Prosecution Insights
Last updated: April 19, 2026
Application No. 18/444,372

SECURE DEVICE ATTESTATION USING ENTITLEMENT TOKENS

Non-Final OA §103
Filed
Feb 16, 2024
Examiner
SHEHNI, GHAZAL B
Art Unit
2499
Tech Center
2400 — Computer Networks
Assignee
Nvidia Corporation
OA Round
1 (Non-Final)
87%
Grant Probability
Favorable
1-2
OA Rounds
2y 8m
To Grant
99%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 87% — above average
87%
Career Allow Rate
932 granted / 1068 resolved
+29.3% vs TC avg
Moderate +12% lift
Without
With
+12.4%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
2y 8m
Avg Prosecution
27 currently pending
Career history
1095
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
12.1%
-27.9% vs TC avg
§103
38.5%
-1.5% vs TC avg
§102
20.6%
-19.4% vs TC avg
§112
12.9%
-27.1% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 1068 resolved cases

Office Action

§103
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 . Election/Restrictions Applicant’s election without traverse of Group I (Claims 1-10, 11-15) in the reply filed on 11/12/2025 is acknowledged. Claims 16-20 withdrawn from further consideration pursuant to 37 CFR 1.142(b) as being drawn to a nonelected (Group II), there being no allowable generic or linking claim. Election was made without traverse in the reply filed on 11/12/2025. Allowable Subject Matter Claim 9 is 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. 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. Claims 1-8, 10, 11-15 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Oerton et al (Pub. No. US 2023/0379699) in view of Ko et al (Pub. No. US 2023/0131060). As per claim 1, Oerton discloses a method comprising: receiving, by at least one processing device, an attestation report corresponding to a root of trust of a computing system, wherein the attestation report is cryptographically signed using a private key unique to the root of trust (…the request for registration includes a report comprising attestation data for the device…this includes measurements of the root of trust on the device…the attestation report received from the device…the request may be signed using an attestation private key that was provisioned on the device during manufacture…see par. 92-93); verifying, by the at least one processing device, the attestation report using a public key corresponding to the private key (…generating and store one set of asymmetric cryptographic keys…once the keys are generated, the device contacts the distributed ledger network as part of a request for registration…the request for registration includes a report comprising attestation for the device…this includes measurements of the root of trust on the device such as hash value computed for the device and can include public keys generated by the device…a node of the attestation channel obtains the request for registration, and can execute chaincode to verify the attestation data against information stored in the attestation channel distributed ledger, such as the attestation public key…see par. 92-93). Oerton does not explicitly disclose based at least upon successful verification of the attestation report, issuing, by at least one processing device, an entitlement token for the root of trust allowing the root of trust to take one or more actions with respect to a system component secured by the root of trust. However Ko discloses based at least upon successful verification of the attestation report, issuing, by at least one processing device, an entitlement token for the root of trust allowing the root of trust to take one or more actions with respect to a system component secured by the root of trust (…the API call includes the attestation token that is used to further validate by the data storage that the secure enclave is the trusted source requesting the information/data via the API call…the confidential/sensitive data and information can be provided to the secure enclave for provision to the requestor if the API call source is validated by the data storage…the attestation service generates the attestation token for the secure enclave that includes a hashed value of the public key in the secure quote…the API call is made from the secure enclave to the data storage to establish a secure communication session based on the signed certificate for the secure enclave… …see par. 29). Therefore one ordinary skill in the art would have found it obvious before the effective filling date of the claimed invention to use Ko in Oerton for including the above limitations because one ordinary skill in the art would recognize it would further improve secure authentication and authorization of accessing to data…see Ko, par. 3. As per claim 11, Oerton discloses a system comprising: a memory device; and a processing device coupled to the memory device (see fig.2), wherein the processing device is configured to perform operations comprising: receiving an attestation report corresponding to a root of trust of a computing system, wherein the attestation report is cryptographically signed using a private key unique to the root of trust (…the request for registration includes a report comprising attestation data for the device…this includes measurements of the root of trust on the device…the attestation report received from the device…the request may be signed using an attestation private key that was provisioned on the device during manufacture…see par. 92-93); verifying the attestation report using a public key corresponding to the private key (…generating and store one set of asymmetric cryptographic keys…once the keys are generated, the device contacts the distributed ledger network as part of a request for registration…the request for registration includes a report comprising attestation for the device…this includes measurements of the root of trust on the device such as hash value computed for the device and can include public keys generated by the device…a node of the attestation channel obtains the request for registration, and can execute chaincode to verify the attestation data against information stored in the attestation channel distributed ledger, such as the attestation public key…see par. 92-93). Oerton does not explicitly disclose based at least upon successful verification of the attestation report, issuing an entitlement token for the root of trust allowing the root of trust to take one or more actions with respect to a system component secured by the root of trust. However Ko discloses based at least upon successful verification of the attestation report, issuing an entitlement token for the root of trust allowing the root of trust to take one or more actions with respect to a system component secured by the root of trust (…the API call includes the attestation token that is used to further validate by the data storage that the secure enclave is the trusted source requesting the information/data via the API call…the confidential/sensitive data and information can be provided to the secure enclave for provision to the requestor if the API call source is validated by the data storage…the attestation service generates the attestation token for the secure enclave that includes a hashed value of the public key in the secure quote…the API call is made from the secure enclave to the data storage to establish a secure communication session based on the signed certificate for the secure enclave…see par. 29). Therefore one ordinary skill in the art would have found it obvious before the effective filling date of the claimed invention to use Ko in Oerton for including the above limitations because one ordinary skill in the art would recognize it would further improve secure authentication and authorization of accessing to data…see Ko, par. 3. As per claims 2, 12, the combination of Oerton and Ko discloses wherein the attestation report includes a signing certificate of the root of trust, the method further comprising: determining the public key corresponding to the private key using the signing certificate (Oerton: see par. 52). As per claims 3, 13, the combination of Oerton and Ko discloses wherein the attestation report includes at least one state measurement (Oerton: see par. 93), and wherein the entitlement token that is issued comprises the at least one state measurement (Ko: see par. 70). The motivation for claims 3, 13 is the same motivation as in claims 1, 11. As per claims 4, 14, the combination of Oerton and Ko discloses wherein the attestation report includes at least one state measurement, and wherein verifying the attestation report comprises: determining whether the at least one state measurement satisfies a security policy (Oerton: see par. 93). As per claim 5, the combination of Oerton and Ko discloses wherein the at least one state measurement comprises at least one of a device identifier or a firmware version, and wherein the security policy indicates whether at least one of the device identifier (Oerton: see par. 93) or the firmware version is authorized to receive an entitlement token. As per claims 6, 15, the combination of Oerton and Ko discloses transmitting a request to the computing system for an attestation report from the root of trust, wherein the request comprises an authentication challenge and wherein the authentication challenge is included in the attestation report that is cryptographically signed (Oerton: see par. 52). As per claim 7, the combination of Oerton and Ko discloses transmitting the entitlement token to the computing system for installation by the root of trust; and receiving a confirmation that the entitlement token was successfully installed by the root of trust (Ko: see par. 71-72). The motivation for claim 7 is the same motivation as in claim 1 above. As per claim 8, the combination of Oerton and Ko discloses issuing a request to the root of trust to remove the entitlement token; and receiving a confirmation that the entitlement token was successfully removed by the root of trust (Ko: see par. 80-81). The motivation for claim 8 is the same motivation as in claim 1 above. As per claim 10, the combination of Oerton and Ko discloses wherein the one or more actions comprise at least one of: affecting a change in a software of the system component, or configuring a feature provided by the software of the system component (Ko: see par. 92-93). The motivation for claim 10 is the same motivation as in claim 1. Conclusion The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure (see PTO-form 892). The following Patents and Papers are cited to further show the state of the art at the time of Applicant’s invention with respect to improve managing the software and/or features available on components of a computer system. Juels et al (Pat. No. US 9659177); “Authentication Token with Controlled Release of Authentication Information Based on Client Attestation”; -Teaches the attestation checker is configured to consume one or more platform attestations generated by the authentication token, in order to support mutual attestation checking by the authentication token and the client…see col.5 lines 9-11. Muller et al (Pub. No. US 2020/0026857); “Host Software Metadata Verification During Remote Attestation”; -Teaches TPM is configured to generate cryptographic data in response to measuring the running software components of software platform…see par. 15. Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to GHAZAL B SHEHNI whose telephone number is (571)270-7479. The examiner can normally be reached Mon-Fri 9am-5pm PCT. 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, Philip Chea can be reached at 5712723951. 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. /GHAZAL B SHEHNI/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2499
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Feb 16, 2024
Application Filed
Jan 21, 2026
Non-Final Rejection — §103
Apr 08, 2026
Applicant Interview (Telephonic)
Apr 08, 2026
Examiner Interview Summary

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12602479
MEASURING CONTAINERS
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 14, 2026
Patent 12596810
AUTOMATED APPLICATION PROGRAMMING INTERFACE (API) TESTING
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 07, 2026
Patent 12591682
AUTOMOTIVE SECURE BOOT WITH SHUTDOWN MEASURE
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 31, 2026
Patent 12591660
DEVICE SECURITY MANAGER ARCHITECTURE FOR TRUSTED EXECUTION ENVIRONMENT INPUT/OUTPUT (TEE-IO) CAPABLE SYSTEM-ON-A-CHIP INTEGRATED DEVICES
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 31, 2026
Patent 12585741
PASSWORD PROMPT FOR SECURE CAMERA ACTIVATION
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 24, 2026
Study what changed to get past this examiner. Based on 5 most recent grants.

AI Strategy Recommendation

Get an AI-powered prosecution strategy using examiner precedents, rejection analysis, and claim mapping.
Powered by AI — typically takes 5-10 seconds

Prosecution Projections

1-2
Expected OA Rounds
87%
Grant Probability
99%
With Interview (+12.4%)
2y 8m
Median Time to Grant
Low
PTA Risk
Based on 1068 resolved cases by this examiner. Grant probability derived from career allow rate.

Sign in with your work email

Enter your email to receive a magic link. No password needed.

Personal email addresses (Gmail, Yahoo, etc.) are not accepted.

Free tier: 3 strategy analyses per month