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 .
This action is responsive to communication filed on 2/20/2025.
Claims 1-20 are subject to examination.
This amendment and applicant’s arguments have been fully considered and entered by the Examiner.
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.
Claim(s) 1-5, 7-20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Cathrow et al. U.S. Patent # 11,190,397 (hereinafter Cathrow) in view of Thaw et al. U.S. Patent Publication # 2022/0417310 (hereinafter Thaw) further in view of Bosch et al. U.S. Patent Publication # 2024/0004973 (hereinafter Bosch) further in view of Poole et al. U.S. Patent Publication # 2016/0020905 (hereinafter Poole)
With respect to claim 1, Cathrow teaches a computer program product for authenticating a client computer with a server over a network, the computer program product comprising a computer readable storage medium in an authenticator having computer readable program code embodied therein that when executed causes the authenticator to perform operations, the operations comprising:
-receiving authentication request to authenticate the client computer with the server (i.e. upon connecting to the network, the IoT device receives the configuration parameters for the IoT device from the DHCP server)(column 7 lines 22-31), wherein the authentication request are for a domain name record for the server (i.e. the network configuration parameters include IP address assigned to the IoT device, an IP address that identifies the DNS server and search path. The IoT device searches the DNS for resource records that are stored in the DNS under the domain name )(column 7 lines 22-31)(column 9 lines 38-46);
using the client authentication information to authenticate the client computer to access the server (i.e. using the IP address and the device issues in DHCP request that return domain search path, the delegation engine then generates search domain name and search DNS for records, the DNS server successfully verifies the customer DNSSEC signature, then the DNS server transmits the delegation record to the engine) (column 15 lines 65-67)(column 16 lines 1-21);
receiving a plurality of network addresses used to identify the client computer in the network (i.e. the network configuration parameters include IP address assigned to the IoT device, an IP address that identifies the DNS server and search path. The IoT device searches the DNS for resource records that are stored in the DNS under the domain name )(column 7 lines 22-31)
Cathrow teaches in response to authenticating the client computer from the client authentication information(column 15 lines 65-67)(column 16 lines 1-21); but does not explicitly show forwarding the plurality of network addresses used to identify the client computer to an access list for the server to allow the client computer to indicate in access the server; and send a message to the client computer indicating access to the server allowed.
Thaw teaches in response to authenticating the client computer from the client authentication (i.e. authentication can be determined based on one or more identifying data received with the request including IP address of the client) (Paragraph 42) forwarding the plurality of network addresses used to identify the client computer to indicate in an access list for the server to allow the client computer to access the server (i.e. based on the IP address determine whether the client is authorized to access the local content, wherein the local system has a range of IP address received with the request from the client , the server can further establish an encrypted session with the client)(Paragraph 42-46, 90-94); and send a message (i.e. request) to the client computer indicating access to the server allowed (Paragraph 65, 67-68). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to implement Thaw’s teaching in Cathrow’s teaching to come up with forwarding the plurality of network addresses used to identify the client computer to an access list for the server to allow the client computer to access the server and send a message indicating access to the server is allowed. The motivation for doing so would be so the server can establish an encrypted session with the client such as via SSL certificates in operation to prevent the content from being access inappropriately (Paragraph 91)
Cathrow and Thaw does not explicitly show authentication request includes client authentication information the client gathered for an authentication type indicated in a domain name record for the server.
Bosch teaches receiving from the client computer, an authentication request to authenticate the client computer with the server (i.e. client authenticates to the server by setting up TLS session) (Paragraph 41, 36-38, ), wherein the authentication request includes client authentication information the client gathered for an authentication type indicated in a domain name record for the server (Paragraph 41, 36-38); using the client authentication information to authenticate the client computer to access the server (Paragraph 24, 29). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to implement Bosch’s teaching in Cathrow and Thaw’s teaching to come up with authentication request including client authentication information the client gathered for an authentication type indicated in a domain name record for the server. The motivation for doing so would to provide access to only authorized and authenticated client for security purposes.
Cathrow, Thaw and Bosch does not explicitly teach wherein the client authentication information from the domain name text record includes an authentication method the client computer uses to authentication with the user.
Poole teaches wherein the client authentication information from the domain name text record includes an authentication method the client computer uses to authentication with the user (Paragraph 47, 49, 12, 35-36, 40-41). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to implement Poole’s teaching in Cathrow, Thaw and Bosch’s teaching to come up with having client authentication information from the domain name text record includes an authentication method the client computer uses to authenticate with the user. The motivation for doing so would to be provide access to the user after securing user’s credentials.
With respect to claim 2, Cathrow, Thaw, Bosch and Poole teaches the computer program product of claim 1, but Thaw further teaches wherein the plurality of network addresses are accessed from the client computer in response to authenticating the client computer (i.e. based on the IP address determine whether the client is authorized to access the local content, wherein the local system has a range of IP address received with the request from the client , the server can further establish an encrypted session with the client)(Paragraph 42-46, 90-94)
With respect to claim 3, Cathrow, Thaw, Bosch and Poole teaches the computer program product of claim 1, but Cathrow further teaches wherein the domain name record comprises domain name service (DNS) text record (column 6 lines 42-53), and wherein the DNS text record includes a domain name of an authenticator the client computer uses to communicate with the authenticator to authenticate the client and a network address of the server (Column 6 lines 54-67)(column 7 lines 1-21)
With respect to claim 4, Cathrow, Thaw, Bosch and Poole teaches the computer program product of claim 1, but Thaw further teaches wherein the operations further comprise: establishing a connection with the client computer in response to the client computer communicating using a network address of an authenticator provided to the client computer in response to the client computer requesting the domain name record for the server (Paragraph 91-94)
With respect to claim 5, Cathrow, Thaw, Bosch and Poole teaches the computer program product of claim 1, but Cathrow further teaches wherein the operations further comprise: sending to the client computer a network address of the server for the client computer to use to communicate with the server in response to authenticating the client computer (column 7 lines 22-31)(column 9 lines 38-46)
With respect to claim 7, Cathrow, Thaw, Bosch and Poole teaches the computer program product of claim 1, but Thaw further teaches wherein the forwarding the plurality of network addresses comprises: providing the plurality of network addresses to identify the client computer to a firewall in response to authenticating the client computer to permit the client computer access to the server (Paragraph 61-62, 60)
With respect to claim 8, Cathrow, Thaw, Bosch and Poole teaches the computer program product of claim 1, but Thaw further teaches wherein the authentication parameters from the client computer include a certificate for the client computer used to authenticate the client computer (Paragraph 67, 91)
With respect to claims 9-13, 14 respectively, teaches similar limitations as claims 1-5, 7 respectively, therefore rejected under same basis.
With respect to claims 15-19, 20 respectively, teaches similar limitations as claims 1-5, 7 respectively, therefore rejected under same basis.
Claim(s) 6 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Cathrow et al. U.S. Patent # 11,190,397 (hereinafter Cathrow) in view of Thaw et al. U.S. Patent Publication # 2022/0417310 (hereinafter Thaw) further Bosch further in view of Poole further in view of Li et al. U.S. Patent Publication # 2019/0288982 (hereinafter Li)
With respect to claim 6, Cathrow, Thaw, Bosch and Poole teaches the computer program product of claim 1, but fails to further teaches wherein the plurality of network addresses used to identify the client computer comprise a first network address assigned by the client computer, a second network address assigned by an Internet Service Provider for the client computer, and a third network address provided to optimize communications with the server.
Li teaches wherein the plurality of network addresses used to identify the client computer comprise a first network address assigned by the client computer (Paragraph 38, 54), a second network address assigned by an Internet Service Provider for the client computer (Paragraph 54), and a third network address provided to optimize communications with the server (Paragraph 54). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to implement Li’s teaching in Cathrow, Thaw, Bosch and Poole’s teaching to come up with having plurality of network addresses used to identify the client computer using first network address, second network address and third network address. The motivation for doing so would to follow priority criteria of the IP mapping rule.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to amended claim limitations have been considered but are moot because 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.
Applicant’s arguments with respect to non-amended claim limitations have been fully considered but deemed non-persuasive.
With respect to remarks, Applicant stated the following:
A). Applicant states Cathrow, Thaw and Bosch does not teach “retrieving from the client computer….send a message to the client computer indicating access to the server is allowed”.
With respect to remark A, Examiner respectfully disagrees with the applicant because in column 7 liens 22-31, column 9 lines 38-46, Cathrow teaches receiving authentication request to authenticate the client computer with the server (i.e. upon connecting to the network, the IoT device receives the configuration parameters for the IoT device from the DHCP server)(column 7 lines 22-31), wherein the authentication request are for a domain name record for the server (i.e. the network configuration parameters include IP address assigned to the IoT device, an IP address that identifies the DNS server and search path. The IoT device searches the DNS for resource records that are stored in the DNS under the domain name )(column 7 lines 22-31)(column 9 lines 38-46);
In column 15 lines 65-67, column 16 lines 1-21, Cathrow teaches using the client authentication information to authenticate the client computer to access the server (i.e. using the IP address and the device issues in DHCP request that return domain search path, the delegation engine then generates search domain name and search DNS for records, the DNS server successfully verifies the customer DNSSEC signature, then the DNS server transmits the delegation record to the engine) (column 15 lines 65-67)(column 16 lines 1-21);
In column 7 lines 22-31, Cathrow teaches receiving a plurality of network addresses used to identify the client computer in the network (i.e. the network configuration parameters include IP address assigned to the IoT device, an IP address that identifies the DNS server and search path. The IoT device searches the DNS for resource records that are stored in the DNS under the domain name )(column 7 lines 22-31)
Cathrow teaches in response to authenticating the client computer from the client authentication information(column 15 lines 65-67)(column 16 lines 1-21); but does not explicitly show forwarding the plurality of network addresses used to identify the client computer to an access list for the server to allow the client computer to indicate in access the server; and send a message to the client computer indicating access to the server allowed.
Thaw teaches in response to authenticating the client computer from the client authentication (i.e. authentication can be determined based on one or more identifying data received with the request including IP address of the client) (Paragraph 42) forwarding the plurality of network addresses used to identify the client computer to indicate in an access list for the server to allow the client computer to access the server (i.e. based on the IP address determine whether the client is authorized to access the local content, wherein the local system has a range of IP address received with the request from the client , the server can further establish an encrypted session with the client)(Paragraph 42-46, 90-94); and send a message (i.e. request) to the client computer indicating access to the server allowed (Paragraph 65, 67-68). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to implement Thaw’s teaching in Cathrow’s teaching to come up with forwarding the plurality of network addresses used to identify the client computer to an access list for the server to allow the client computer to access the server and send a message indicating access to the server is allowed. The motivation for doing so would be so the server can establish an encrypted session with the client such as via SSL certificates in operation to prevent the content from being access inappropriately (Paragraph 91)
Cathrow and Thaw does not explicitly show authentication request includes client authentication information the client gathered for an authentication type indicated in a domain name record for the server.
Bosch teaches receiving from the client computer, an authentication request to authenticate the client computer with the server (i.e. client authenticates to the server by setting up TLS session) (Paragraph 41, 36-38, ), wherein the authentication request includes client authentication information the client gathered for an authentication type indicated in a domain name record for the server (Paragraph 41, 36-38); using the client authentication information to authenticate the client computer to access the server (Paragraph 24, 29). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to implement Bosch’s teaching in Cathrow and Thaw’s teaching to come up with authentication request including client authentication information the client gathered for an authentication type indicated in a domain name record for the server. The motivation for doing so would to provide access to only authorized and authenticated client for security purposes.
Cathrow, Thaw and Bosch does not explicitly teach wherein the client authentication information from the domain name text record includes an authentication method the client computer uses to authentication with the user.
Poole teaches wherein the client authentication information from the domain name text record includes an authentication method the client computer uses to authentication with the user (Paragraph 47, 49, 12, 35-36, 40-41). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to implement Poole’s teaching in Cathrow, Thaw and Bosch’s teaching to come up with having client authentication information from the domain name text record includes an authentication method the client computer uses to authenticate with the user. The motivation for doing so would to be provide access to the user after securing user’s credentials.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
A). Blinn et al. U.S. Patent Publication # 2017/0192947 which teaches about authenticating a potential sub domain registrant according to the rules, rule parameters and prerequisites to register a sub domain.
B). Iwamoto et al. U.S. Patent Publication # 2025/0184320 which teaches about obtaining a user request to access at least one system resource and obtaining validation result associated with digital certificate from a blockchain ledger.
C). Guillford et al. U.S. Patent Publication # 2022/0417035 which teaches about security component of a network receiving an incoming data packet sent to a destination computer device in the network, a security certificate is requested from the destination computer device.
D). Cosma et al. U.S. Patent # 10,944,714
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to DHAIRYA A PATEL whose telephone number is (571)272-5809. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 7:30am-4:00pm.
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.
DHAIRYA A. PATEL
Primary Examiner
Art Unit 2453
/DHAIRYA A PATEL/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2453