of the plurality of meters including, a communication device for coupling the meter to the network and receiving the security configuration for the meter, and [Davis: para 0111-0112; a smart meter may be configured with proximity beaconing or NFC capability allowing for the transfer of the identification code and any additional information to the Product App using wireless or near field communications where supported by the smartphone. In order to establish a secure communications link, power management device and a smart meter need to be placed into a secure pairing mode allowing for a multistep exchange of security keys and certificates. More examples on para 0116, 0119, 0125] a second memory for storing the security configuration in a local database [Davis: para 0247], **wherein the communication device transmits a security event to the security server for storage in a log and the security event is transmitted via a directory protocol. [**rejected under a secondary reference, discussion below] [Davis: para 0117; a notification from a utility or communications hub manager for connection to a smart meter] Davis suggest a device which may be a server that sends a notification to a smart meter [Davis: para 0117]. However, Davis did not clearly teach “wherein the communication device transmits a security event to the security server for storage in a log and the security event is transmitted via a directory protocol”. Malpani teaches computer systems may implement security policies to protect their information and service resources from unauthorized accesses. Such systems may audit, for example, directory and file accesses or server events and record such events in security logs. The logs may be reviewed to help flag security breaches. Users of such systems may configure the security audits to track certain events and may decide to forego tracking other events [Malpani: para 0002]. The present invention may apply to an environment with server computers and client computers deployed in a network environment, having remote or local storage [Malpani: para 0031]. As such, one would be motivated to implement security policies to protect their information and service resources from unauthorized accesses. Malpani obviously suggest “wherein the communication device transmits a security event to the security server for storage in a log and the security event is transmitted via a directory protocol”. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine Malpani with Davis to teach “wherein the communication device transmits a security event to the security server for storage in a log and the security event is transmitted via a directory protocol” for the reason to implement security policies to protect their information and service resources from unauthorized accesses [Malpani: para 0002]. Claim 14: Davis: para 0252, 0258; discussing the system of claim 13, wherein the log is fed into a security information and event management (SIEM) system for analysis, wherein the SIEM system generates an alert based on at least one of when a specified event is detected, a threshold of event occurrences has been exceeded and/or a combination of events has occurred. Claim 15: Davis: para 0155, 0179 in view of Malpani: para 0002-0003 [suggesting “intrusion detection”, under the same pretext and motivation as in claim 1]; discussing the system of claim 13, wherein the log is fed into an intrusion detection system (IDS) for analysis, wherein the IDS system generates an alert based events indicative of an intrusion by an attacker. Claim 16: Davis: para 0113; discussing the system of claim 13, wherein the plurality of meters includes at least one of a socket/S-base meter, a panel meter, a switchboard/draw-out meter and/or a A-base meter. Claim 21: Davis: para 0155, 0159 [detect possible error conditions or a variation from a threshold, periodically or continuously monitor power measurement and cause a power control circuit to terminate power on detection of a deviation from a specified threshold or measured operating threshold. Switching of low power loads that have low duty cycles]; discussing the system of claim 13, wherein the security event comprises a performance change detected at one of the plurality of meters, the performance change including at least one of a drop in CPU cycles, a real-time task falling behind an expected time slot, a timed event taking longer than a threshold, or events per second exceeding a threshold. Claim 22: Davis: para 0115-0117, 0125 [be automatically transfer/send security events such as security certificate for pairing, may be by a server storing the product app associated to the security event– para 0046]; discussing the system of claim 13, wherein the at least one security server is configured to automatically route security events received from the plurality of meters to an external server as each security event is received by the at least one security server. Claim 23: Davis: para 0095 [a power management device, or a sub-system, needs to be completely reset]; discussing the system of claim 13, wherein the security event comprises a reset of energy in one of the plurality of meters by a user. Claim 24: Davis: para 0155, 0179; discussing the system of claim 13, wherein the at least one security server is configured to generate a report identifying failed logins for the plurality of meters during a specified time interval. 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 Leynna Truvan whose telephone number is (571)272-3851. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 9:00AM-5:00PM, EST. Examiner interviews are available via telephone, in-person, and video conferencing using a USPTO supplied web-based collaboration tool. To schedule an interview, applicant is encouraged to use the USPTO Automated Interview Request (AIR) at http://www.uspto.gov/interviewpractice. If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Amir Mehrmanesh can be reached at 571-270-3351. 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. Leynna Truvan Examiner Art Unit 2435 /L.TT/Examiner, Art Unit 2435 /EDWARD ZEE/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2435