DETAILED ACTION
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.
This Office Action is in response to the amendment filed on 1/22/2026.
Claim 7 has been canceled.
Claim 21 has been added.
Claims 1-6 and 8-21 are pending for consideration.
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 .
Specification
The lengthy specification has not been checked to the extent necessary to determine the presence of all possible minor errors. Applicant’s cooperation is requested in correcting any errors of which applicant may become aware in the specification.
Response to Arguments
Regarding the non-statutory double patenting rejection, the pending claims are still not patentably distinct from the claims of Juniper-US11895234. Therefore, the rejection has been maintained.
Regarding the 101 rejection, Applicant’s arguments are persuasive because the amended claims have incorporated additional features that limit any abstract idea to a particular technological environment. Therefore, the rejection has been withdrawn.
Regarding the 112(b) rejection, the claims have been amended to overcome the indefinite issues. Therefore, the rejection of claim 1 has been withdrawn. However, the amended claims for claim 8 does not resolve the indefinite issue. Therefore, the rejection of claim 8 has been maintained.
Applicant’s arguments with respect to claim(s) 1-6 and 8-21 have been considered but are moot.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(b):
(b) CONCLUSION.—The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph:
The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the applicant regards as his invention.
Claims 8-14 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor (or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the applicant), regards as the invention.
Regarding claim 8, claim 8 recites a limitation “wherein the first message is sent to the node before expiration a particular time window”. It is unclear how the expiration of the particular time window is associated with the first message and how the expiration of the particular time window is triggered. Is it triggered by the creation of the key or establishment of the communication? The metes and bounds of these limitations are entirely unclear and subjective. Further clarification is required.
Claim 8 further recites the second message that includes the key and information indicating the particular time window. It is unclear how the key and information indicating the particular time window are linked to the second message via the first message. The metes and bounds of these limitations are entirely unclear and subjective. Further clarification is required.
Dependent claims 9-14 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) as they being dependent upon rejected base claim 8, respectively.
Double Patenting
The nonstatutory double patenting rejection is based on a judicially created doctrine grounded in public policy (a policy reflected in the statute) so as to prevent the unjustified or improper timewise extension of the “right to exclude” granted by a patent and to prevent possible harassment by multiple assignees. A nonstatutory double patenting rejection is appropriate where the conflicting claims are not identical, but at least one examined application claim is not patentably distinct from the reference claim(s) because the examined application claim is either anticipated by, or would have been obvious over, the reference claim(s). See, e.g., In re Berg, 140 F.3d 1428, 46 USPQ2d 1226 (Fed. Cir. 1998); In re Goodman, 11 F.3d 1046, 29 USPQ2d 2010 (Fed. Cir. 1993); In re Longi, 759 F.2d 887, 225 USPQ 645 (Fed. Cir. 1985); In re Van Ornum, 686 F.2d 937, 214 USPQ 761 (CCPA 1982); In re Vogel, 422 F.2d 438, 164 USPQ 619 (CCPA 1970); In re Thorington, 418 F.2d 528, 163 USPQ 644 (CCPA 1969).
A timely filed terminal disclaimer in compliance with 37 CFR 1.321(c) or 1.321(d) may be used to overcome an actual or provisional rejection based on nonstatutory double patenting provided the reference application or patent either is shown to be commonly owned with the examined application, or claims an invention made as a result of activities undertaken within the scope of a joint research agreement. See MPEP § 717.02 for applications subject to examination under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA as explained in MPEP § 2159. See MPEP § 2146 et seq. for applications not subject to examination under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA . A terminal disclaimer must be signed in compliance with 37 CFR 1.321(b).
The filing of a terminal disclaimer by itself is not a complete reply to a nonstatutory double patenting (NSDP) rejection. A complete reply requires that the terminal disclaimer be accompanied by a reply requesting reconsideration of the prior Office action. Even where the NSDP rejection is provisional the reply must be complete. See MPEP § 804, subsection I.B.1. For a reply to a non-final Office action, see 37 CFR 1.111(a). For a reply to final Office action, see 37 CFR 1.113(c). A request for reconsideration while not provided for in 37 CFR 1.113(c) may be filed after final for consideration. See MPEP §§ 706.07(e) and 714.13.
The USPTO Internet website contains terminal disclaimer forms which may be used. Please visit www.uspto.gov/patent/patents-forms. The actual filing date of the application in which the form is filed determines what form (e.g., PTO/SB/25, PTO/SB/26, PTO/AIA /25, or PTO/AIA /26) should be used. A web-based eTerminal Disclaimer may be filled out completely online using web-screens. An eTerminal Disclaimer that meets all requirements is auto-processed and approved immediately upon submission. For more information about eTerminal Disclaimers, refer to www.uspto.gov/patents/apply/applying-online/eterminal-disclaimer.
Claims 1-6 and 8-21 are rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claims 1-20 of U.S. Patent No. 11895234. Although the claims at issue are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other because both applications disclose the same subject matter, delayed quantum key-distribution. For example, see the table below for a claim comparison between the instant application and patent application (bolded text indicates significant similarities of major feature in each invention).
Instant Application 18410946
Patent Application 11895234
Claim 1:
A method comprising: receiving, by a node and from a quantum key-distribution device, a first message that includes a request to perform at least one task; sending, by a node and to another node, a second message that includes the request to perform at least one task, wherein sending the second message to the other node causes the other node to obtain a key from another quantum key-distribution device associated with the quantum key-distribution device; receiving, by the node and from the other node, a third message that includes information associated with performance of the at least one task by the other node and information indicating a time of performance of the at least one task by the other node; processing, by the node and based on the key, the third message by identifying the time of performance of the at least one task by the other node to determine whether the third message is valid and causing, by the node and based on determining whether the third message is valid, one or more actions to be performed by the other node.
Claim 1:
A method, comprising: receiving, by a node and from a quantum key-distribution device of a pair of quantum key-distribution devices, a first message that includes an identifier associated with a key, wherein the key is associated with a particular time window; sending, by the node and to another node, a second message that includes at least one of the identifier associated with the key and a request to perform at least one task, wherein sending the second message to the other node causes the other node to obtain the key from another quantum key-distribution device of the pair of quantum key-distribution devices; receiving, by the node and from the other node, a third message that includes information associated with performance of the at least one task by the other node and information indicating a time of performance of the at least one task by the other node; receiving, by the node and from the quantum key-distribution device, a fourth message that includes the key and information indicating the particular time window; wherein the fourth message is received after expiration of the particular time window; processing, by the node and based on the fourth message, the third message by identifying the time of performance of the at least one task by the other node to determine whether the third message is valid; and causing, by the node and based on determining whether the third message is valid, one or more actions to be performed by the other node.
Claim 8:
A non-transitory computer-readable medium storing a set of instructions, the set of instructions comprising: one or more instructions that, when executed by one or more processors of a quantum key-distribution device, cause the quantum key-distribution device to: communicate with another quantum key-distribution device to cause a key to be generated; send, to a node, a first message that includes an identifier associated with the key, wherein the first message is sent to the node before expiration of a particular time window; and send, to the node, a second message that includes the key and information indicating a particular time window, wherein the second message is sent after expiration of the particular time window.
Claim 9:
A non-transitory computer-readable medium storing a set of instructions, the set of instructions comprising: one or more instructions that, when executed by one or more processors of a quantum key-distribution device, cause the quantum key-distribution device of a pair of quantum key-distribution devices to: communicate with another quantum key-distribution device of the pair of quantum key-distribution devices to cause a key to be generated; determine an identifier associated with the key; determine a particular time window associated with the key; send, to a node, a first message that includes the identifier associated with the key, wherein the first message is sent to the node before expiration of the particular time window; and send, to the node, a second message that includes the key and information indicating the particular time window, wherein the second message is sent to the node after expiration of the particular time window.
Claim 15:
A node, comprising: one or more memories; and one or more processors to: receive a first message that includes an identifier associated with a key and a request to perform at least one task; send, to a quantum key-distribution device, a second message that includes the identifier associated with the key; receive, from the quantum key-distribution device, a third message that includes the key and information indicating a particular time window associated with the key; perform, based on the request included in the first message, the at least one task; and generate, based on determining that a time of performance of the at least one task is within the particular time window, and by using the key, information associated with performance of the at least one task.
Claim 14:
A node, comprising: one or more memories; and one or more processors to: receive, from another node, a first message that includes an identifier associated with a key and a request to perform at least one task; send, to a key-distribution device of a pair of key-distribution devices, a second message that includes the identifier associated with the key; receive, from the key-distribution device, a third message that includes the key and information indicating a particular time window associated with the key; perform, based on the request included in the first message, the at least one task; determine that a time of performance of the at least one task by the node is within the particular time window; generate, based on performing the at least one task and determining that the time of performance of the at least one task by the node is within the particular time window, and by using the key, information associated with performance of the at least one task by the node; and send, to the other node, a fourth message that includes the information associated with performance of the at least one task by the node and information indicating the time of performance of the at least one task by the node.
The dependent claims of the instant application recite language similar to the dependent claims of the patent application and are covered by the patent application.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 1-6 and 8-21 would be allowable if rewritten or amended to overcome the rejection(s) under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), 2nd paragraph and nonstatutory double patenting set forth in this Office action.
The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter: the closest prior art has been incorporated into the record and does not disclose, individually or in reasonable combination, the features disclosed in claims 1-6 and 8-21 as a whole.
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 TRANG T DOAN whose telephone number is (571)272-0740. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 7-4 ET.
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, Lynn D Feild can be reached on (571)272-2092. 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.
/TRANG T DOAN/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2431
Prosecution Insights