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 Amendments and Arguments
Applicant amended claims 1-6 and argues that the amendment has overcome claim objections issued for claims 1, 2, 4 & 5. Examiner reviewed these amendments and found the arguments persuasive. Claim objections for claims 1, 2, 4 & 5 are withdrawn.
The Applicant’s arguments against issuance of rejections 112b for claims 1-6 deemed indefinite has been found persuasive. Hence, rejections 112b for these has claims has been withdrawn.
The amendment has also removed the 112f issues as identified in the previous office actions. Hence, the invocation of 112f as well as 112b rejections issued in the previous office action for claims 1-3, as written description fails to disclose corresponding structure, has also been withdrawn.
The Applicant argues in the Remarks that cited art does not teach the amended limitation-a digital certificate generated by the device. This argument has been considered but has been found moot as Examiner introduced new art.
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 of this title, 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.
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 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.
Claims 1-6 are rejected under 35 USC 103 as being unpatentable over Ajitomi (US 20180007033 A1 as mentioned in the IDS) in view of You (US 20050086504 A1) and Lewis (US 20180048638 A1)
Regarding claim 1, Ajitomi teaches a system comprising a terminal apparatus and a device configured to communicate with the terminal apparatus, wherein the terminal apparatus comprises one or more processors is configured to generate a digital signature in response to a digital certificate signature request generated by the device, [0071] While the second communication processor 115 waits for the response from the authorizer 118, the second communication processor 115 uses the pre-shared key to sign the received challenge code (“code”) to generate a signed code (“sign”) (step 16). The signed code is equivalent to signed data obtained by encrypting the challenge code by the pre-shared key. The algorithm of the signature used in this case may be arbitrarily selected from the signature algorithm list. Although the signing process is executed while the second communication processor 115 waits for the response from the authorizer 118, the signing process may be executed any time after the reception of the certificate issue request (CSR), before the acquisition of the authorization for issuing the server certificate. Incidentally, in the case where the challenge code is be pre-shared with the communication device 101, the second communication processor 115 may sign the pre-shared challenge code. Alternatively, in the case where the communication device 101 receives a value for identifying the used challenge code, the second communication processor may specify the corresponding challenge code based on the notified value among previously holding at least one challenge codes.]
the device comprises one or more processors and is configured to transmit the digital certificate signature request, and the digital signature, to a server, [0071] While the second communication processor 115 waits for the response from the authorizer 118, the second communication processor 115 uses the pre-shared key to sign the received challenge code (“code”) to generate a signed code (“sign”) (step 16). The signed code is equivalent to signed data obtained by encrypting the challenge code by the pre-shared key. The algorithm of the signature used in this case may be arbitrarily selected from the signature algorithm list. Although the signing process is executed while the second communication processor 115 waits for the response from the authorizer 118, the signing process may be executed any time after the reception of the certificate issue request (CSR), before the acquisition of the authorization for issuing the server certificate.]
Although, Ajitomi teaches digital certificate, he does not teach explicitly, however, You teaches:
the device comprises one or more processors and is configured to transmit a digital certificate to a server, [0025] According to a further exemplary aspect of the present invention, there is provided a digital content processing device for performing device authentication using a certificate, the digital content processing device comprising a secret information generating unit for generating secret information on the digital content processing device; a certificate generating unit for generating a certificate using the generated secret information, a public key of the digital content processing device for encryption/decryption of digital content, and a device identifier of the digital content processing device; and a transmitting unit for transmitting the generated certificate to another digital content processing device.]
a digital certificate generated by the device, [0025] according to a further exemplary aspect of the present invention, there is provided a digital content processing device for performing device authentication using a certificate, the digital content processing device comprising a secret information generating unit for generating secret information on the digital content processing device; a certificate generating unit for generating a certificate using the generated secret information, a public key of the digital content processing device for encryption/decryption of digital content, and a device identifier of the digital content processing device; and a transmitting unit for transmitting the generated certificate to another digital content processing device. Please also see paragraphs 0021, 0029 & 0034.]
Before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, it would have been obvious to one with ordinary skill in the art to combine the teachings of Ajitomi with the disclosure of You The motivation or suggestion would have been to implement an efficient method for digital certificate generation. (abstract, paras 0007-0014, You)
Although, Ajitomi & You teach digital certificate, they do not teach explicitly, however, Lewis teaches the server having information that maps a user to the terminal apparatus, and to establish communication with the server on a condition that the digital certificate is authenticated by a certificate authority associated with the server. [0018] First Microservice 105 is coupled to Authorization Server 107, Secret Server 111, and Certificate Authority 113. First Microservice 105 preferably includes a transceiver and a processor coupled to the transceiver. First Microservice 105 logs in to Secret Server 111 using the APP_ID/USER_ID tuple and retrieves the client ID and client secret. First Microservice 105 uses the client ID and the client secret to retrieve an access token including authorized CSR attributes from Authorization Server 107. In an exemplary embodiment, First Microservice 105 generates a key pair and a CSR, based at least in part upon the CSR attributes in the access token. First Microservice 105 sends the access token and the CSR to Certificate Authority 113, which vets the CSR by checking the attributes included in the CSR against the attributes included in the access token and returns a certificate to First Microservice 105 if the values match and the vetting is successful.]
Before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, it would have been obvious to one with ordinary skill in the art to combine the teachings of Ajitomi and You with the disclosure of Lewis. The motivation or suggestion would have been to implement an improved method for providing secure communication between services in network environments. (abstract, paras 0001-0006, Lewis)
Regarding claim 2, although, Ajitomi and You teach digital certificate signature request,, they do not teach explicitly, however, Lewis teaches wherein on the server and on a condition that the digital signature corresponds to the information that maps the user to the terminal apparatus , the digital certificate signature request and the digital certificate are transmitted to the certificate authority, and an authenticated digital certificate transmitted from the certificate authority is transmitted to the device. [0018] First Microservice 105 is coupled to Authorization Server 107, Secret Server 111, and Certificate Authority 113. First Microservice 105 preferably includes a transceiver and a processor coupled to the transceiver. First Microservice 105 logs in to Secret Server 111 using the APP_ID/USER_ID tuple and retrieves the client ID and client secret. First Microservice 105 uses the client ID and the client secret to retrieve an access token including authorized CSR attributes from Authorization Server 107. In an exemplary embodiment, First Microservice 105 generates a key pair and a CSR, based at least in part upon the CSR attributes in the access token. First Microservice 105 sends the access token and the CSR to Certificate Authority 113, which vets the CSR by checking the attributes included in the CSR against the attributes included in the access token and returns a certificate to First Microservice 105 if the values match and the vetting is successful.]
Before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, it would have been obvious to one with ordinary skill in the art to combine the teachings of Ajitomi and You with the disclosure of Lewis. The motivation or suggestion would have been to implement an improved method for providing secure communication between services in network environments. (abstract, paras 0001-0006, Lewis)
Regarding claim 3, Ajitomi teaches wherein the one or more processors of the device is configured to transmit the digital certificate signature request to the terminal apparatus upon recognizing the terminal apparatus in a wired or wireless manner. [0166] The user logs in to an IoT (Internet of Things) service of the device corresponding to the SD card by operating the web browser on the operation terminal 201 into which the SD card is inserted. The IoT service corresponds to the web service provided by the web server 301.[0168] Subsequently, as shown in FIG. 11, the user extracts the SD card from the operation terminal 201 and inserts the SD card into the legacy device 160 to put the legacy device 160 into the IoT. Therefore, the legacy device 160 can be controlled through the first network 501. Subsequently, the cross-origin access is conducted from the web browser of the operation terminal 201 to the IoT device through the web server 301. In this case, the CORS can be set to control and allow the access only from the front end of the web server 301. The logic, such as CGI, operated on the HTTP server of the first communication processor 112 in the SD card controls the legacy device 160 through the second communicator 114 (SDIO). As a result, the operation terminal 201 can control the IoT legacy device 160, and the legacy device 160 can acquire the data saved in the SD card. Although the second communicator 114 is the SDIO in the scenario, the second communication 114 may be Wi-Fi just like the first communicator 111. Specifically, the Wi-Fi function of the SD card may have both an access point function and a station function. The second communicator 114 may be on the access point function side, and the first communicator 111 may be on the station function side. In this case, the setter 117 may be configured to also control the operation mode of Wi-Fi to operate the access point function until the issue of the certificate and operate the station mode function after the issue of the certificate.]
Regarding claim 4, this claim is interpreted to be similar to claim 1 and is rejected for the same reasons as set forth for claim 1.
Regarding claim 5, this claim interpreted to be similar to claim 2 and is rejected for the same reasons as set forth for claim 2.
Regarding claim 6, this claim interpreted to be similar to claim 3 and is rejected for the same reasons as set forth for claim 3.
Conclusion
Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP § 706.07(a). 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 SHER A KHAN whose telephone number is (571)272-8574. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 8:00 am-500pm.
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, Eleni A Shiferaw can be reached at 571-272-3867. 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.
/SHER A KHAN/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2497