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 .
DETAILED ACTION
Response to Arguments
In communications filed on 11/20/2025, claims 1-7, 9-18, and 20-22 are presented for examination. Claims 1, 7, and 12 are independent.
Amended claim(s): 6, 9, 16, 20.
Applicants’ arguments, see Applicant Arguments/Remarks filed 11/20/2025, with respect to claim(s) rejected under prior art have been fully considered and are persuasive with regards to amended claims 6 and 16.
As regards to Applicant Arguments/Remarks with respect to claim(s) 1 and 12 rejected under prior art have been fully considered but are not persuasive. Applicant argues “plaintext polynomial is totally different from a “coefficient vector” as recited in the claim.” The Examiner disagrees. Ahmed’s cited portion explicitly discloses the polynomials are obtained by through a binning process (Ahmed: Figs 4-5, ¶5-¶7, ¶14) and combining the coefficients of the polynomial and represented as vectors ((Ahmed: Figs 1-5, ¶5-¶7, ¶14, ¶16, ¶83, ¶90-¶97, ¶149). Ahmed further discloses performing homomorphic evaluation on the combined coefficient vectors of the polynomial (Ahmed: Figs 1-6, ¶5-¶7, ¶12-¶14, ¶16, ¶48-¶50, ¶83, ¶90-¶97, ¶109-¶115, ¶149, ¶221, i.e., performing homomorphic encryption using PKI)
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
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 (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) 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.
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.
Claim(s) 1-3, 5, 12, 13, and 15 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by US 20210336770 A1 (hereinafter ‘Ahmed’).
As regards claim 1, Ahmed (US 20210336770 A1) discloses: A method for unbalanced private set intersection (PSI), a first party having a first data set, a second party having a second data set, the method comprising: (Ahmed: Figs. 1-5, ¶3, ¶12, ¶48, i.e., performing unbalanced PSI on data from two devices)
performing data preprocessing on private data in the first data set to obtain a first mapped data set; (Ahmed: ¶15, binning (mapping) the elements)
obtaining a polynomial function through fitting based on the first mapped data set; (Ahmed: Figs 1-5, ¶5-¶7, ¶14, obtaining polynomials from the bin data sets)
combining coefficients of terms in the polynomial function into a coefficient vector; receiving a public key from the second party; (Ahmed: Figs 1-5, ¶5-¶7, ¶14, ¶16, ¶83, ¶90-¶97, ¶149, i.e., combining coefficients into vectors)
performing homomorphic encryption on the coefficient vector by using the public key to obtain an encrypted coefficient vector; (Ahmed: Figs 1-6, ¶5-¶7, ¶12-¶14, ¶16, ¶48-¶50, ¶83, ¶90-¶97, ¶109-¶115, ¶149, ¶221, i.e., performing homomorphic encryption using PKI)
receiving a ciphertext input vector from the second party; (Ahmed: Figs 1-6, ¶5-¶7, ¶12-¶14, ¶16, ¶48-¶50, ¶83, ¶90-¶97, ¶109-¶115, ¶149, ¶221, i.e., performing homomorphic encryption using PKI)
obtaining a ciphertext result through computation based on the ciphertext input vector and the encrypted coefficient vector; and (Ahmed: Figs 6-10, ¶5-¶7, ¶12-¶14, ¶16, ¶46-¶50, ¶83, ¶90-¶97, ¶109-¶115, ¶149, ¶221, i.e., obtaining the ciphertext result)
sending the ciphertext result to the second party for the second party to obtain a result of unbalanced PSI. (Ahmed: Figs 6-10, ¶5-¶7, ¶12-¶14, ¶16, ¶46-¶50, ¶83, ¶90-¶97, ¶109-¶115, ¶149, ¶221, i.e., obtaining the result of the unbalanced PSI)
Claim 12 recites substantially the same features recited in claim 1 above and is rejected based on the aforementioned rationale discussed in the rejection.
As regards claim 2, Ahmed discloses the method according to claim 1, wherein the performing data preprocessing on the private data in the first data set includes performing data preprocessing by using an oblivious pseudorandom function (OPRF), and wherein data in the first mapped data set are pseudorandom numbers. (Ahmed: Figs 6-10, ¶5-¶7, ¶12-¶14, ¶16, ¶46-¶50, i.e., OPRF protocol)
Claim 13 recites substantially the same features recited in claim 2 above and is rejected based on the aforementioned rationale discussed in the rejection.
As regards claim 3, Ahmed discloses the method according to claim 1, wherein the private data of the first party is a user identifier of a to-be-queried user, and private data in the second data set of the second party is a group of user identifiers of a target category. (Ahmed: Figs. 1-5, 7B, ¶3, ¶12, ¶48)
As regards claim 5, Ahmed discloses the method according to claim 1, wherein the polynomial function is obtained through fitting by using a least squares procedure. (Ahmed: Figs 6-10, ¶5-¶7, ¶12-¶14, ¶16, ¶46-¶50, ¶77-¶81)
Claim 15 recites substantially the same features recited in claim 5 above and is rejected based on the aforementioned rationale discussed in the rejection.
Claim Objections
Claims 4, 14 are objected. Claims recites allowable subject matter: “obtaining, by the second party, ciphertext input vector, the obtaining including: generating a random matrix; generating an identity matrix; generating an invertible matrix pair; and obtaining the ciphertext input vector through computation based on the random matrix, the identity matrix, the invertible matrix pair, and a private key of the second party” not taught by prior art taken alone or in combination. Claim would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the respective base claims and any intervening claims.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 6, 7, 9-11, 16-18, and 20-22 are allowed.
The following is an examiner’s statement of reasons for allowance: Claim 6 and 16 limitations: “generating a random matrix; generating an identity matrix; generating an invertible matrix pair; and obtaining the ciphertext input vector through computation based on the private key, the random matrix, the identity matrix, and the invertible matrix pair” in combination with other limitations not taught by prior art taken alone or in combination.
Any comments considered necessary by applicant must be submitted no later than the payment of the issue fee and, to avoid processing delays, should preferably accompany the issue fee. Such submissions should be clearly labeled “Comments on Statement of Reasons for Allowance.”
Conclusion
THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. 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 SYED A ZAIDI whose telephone number is (571)270-5995. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Thursday: 5:30AM-5:30PM.
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, Jeffrey Nickerson can be reached at (469) 295-9235. 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.
/SYED A ZAIDI/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2432