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 .
Claims 1-20 are pending.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
The following is a quotation of the appropriate paragraphs of 35 U.S.C. 102 that form the basis
for the rejections under this section made in this Office action:
A person shall be entitled to a patent unless –
(a)(1) the claimed invention was patented, described in a printed publication, or in public use, on sale, or otherwise available to the public before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claims 1-3, 11-13 and 17-19 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Palmer, Mathew, U.S. Patent No. 7,882,538, hereinafter known as Palmer.
As to claim 1, Palmer discloses a network access server (NAS) device on a wireless network at a site, the NAS device (Palmer, Figure 1, endpoint device 20A-N (NAS)) comprising: memory including a policy cache having entries for one or more client devices where each entry includes a last policy action previously identified by a network access control (NAC) system for the respective client device (Palmer, Column 5, lines 65-67 and column 6, lines 1-19, local cache users (client device) entries and associated policy for them with “current version” (last policy action)); and processing circuitry configured to: upon receipt of an access request for the wireless network from a client device, authenticate the client device (Palmer, Column 4, lines 28-61, authenticating devices based on security information of devices stored locally); after authentication of the client device, determine whether the client device is included in the policy cache; and based on the client device being included in the policy cache, authorize the client device to access the wireless network in accordance with the last policy action for the client device (Palmer, Column 5, lines 65-67 and column 6, lines 1-19, local cache user entries and associated policy for them with current version; Column 6, lines 1-51, determine if current version of policy for users is valid and authorize the user for the policy).
As to claim 2, Palmer discloses wherein the processing circuitry is configured to, based on the client device not being included in the policy cache: send, to the NAC system, an access authorization request for the client device; and receive, from the NAC system, a current policy action identified for the client device based on one or more access policy rules for the wireless network maintained at the NAC system (Palmer, Column 6, lines 20-51, local access module requests and receives user authentication information when the local policy does not match current version of the policy for the user).
As to claim 3, Palmer discloses wherein the processing circuitry is configured to add an entry to the policy cache for the client device that includes the current policy action as the last policy action previously identified by the NAC system for the client device (Palmer, Column 6, lines 20-51, when current policy is not in the cached policy for users, caching the latest version received from server).
As to claims 11-13, the claims are each rejected as applied to claims 1-3 respectively above by Palmer.
As to claims 17-19 the claims are each rejected as applied to claims 1-3 respectively above by Palmer.
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.
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.
Claims 5 and 15 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Palmer in view of Martherus et al, application no. 2007/0174905, hereinafter known as Martherus.
As to claim 5, Palmer disclose the NAS device of claim 1. Palmer does not disclose however Martherus dicloses wherein a wide area network (WAN) link between the NAS device and the NAC system is down, and wherein the processing circuitry is configured to, based on the client device not being included in the policy cache, authorize the client device to access the wireless network in accordance with a default policy (Martherus, [0102], using default policy rules when a list does not have a match for policy for users).
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 Palmer to include the limitations of wherein a wide area network (WAN) link between the NAS device and the NAC system is down, and wherein the processing circuitry is configured to, based on the client device not being included in the policy cache, authorize the client device to access the wireless network in accordance with a default policy as taught by Martherus. Use of default communications policy can be provided to user provisionally to provide the user with access communications while a policy for can be established and stored for later use.
As to claim 15, the claim is rejected as applied to claim 5 above by Palmer in view of Martherus.
Claims 6, 15 and 20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Palmer in view of Luft et al, application no. 2019/0268766, hereinafter known as Luft.
As to claim 6, Palmer disclose the NAS device of claim 1. Palmer does not disclose however Luft dicloses wherein the processing circuitry is configured to synchronize the policy cache with policy caches of one or more other NAS devices at the site (Luft, [0153]-[0163], updating user information with plural Network Access Servers).
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 Palmer to include the limitations of wherein the processing circuitry is configured to synchronize the policy cache with policy caches of one or more other NAS devices at the site.as taught by Luft. Updating plural NAS with user information allows all the NAS device to authenticate user with most update security information for the users.
As to claim 16 and 20, the claim are reach ejected as applied to claim 5 above by Palmer in view of Martherus.
Claim 7 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Palmer in view of Comay et al, application no. 2018/0176210, hereinafter known as Comay.
As to claim 7, Palmer disclose the NAS device of claim 1. Palmer does not disclose however Comay dicloses wherein the processing circuitry authenticates the client device based on an exchange of authentication certificates associated with the NAC system and the client device (Comay, [0013],[0016], figure 2, NAC device providing authentication with use of authenticate certificates)
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 Palmer to include the limitations of wherein the processing circuitry authenticates the client device based on an exchange of authentication certificates associated with the NAC system and the client device as taught by Comay. Authentication certificates are used in the art to provide high level of security for users.
Claim 10 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Palmer in view of Pisut et al, application no. 2018/0101850, hereinafter known as Pisut.
As to claim 10, Palmer disclose the NAS device of claim 1. Palmer does not disclose however Pisut dicloses wherein the processing circuitry authenticates the client device based on password authentication with the client device (Pisut, [0038], authentication methods for verify users in included use of passwords and/or encryption).
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 Palmer to include the limitations of wherein the processing circuitry authenticates the client device based on password authentication with the client device as taught by Pisut. Use of passwords and/or encryption are well known in the art to authenticate users as being valid.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 4, 8, 9 and 14 are objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, but would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to GAUTAM SHARMA whose telephone number is (571)270-7182. The examiner can normally be reached 11am-8pm.
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, Hassan Phillips can be reached at 571-272-3940. 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.
/GAUTAM SHARMA/ Examiner, Art Unit 2467
/HASSAN A PHILLIPS/ Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2467