Detailed Action
The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
This Office action is in response to Applicant’s amendment submitted on February 12, 2026.
Claims 1, 3-4, 6-13, 15-16, 18-20 are pending in the application.
Continued Examination Under 37 CFR 1.114
A request for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, including the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e), was filed in this application after final rejection. Since this application is eligible for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114. Applicant's submission filed on February 12, 2026 has been entered.
Response to Arguments/Remarks
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
Claims 1, 3-4, 6-12, and 20 were rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(a) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), first paragraph, as failing to comply with the written description requirement.
Applicant’s amendments to the claims have addressed the rejections. Accordingly, the rejections have been withdrawn.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102/103
Claims 13 and 18 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Honda et al. US Patent Publication No. 2004/0072580 (“Honda”) in view of Amar et al. US Patent Publication No. 2023/0283597 (“Amar”).
Applicant submitted that in Takazoe, US Patent Publication No. 2018/0241739, the condition of performing device authentication is pressing the buttons (claimed trigger) on both the new controller 41 and the new device 42. Thus, the trigger is not only disposed in one device.
In response, independent claims 1, 13, and 20 are amended to recite, “wherein the trigger unit is disposed in only the processing module.” The independent claims do not require a button disposed in the processing module. Furthermore, Applicant appears to suggest that the authentication occurs only in response to the trigger unit disposed in the processing module. This feature is also not found in the claims. Honda discloses wireless communication utility 201 that controls the setting of an operation mode of the device (para. [0048]), which includes the “pairing mode” to allow authentication process to be performed (para. [0065]). The software within the particular wireless communication control unit 201 is disposed only in the module of the device, which enables the pairing mode.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of 35 U.S.C. 112(a):
(a) IN GENERAL.—The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor or joint inventor of carrying out the invention.
The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112:
The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor of carrying out his invention.
Claims 1, 3-4, 6-13, 15-16, 18-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(a) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), first paragraph, as failing to comply with the written description requirement. The claim(s) contains subject matter which was not described in the specification in such a way as to reasonably convey to one skilled in the relevant art that the inventor or a joint inventor, or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the inventor(s), at the time the application was filed, had possession of the claimed invention.
Regarding claim 1, the limitation, “wherein the trigger unit is disposed in only the processing module,” is not supported by Applicant’s disclosure. The specification discloses that the trigger unit is disposed in the processing unit (see para. [0025]). The specification does not expressly disclose that the trigger is disposed only in the processing unit.
Claims 13 and 20 comprises a similar language as claim 1 and are rejected under a similar rationale as claim 1.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
The text of those sections of Title 35, U.S. Code not included in this action can be found in a prior Office action.
Claims 1, 6-7, 12-13, 18, and 20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Honda et al. US Patent Publication No. 2004/0072580 (“Honda”) in view of Amar et al. US Patent Publication No. 2023/0283597 (“Amar”).
Regarding claim 1, Honda teaches a remote terminal unit, comprising:
a processing module, comprising: a first processor; and a first memory, coupled to the first processor,
wherein in response to a trigger unit being enabled, the first processor operates in a provision mode to allow an input/output module and the processing module to establish trust (para. [0065] "pairing mode" is an operating environment setting item for specifying whether to allow an authentication process to be performed between the local device 1 and the remote device 2.),
wherein in response to the trigger unit being disabled, the first processor operates in a running mode to prohibit another input/output module that has not yet established trust from connecting with the processing module (para. [0065] mode (non-pairable mode) that inhibits the authentication process (pairing) from being performed. para [0068] when the local device 1 is in the non-pairable mode, the local device 1 is inhibited from performing the above pairing process. pairing process is required at the time of connection between the devices that the pairing has not completed)
wherein the trigger unit is disposed in only the processing module (para. [0048] wireless communication utility 201 controls the setting of an operation mode of the device. para. [0065] “pairing mode,” the local device 1 is set in one of a mode (pairable mode) that allows the authentication process (pairing) to be performed).
Honda does not teach:
wherein in response to the first processor operating in the provision mode, the first processor sends a notification signal to the input/output module, so that the processing module and the input/output module obtain certificates of each other;
wherein in response to the processing module and the input/output module operating in the provision mode, the first processor sends a processing module certificate to the input/output module, and receives an input/output module certificate sent by the input/output module to store the input/output module certificate into the first memory, and a second processor of the input/output module receives the processing module certificate sent by the processing module to store the processing module certificate into a second memory of the input/output module,
Amar discloses in response to a first processor operating in a provision mode, sending a notification signal to an input/output module, so that the processing module and the input/output module obtain certificates of each other (para. [0050] device 202 may transmit a connection request including the communication device digital certificate at operation 252 to access device. para. [0052] access device 204 may provide its access device digital certificate. para. [0053] upon verification of both the communication device digital certificate and the access device digital certificate, mutual trust can be established between communication device 202 and access device 202);
wherein in response to the processing module and the input/output module operating in the provision mode, the first processor sends a processing module certificate to the input/output module; and receives the processing module certificate sent by the processing module by a second processing unit of the input/output module to store the processing module certificate into a first memory (para. [0050] device 202 may transmit a connection request including the communication device digital certificate at operation 252 to access device. verify the communication device digital certificate. para. [0052] access device 204 may provide its access device digital certificate. decrypt the information using the corresponding private key. verify the access device digital certificate), and a second processor of the input/output module receives the input/output module certificate sent by the processing module to store the input/output module certificate into a second memory of the input/output module (para. [0052] access device 204 may provide its access device digital certificate. decrypt the information using the corresponding private key. verify the access device digital certificate, remotely or locally.).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Honda with Amar’s disclosure of obtaining and storing certificates of each other. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to do so in order to have utilized digital certificates to achieve mutual trust and to provide encryption for data exchange (para. [0010],[0053]).
Regarding claim 13, Honda discloses an authentication method of a remote terminal unit, wherein the remote terminal unit comprises a processing module, the authentication method comprising:
in response to a trigger unit being enabled, operating a first processor of the processing module in a provision mode to allow an input/output module and the processing module to establish trust (para. [0065] "pairing mode" is an operating environment setting item for specifying whether to allow an authentication process to be performed between the local device 1 and the remote device 2.), wherein the trigger unit is disposed in only the processing module (para. [0048] wireless communication utility 201 controls the setting of an operation mode of the device. para. [0065] “pairing mode,” the local device 1 is set in one of a mode (pairable mode) that allows the authentication process (pairing) to be performed); and
in response to the trigger unit being disabled, operating the first processing unit of the processing module in a running mode to prohibit another input/output module that has not yet established trust from connecting with the processing module (para. [0065] mode (non-pairable mode) that inhibits the authentication process (pairing) from being performed. para [0068] when the local device 1 is in the non-pairable mode, the local device 1 is inhibited from performing the above pairing process. pairing process is required at the time of connection between the devices that the pairing has not completed).
Honda does not teach in wherein in response to the first processor operating in the provision mode, sending a notification signal to the input/output module by the first processor, so that the processing module and the input/output module obtain certificates of each other.
Honda does not teach wherein the step of the processing module and the input/output module obtaining the certificates of each other comprises:
sending a processing module certificate to the input/output module by the first processor of the processing module:
receiving the processing module certificate sent by the processing module by a second processor of the input/output module to store the processing module certificate into a second memory of the input/output module;
sending an input/output module certificate to the processing module by the second processor of the input/output module; and
receiving the input/output module certificate sent by the input/output module by the first processor of the processing module to store the input/output module certificate into a first memory of the processing module; and
Amar discloses: in response to a first processor operating in a provision mode, sending a notification signal to an input/output module by the first processor, so that the processing module and the input/output module obtain certificates of each other (para. [0050] device 202 may transmit a connection request including the communication device digital certificate at operation 252 to access device. para. [0052] access device 204 may provide its access device digital certificate. para. [0053] upon verification of both the communication device digital certificate and the access device digital certificate, mutual trust can be established between communication device 202 and access device 202);
sending a processing module certificate to an input/output module by the first processor of the processing module; receiving the processing module certificate sent by the processing module by a second processing unit of the input/output module to store the processing module certificate into a second memory of the input/output module (para. [0050] device 202 may transmit a connection request including the communication device digital certificate at operation 252 to access device. verify the communication device digital certificate. para. [0052] access device 204 may provide its access device digital certificate. decrypt the information using the corresponding private key. verify the access device digital certificate);
sending an input/output module certificate to the processing module by the second processor of the input/output module; and receiving the input/output module certificate sent by the input/output module by the first processor of the processing module to store the input/output module certificate into a first storage unit of the processing module (para. [0052] access device 204 may provide its access device digital certificate. decrypt the information using the corresponding private key. verify the access device digital certificate.).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Honda with Amar’s disclosure of obtaining and storing certificates of each other. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to do so in order to have utilized digital certificates to achieve mutual trust and to provide encryption for data exchange (para. [0010],[0053]).
Regarding claim 20, Honda teaches a communication system, comprising
a remote terminal unit, comprising a processing module comprising a first processor and a first memory; and an extension device, comprising an input/output module and coupled to the remote terminal unit (para. [0065] local device, remote device),
wherein in response to a trigger unit of the processing module being enabled, the first processor operates in a provision mode to allow the input/output module and the processing module to establish trust (para. [0065] "pairing mode" is an operating environment setting item for specifying whether to allow an authentication process to be performed between the local device 1 and the remote device 2.),
wherein in response to the trigger unit being disabled, the first processor operates in a running mode to prohibit another input/output module that has not yet established trust from connecting with the processing modules (para. [0065] mode (non-pairable mode) that inhibits the authentication process (pairing) from being performed. para [0068] when the local device 1 is in the non-pairable mode, the local device 1 is inhibited from performing the above pairing process. pairing process is required at the time of connection between the devices that the pairing has not completed)
wherein the trigger unit is disposed in only the processing module (para. [0048] wireless communication utility 201 controls the setting of an operation mode of the device. para. [0065] “pairing mode,” the local device 1 is set in one of a mode (pairable mode) that allows the authentication process (pairing) to be performed).
Honda does not teach: wherein in response to the first processor operating in the provision mode, the first processor sends a notification signal to the input/output module, so that the processing module and the input/output module obtain certificates of each other,
wherein in response to the processing module and the input/output module operating in the provision mode, the first processor sends a processing module certificate to the input/output module, and receives an input/output module certificate sent by the input/output module to store the input/output module certificate into the first memory, and a second processor of the input/output module receives the processing module certificate sent by the processing module to store the processing module certificate into a second memory of the input/output module.
Amar discloses: in response to a first processor operating in a provision mode, the first processor sends a notification signal to an input/output module, so that the processing module and the input/output module obtain certificates of each other (para. [0050] device 202 may transmit a connection request including the communication device digital certificate at operation 252 to access device. para. [0052] access device 204 may provide its access device digital certificate. para. [0053] upon verification of both the communication device digital certificate and the access device digital certificate, mutual trust can be established between communication device 202 and access device 202);
in response to the processing module and the input/output module operating in the provision mode, the first processor sends a processing module certificate to the input/output module, and receives an input/output module certificate sent by the input/output module to store the input/output module certificate into the first memory (para. [0050] device 202 may transmit a connection request including the communication device digital certificate at operation 252 to access device. verify the communication device digital certificate. para. [0052] access device 204 may provide its access device digital certificate. decrypt the information using the corresponding private key. verify the access device digital certificate); and a second processor of the input/output module receives the processing module certificate sent by the processing module to store the processing module certificate into a second memory of the input/output module (para. [0052] access device 204 may provide its access device digital certificate. decrypt the information using the corresponding private key. verify the access device digital certificate, remotely or locally.).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Honda with Amar’s disclosure of obtaining and storing certificates of each other. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to do so in order to have utilized digital certificates to achieve mutual trust and to provide encryption for data exchange (para. [0010],[0053]).
Regarding claim 6, Honda does not teach the remote terminal unit according to claim 1, wherein in response to the first processor operating in the running mode, the first processor sends first handshake data to the input/output module and receives second handshake data from the input/output module, wherein the first processor decrypts the second handshake data according to a first secret key stored in the first memory, and verifies with the input/output module certificate stored in the first memory to confirm the input/output module is a trusted input/output module.
Amar discloses a first processor sends first handshake data to the input/output module and receives second handshake data from the input/output module, wherein the first processor decrypts the second handshake data according to a first secret key stored in the first memory, and verifies with the input/output module certificate stored in the first memory to confirm the input/output module is a trusted input/output module (para. [0044] communications between communication device 102 and access device 104 can be encrypted using the public keys included in the certificates. para. [0048] data encrypted by the access device public key can be decrypted by an access device private key stored on access device 204. para. [0050] device 202 may transmit a connection request including the communication device digital certificate at operation 252 to access device. verify the communication device digital certificate. para. [0052] access device 204 may provide its access device digital certificate. para. [0053] upon verification of both the communication device digital certificate and the access device digital certificate, mutual trust can be established between communication device 202 and access device 202. update its local network state information to indicate that access device 204 is now securely connected to communication device.). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Honda with Amar’s disclosure. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Honda with Amar’s disclosure of exchanging handshake data and verify with the certificate to confirm the module is trusted. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to do so for purposes increased security by encrypting transmitted data and maintaining trust through verification of certificates.
Regarding claim 7, Honda does not teach the remote terminal unit according to claim 6, wherein the second processor of the input/output module decrypts the first handshake data according to a second secret key stored in the second memory, and verifies with the processing module certificate stored in the second memory to confirm the processing module is a trusted processing module.
Amar discloses a second processor of the input/output module decrypts the first handshake data according to a second secret key stored in the second memory, and verifies with the processing module certificate stored in the second memory to confirm the processing module is a trusted processing module (para. [0052] receiving and decrypting the access device digital certificate. para. [0053] upon verification of both the communication device digital certificate and the access device digital certificate, mutual trust can be established between communication device 202 and access device 202. update its local network state information to indicate that access device 204 is now securely connected to communication device). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Honda with Amar’s disclosure of exchanging handshake data and verify with the certificate to confirm the model is trusted. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to do so for purposes increased security by encrypting transmitted data and maintaining trust through verification of certificates.
Regarding claim 12, Honda in view of Amar teach the remote terminal unit according to claim 1, wherein the input/output module is disposed in an extension device (Honda: para. [0065] local device, remote device. See Applicant’s specification, [0018], which states that the extension device may be another remote terminal unit).
Regarding claim 18, Honda does not teach the authentication method according to claim 13, wherein in response to the first processor operating in the running mode, the authentication method further comprises: sending first handshake data to the input/output module by the first processor of the processing module, and receiving second handshake data from the input/output module; and decrypting the second handshake data according to a first secret key stored in the first memory by the first processor of the processing module, and verifying with the input/output module certificate stored in the first memory to confirm the input/output module is a trusted input/output module; and decrypting the first handshake data according to a second secret key stored in the second memory by the second processor of the input/output module, and verifying with the processing module certificate stored in the second memory to confirm the processing module is a trusted processing module.
Amar teaches sending first handshake data to a second device by a first processor of a processing module, and receiving second handshake data from the second device (para. [0050] device 202 may transmit a connection request including the communication device digital certificate at operation 252 to access device. verify the communication device digital certificate. para. [0052] access device 204 may provide its access device digital certificate); and decrypting a second handshake data according to a first secret key stored in a first memory by a first processor of a processing module, and verifying with the input/output module certificate stored in the first memory to confirm the second device is a trusted device (para. [0044] communications between communication device 102 and access device 104 can be encrypted using the public keys included in the certificates. para. [0053] upon verification of both the communication device digital certificate and the access device digital certificate, mutual trust can be established between communication device 202 and access device 202. update its local network state information to indicate that access device 204 is now securely connected to communication device.); and decrypting the first handshake data according to a second secret key stored in the second memory by the second processor of the second device, and verifying with the processing module certificate stored in the second memory to confirm the processing module is a trusted processing module (para. [0052] receiving and decrypting the access device digital certificate. para. [0053] upon verification of both the communication device digital certificate and the access device digital certificate, mutual trust can be established between communication device 202 and access device 202. update its local network state information to indicate that access device 204 is now securely connected to communication device). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Honda with Amar’s disclosure of exchanging handshake data and verify with the certificate to confirm the module is trusted. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to do so for purposes increased security by encrypting transmitted data and maintaining trust through verification of certificates.
Claims 3-4, 15-16 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Honda in view of Amar and Gaal et al. US Patent Publication No. 2020/0366686 (“Gaal”).
Regarding claim 3, Honda does not teach the remote terminal unit according to claim 1, wherein the first processor sends the notification signal to the input/output module through a link layer discovery protocol (LLDP).
Gaal discloses a processor that sends a notification signal to a module through a link layer discovery protocol (LLDP) (para. [0124] LLDP message is transmitted by a transmitting node abbreviated TN that may correspond to the transmitting node 120... LLDP message has a mandatory part and an optional part. optional part may correspond to organizational specific TLVs). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Honda and Amar with Gaal’s disclosure of sending a notification signal to a module through a LLDP. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to do so for benefits of improved network security by providing exchanging security related information providing a messaging protocol and that provides data indicating nodes that are authenticated or not and (para. [0009],[0030]).
Regarding claim 4, Honda does not teach the remote terminal unit according to claim 3, wherein the notification signal comprises an organization-specific information of the link layer discovery protocol.
Gaal discloses a notification signal that comprises an organization-specific information of the link layer discovery protocol (para. [0124] LLDP message is transmitted by a transmitting node abbreviated TN that may correspond to the transmitting node 120... LLDP message has a mandatory part and an optional part. The optional part may correspond to organizational specific TLVs). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Honda and Amar with Gaal’s disclosure of sending a notification signal to a module through a LLDP, wherein the notification signal comprises an organization-specific information. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to do so in order to have provided additional security related information that may be used to verify authenticity (para. [0055],[0069],[0070]).
Regarding claim 15, Honda does not teach the authentication method according to claim 13, wherein the first processor sends the notification signal to the input/output module through a link layer discovery protocol.
Gaal discloses a processor that sends a notification signal to a module through a link layer discovery protocol (LLDP) (para. [0124] LLDP message is transmitted by a transmitting node abbreviated TN that may correspond to the transmitting node 120... LLDP message has a mandatory part and an optional part. optional part may correspond to organizational specific TLVs). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Honda and Amar with Gaal’s disclosure of sending a notification signal to a module through a LLDP. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to do so for benefits of improved network security by providing exchanging security related information providing a messaging protocol and that provides data indicating nodes that are authenticated or not and (para. [0009],[0030]).
Regarding claim 16, Honda does not teach the authentication method according to claim 15, wherein the notification signal comprises organization-specific information of the link layer discovery protocol.
Gaal discloses a notification signal that comprises an organization-specific information of the link layer discovery protocol (para. [0124] LLDP message is transmitted by a transmitting node abbreviated TN that may correspond to the transmitting node 120... LLDP message has a mandatory part and an optional part. optional part may correspond to organizational specific TLVs). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Honda and Amar with Gaal’s disclosure of sending a notification signal to a module through a LLDP, wherein the notification signal comprises an organization-specific information. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to do so in order to have provided additional security related information that may be used to verify authenticity (para. [0055],[0069],[0070]).
Claims 8 and 19 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Honda in view of Amar and Jayakumar et al. US Patent Publication No. 2023/0060447 (“Jayakumar”).
Regarding claim 8, Honda does not teach the remote terminal unit according to claim 1, wherein the processing module and the input/output module obtain the certificates of each other based on a mutual transport layer security communication protocol to establish trust.
Jayakumar discloses obtaining certificates of each other based on a mutual transport layer security communication protocol to establish trust (para. [0070] mTLS connections might be advantageous to implement between VASPs because, for instance, both client and server (e.g., both VASPs) provide identity information (e.g., certificates) to authenticate one another). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Honda and Amar with Jayakumar’s disclosure of obtaining certificates of each other based on mTLS to establish trust. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to do so for improving security by utilizing a protocol that provides encryption and requiring both modules to authenticate one another using certain certificates (para. [0070]).
Regarding claim 19, Honda does not teach the authentication method according to claim 13, wherein the processing module and the input/output module obtain the certificates of each other based on a mutual transport layer security communication protocol to establish trust.
Jayakumar discloses obtaining certificates of each other based on a mutual transport layer security communication protocol to establish trust (para. [0070] mTLS connections might be advantageous to implement between VASPs because, for instance, both client and server (e.g., both VASPs) provide identity information (e.g., certificates) to authenticate one another). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Honda and Amar with Jayakumar’s disclosure of obtaining certificates of each other based on mTLS to establish trust. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to do so for improving security by utilizing a protocol that provides encryption and requiring both modules to authenticate one another using certain certificates (para. [0070]).
Claim 9 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Honda in view of Amar and Orthmann et al. US Patent Publication No. 2016/0198391 (“Orthmann”).
Regarding claim 9, the remote terminal unit according to claim 1, wherein the trigger unit is a physical button.
Orthmann discloses a trigger unit that is a physical button (para. [0061] pairing process is initiated by pressing a button of the inputting device 140 of the central module 100). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Honda with Orthmann’s disclosure of implementing a physical button in a module such that a physical button is disposed on the processing module of Honda. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to do so because Orthmann describes a pairing process that is initiated by the button, and it would have been beneficial to enable a user to also initiate the pairing by pressing a button.
Claim 10 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Honda in view of Amar and Kim et al US Patent Publication No. 2023/0209617 (“Kim”).
Regarding claim 10, Honda does not teach the remote terminal unit according to claim 1, wherein the trigger unit is a virtual button and is remotely enabled or disabled by a remote network interface or a network management tool.
Kim discloses a unit that is a virtual button and is remotely enabled or disabled by a remote network interface or a network management tool (para. [0600] visual interface modules can enable a user of the access device 108 to remotely control network devices within a network without having to physically interface with the network device). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Honda with Kim’s disclosure of a unit that is a virtual button and is remotely enabled or disabled by a remote network interface or a network management tool such that the trigger unit of Honda is a virtual button. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to do so for similar benefits of enabling a user to manage a device without having to physically interface with the device.
Claim 11 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Honda in view of Amar and Paulraj et al US Patent Publication No. 2024/0303313 (“Paulraj”).
Regarding claim 11, Honda does not teach the remote terminal unit according to claim 1, wherein the remote terminal unit further comprises the input/output module.
Paulraj discloses a terminal unit comprising an input/output module (para. [0026] require components to establish trust, and to reestablish trust over time, with other components before securely communicating. PCIe adapters, BMCs, authentication components, CPUs, and components that are attached). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Honda with Paulraj’s disclosure of a terminal unit comprising an input/output module. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to do so for similar a benefit of improving security by establishing and reestablishing trust between components for secure communications.
Examiner’s Note
The following prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant’s disclosure.
Fujimoto et al. US Patent Publication No. 2018/0124028 (para. [0057] start button 220, if the start button 220 is pressed, the processor 210 generates a password used for authentication of the IoT terminal device 200. Then, the processor 210 sends the connection request including the generated password to the GW device 300 via the communication module 240)
Conclusion
A shortened statutory period for reply to this Office action is set to expire THREE MONTHS from the mailing date of this action.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Joshua Joo whose telephone number is 571 272-3966. The examiner can normally be reached on Monday-Friday 7am-3pm EST.
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, Oscar Louie can be reached on 571 270-1684. 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.
/JOSHUA JOO/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2445