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 .
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
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 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.
The factual inquiries for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized as follows:
1. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art.
2. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue.
3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art.
4. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness.
Claim(s) 1, 5, 6, 9 and 10 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Olson et al. (US. Pub. No. 2005/0171720 A1; hereinafter “OLSON”) in view of Townend (US. Pub. No. 2015/0036539 A1; hereinafter “TOWNEND”), Deshmukh et al. (US. Pub. No. 2023/0422118 A1; hereinafter “DESHMUKH”) and Barton et al. (US. Pub. No. 2023/0319943 A1; hereinafter “BARTON”)
Regarding claim 1, OLSON teaches a computer-implemented method in a Wi-Fi controller on a data communication network, the method comprising:
receiving, at the Wi-Fi controller, AP scan reports and station scan reports from one or more access points (see OLSON, fig. 7, 707, para. [0095]);
identifying a rogue access point from the access point scan reports and a rogue station from the station scan reports (see OLSON, fig. 7, 707-709, para. [0095-97]), wherein the rogue station and the rogue access point are compatible with IEEE 802.11 (see OLSON, para. [0029]);
wherein the nearby trusted access point is compatible with IEEE 802.11 (see OLSON, para. [0029], fig. 2, managed AP1 and AP2, 107,109).
OLSON is silent to teaching that, for disrupting connections between rouge access points and rogue stations operating with spoofed Basic Service Set (BSS) Transition Management Request (BTM-REQ frame) Action frames, comprising:
disrupting the rogue station connection to the rogue access point by notifying a nearby, trusted access point to transmit a spoofed BTM-REQ Action frame, having a Preference field value for a rogue BSSID set to a lowest value under a Subelement: BSS Transition Candidate Preference field, and having a Preference field value for a trusted BSSID set to a highest value, wherein the Disassociation Imminent field value is set to 1 indicative of upcoming disconnection;
detecting disruption of the connection between the rogue station and the rogue BSSID from subsequent station scan reports, and
wherein IEEE 802.11 is IEEE 802.11v.
in the same field of endeavor, TOWNEND teaches a method, for disrupting connections between rouge access points and rogue stations operating with spoofed SSID frames (see TOWNEND, fig. 3, Rogue AP 32), comprising
disrupting the rogue station connection to the rogue access point by notifying a nearby, trusted access point to transmit a spoofed SSID frame (see TOWNEND, fig. 4, 44, 45, para. [0055]); and
detecting disruption of the connection between the rogue station and the rogue BSSID from subsequent station scan reports (see TOWNEND, fig. 5b, para. [0057], displacing SSID 51 with SSID 59).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to combine the teaching of OLSON with the teaching of TOWNEND in order to reduce interference and improve capacity (see TOWNEND, para. [0002]).
The combination of OLSON and TOWNEND is silent to teaching that wherein the spoofed SSID frame is a spoofed Basic Service Set (BSS) Transition Management Request (BTM-REQ frame) Action frame, wherein the spoofed BTM-REQ Action frame, having a Preference field value for a rogue BSSID set to a lowest value under a Subelement: BSS Transition Candidate Preference field, and having a Preference field value for a trusted BSSID set to a highest value, wherein the Disassociation Imminent field value is set to 1 indicative of upcoming disconnection; wherein IEEE 802.11 is IEEE 802.11v.
In the same field of endeavor, DESHMUKH teaches a method wherein the spoofed SSID frame is a spoofed Basic Service Set (BSS) Transition Management Request (BTM-REQ frame) Action frame (see DESHMUKH,f ig. 2A, 204), wherein the spoofed BTM-REQ Action frame, having a Preference field value for a rogue BSSID set to a lowest value under a Subelement: BSS Transition Candidate Preference field, and having a Preference field value for a trusted BSSID set to a highest value (see DESHMUKH, para, [0026]), wherein IEEE 802.11 is IEEE 802.11v (see DESHMUKH, para. [0025]).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to combine the teaching of OLSON and TOWNEND with the teaching of DESHMUKH in order to improve AP roaming and efficiency (see DESHMUKH, para. [0002]).
The combination of OLSON, TOWNEND and DESHMUKH is silent to teaching that wherein the Disassociation Imminent field value is set to 1 indicative of upcoming disconnection .
In the same field of endeavor, BARTON teaches a method wherein the Disassociation Imminent field value is set to 1 indicative of upcoming disconnection (see BARTON, para. [0040-47], fig. 6, 602).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to combine the teaching of OLSON, TOWNEND and DESHMUKH with the teaching of BARTON in order to improve Wifi association efficiency and capacity (see BARTON, para. [0003]).
Regarding claim 5, the combination of OLSON, TOWNEND, DESHMUKH and BARTON teaches the method of claim 1, wherein the step of identifying the access point with an OUI comparison (see OLSON, fig. 7, 709).
Regarding claim 6, the combination of OLSON, TOWNEND, DESHMUKH and BARTON teaches the method of claim 1, wherein the BTM-REQ Action frame a Disassociation Time field is set to a relatively low value (see BARTON, para. [0040-47], fig. 6, 602).
Regarding claim 9, OLSON teaches a non-transitory computer-readable medium in a Wi-Fi controller on a data communication network, the method comprising:
receiving, at the Wi-Fi controller, AP scan reports and station scan reports from one or more access points (see OLSON, fig. 7, 707, para. [0095]);
identifying a rogue access point from the access point scan reports and a rogue station from the station scan reports (see OLSON, fig. 7, 707-709, para. [0095-97]), wherein the rogue station and the rogue access point are compatible with IEEE 802.11 (see OLSON, para. [0029]);
wherein the nearby trusted access point is compatible with IEEE 802.11 (see OLSON, para. [0029], fig. 2, managed AP1 and AP2, 107,109).
OLSON is silent to teaching that, for disrupting connections between rouge access points and rogue stations operating with spoofed Basic Service Set (BSS) Transition Management Request (BTM-REQ frame) Action frames, comprising:
disrupting the rogue station connection to the rogue access point by notifying a nearby, trusted access point to transmit a spoofed BTM-REQ Action frame, having a Preference field value for a rogue BSSID set to a lowest value under a Subelement: BSS Transition Candidate Preference field, and having a Preference field value for a trusted BSSID set to a highest value, wherein the Disassociation Imminent field value is set to 1 indicative of upcoming disconnection;
detecting disruption of the connection between the rogue station and the rogue BSSID from subsequent station scan reports, and
wherein IEEE 802.11 is IEEE 802.11v.
in the same field of endeavor, TOWNEND teaches a method, for disrupting connections between rouge access points and rogue stations operating with spoofed SSID frames (see TOWNEND, fig. 3, Rogue AP 32), comprising
disrupting the rogue station connection to the rogue access point by notifying a nearby, trusted access point to transmit a spoofed SSID frame (see TOWNEND, fig. 4, 44, 45, para. [0055]); and
detecting disruption of the connection between the rogue station and the rogue BSSID from subsequent station scan reports (see TOWNEND, fig. 5b, para. [0057], displacing SSID 51 with SSID 59).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to combine the teaching of OLSON with the teaching of TOWNEND in order to reduce interference and improve capacity (see TOWNEND, para. [0002]).
The combination of OLSON and TOWNEND is silent to teaching that wherein the spoofed SSID frame is a spoofed Basic Service Set (BSS) Transition Management Request (BTM-REQ frame) Action frame, wherein the spoofed BTM-REQ Action frame, having a Preference field value for a rogue BSSID set to a lowest value under a Subelement: BSS Transition Candidate Preference field, and having a Preference field value for a trusted BSSID set to a highest value, wherein the Disassociation Imminent field value is set to 1 indicative of upcoming disconnection; wherein IEEE 802.11 is IEEE 802.11v.
In the same field of endeavor, DESHMUKH teaches a method wherein the spoofed SSID frame is a spoofed Basic Service Set (BSS) Transition Management Request (BTM-REQ frame) Action frame (see DESHMUKH,f ig. 2A, 204), wherein the spoofed BTM-REQ Action frame, having a Preference field value for a rogue BSSID set to a lowest value under a Subelement: BSS Transition Candidate Preference field, and having a Preference field value for a trusted BSSID set to a highest value (see DESHMUKH, para, [0026]), wherein IEEE 802.11 is IEEE 802.11v (see DESHMUKH, para. [0025]).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to combine the teaching of OLSON and TOWNEND with the teaching of DESHMUKH in order to improve AP roaming and efficiency (see DESHMUKH, para. [0002]).
The combination of OLSON, TOWNEND and DESHMUKH is silent to teaching that wherein the Disassociation Imminent field value is set to 1 indicative of upcoming disconnection .
In the same field of endeavor, BARTON teaches a method wherein the Disassociation Imminent field value is set to 1 indicative of upcoming disconnection (see BARTON, para. [0040-47], fig. 6, 602).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to combine the teaching of OLSON, TOWNEND and DESHMUKH with the teaching of BARTON in order to improve Wifi association efficiency and capacity (see BARTON, para. [0003]).
Regarding claim 10, OLSON teaches a Wi-Fi controller on a data communication network, the Wi-Fi controller comprising: a processor; a network interface communicatively coupled to the processor and to a data communication network; and a memory (see OLSON, fig. 3), communicatively coupled to the processor and storing:
an access point module to receive AP scan reports and station scan reports from one or more access points (see OLSON, fig. 7, 707, para. [0095]);
a rogue device detector to identify a rogue access point from the access point scan reports and a rogue station from the station scan reports, wherein the rogue station and the rogue access point are compatible with IEEE 802.11 (see OLSON, para. [0029]); and
wherein the nearby trusted access point is compatible with IEEE 802.11 (see OLSON, para. [0029], fig. 2, managed AP1 and AP2, 107,109).
OLSON is silent to teaching that comprising
a rogue device disruptor to disrupt the rogue station connection to the rogue access point by notifying a nearby, trusted access point to transmit a spoofed BTM-REQ Action frame, having a Preference field value for a rogue BSSID set to a lowest value under a Subelement: BSS Transition Candidate Preference field, and having a Preference field value for a trusted BSSID set to a highest value, wherein the Disassociation Imminent field value is set to 1 indicative of upcoming disconnection, and wherein IEEE 802.11 is IEEE 802.11v, and
wherein the rogue device detector identifies disruption of the connection between the rogue station and the rogue BSSID from subsequent station scan reports.
in the same field of endeavor, TOWNEND teaches a method, for disrupting connections between rouge access points and rogue stations operating with spoofed SSID frames (see TOWNEND, fig. 3, Rogue AP 32), comprising
disrupting the rogue station connection to the rogue access point by notifying a nearby, trusted access point to transmit a spoofed SSID frame (see TOWNEND, fig. 4, 44, 45, para. [0055]); and
detecting disruption of the connection between the rogue station and the rogue BSSID from subsequent station scan reports (see TOWNEND, fig. 5b, para. [0057], displacing SSID 51 with SSID 59).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to combine the teaching of OLSON with the teaching of TOWNEND in order to reduce interference and improve capacity (see TOWNEND, para. [0002]).
The combination of OLSON and TOWNEND is silent to teaching that wherein the spoofed SSID frame is a spoofed Basic Service Set (BSS) Transition Management Request (BTM-REQ frame) Action frame, wherein the spoofed BTM-REQ Action frame, having a Preference field value for a rogue BSSID set to a lowest value under a Subelement: BSS Transition Candidate Preference field, and having a Preference field value for a trusted BSSID set to a highest value, wherein the Disassociation Imminent field value is set to 1 indicative of upcoming disconnection; wherein IEEE 802.11 is IEEE 802.11v.
In the same field of endeavor, DESHMUKH teaches a system wherein the spoofed SSID frame is a spoofed Basic Service Set (BSS) Transition Management Request (BTM-REQ frame) Action frame (see DESHMUKH, fig. 2A, 204), wherein the spoofed BTM-REQ Action frame, having a Preference field value for a rogue BSSID set to a lowest value under a Subelement: BSS Transition Candidate Preference field, and having a Preference field value for a trusted BSSID set to a highest value (see DESHMUKH, para, [0026]), wherein IEEE 802.11 is IEEE 802.11v (see DESHMUKH, para. [0025]).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to combine the teaching of OLSON and TOWNEND with the teaching of DESHMUKH in order to improve AP roaming and efficiency (see DESHMUKH, para. [0002]).
The combination of OLSON, TOWNEND and DESHMUKH is silent to teaching that wherein the Disassociation Imminent field value is set to 1 indicative of upcoming disconnection.
In the same field of endeavor, BARTON teaches a system wherein the Disassociation Imminent field value is set to 1 indicative of upcoming disconnection (see BARTON, para. [0040-47], fig. 6, 602).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to combine the teaching of OLSON, TOWNEND and DESHMUKH with the teaching of BARTON in order to improve Wifi association efficiency and capacity (see BARTON, para. [0003]).
Claim(s) 2-4 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over OLSON, TOWNEND, DESHMUKH and BARTON as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Lapidous (US. Pub. No. 2015/0189511 A1; hereinafter “LAPIDOUS”)
Regarding claim 2, the combination of OLSON, TOWNEND, DESHMUKH and BARTON teaches the method of claim 1.
The combination of OLSON, TOWNEND, DESHMUKH and BARTON is silent to teaching that further comprising identifying reconnection to rogue BSSID, and in response, broadcasting the spoofed BTM-REQ Action frame.
In the same field of endeavor, LAPIDOUS teaches a method comprising identifying reconnection to rogue BSSID, and in response, broadcasting the spoofed BTM-REQ Action frame (see LAPIDOUS, para. Fig. 0073], fig. 6, 650,660]).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to combine the teaching of OLSON, TOWNEND, DESHMUKH and BARTON with the teaching of LAPIDOUS in order to improve wireless network security and efficiency (see LAPIDOUS, para. [0010]).
Regarding claim 3, the combination of OLSON, TOWNEND, DESHMUKH and BARTON teaches the method of claim 1.
The combination of OLSON, TOWNEND, DESHMUKH and BARTON is silent to teaching that further comprising identifying a threshold number of rogue stations connected to the same rogue access point, and in response, broadcasting the spoofed BTM-REQ Action frame, wherein a second rogue station avoids any future conne650ction by the second rogue station to the rogue access point.
In the same field of endeavor, LAPIDOUS teaches a method comprising identifying a threshold number of rogue stations connected to the same rogue access point, and in response, broadcasting the spoofed BTM-REQ Action frame, wherein a second rogue station avoids any future conne650ction by the second rogue station to the rogue access point (see LAPIDOUS, para. Fig. 0073], fig. 6, 650,660]).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to combine the teaching of OLSON, TOWNEND, DESHMUKH and BARTON with the teaching of LAPIDOUS in order to improve wireless network security and efficiency (see LAPIDOUS, para. [0010]).
Regarding claim 4, the combination of OLSON, TOWNEND, DESHMUKH and BARTON teaches the method of claim 1.
The combination of OLSON, TOWNEND, DESHMUKH and BARTON is silent to teaching that further identifying a threshold number of rogue stations potentially connecting to the same rogue access point, and in response, broadcasting the spoofed BTM-REQ Action frame, wherein a second rogue station avoids any future connection by the second rogue station to the rogue access point.
In the same field of endeavor, LAPIDOUS teaches a method comprising identifying a threshold number of rogue stations potentially connecting to the same rogue access point, and in response, broadcasting the spoofed BTM-REQ Action frame, wherein a second rogue station avoids any future connection by the second rogue station to the rogue access point (see LAPIDOUS, para. Fig. 0073], fig. 6, 650,660]).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to combine the teaching of OLSON, TOWNEND, DESHMUKH and BARTON with the teaching of LAPIDOUS in order to improve wireless network security and efficiency (see LAPIDOUS, para. [0010]).
Claim(s) 8 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over OLSON, TOWNEND, DESHMUKH and BARTON as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Saloni et al. (US. Pub. No. 2023/0276239 A1; hereinafter “SALONI”)
Regarding claim 8, the combination of OLSON, TOWNEND, DESHMUKH and BARTON teaches the method of claim 1.
The combination of OLSON, TOWNEND, DESHMUKH and BARTON is silent to teaching that further comprising detecting the rogue station and the rogue access point comprises detecting a Wi-Fi 6E rogue station and a Wi-Fi 6E access point.
In the same field of endeavor, SALONI teaches a method comprising detecting the rogue station and the rogue access point comprises detecting a Wi-Fi 6E rogue station and a Wi-Fi 6E access point (see SALONI, para. [0012])
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to combine the teaching of OLSON, TOWNEND, DESHMUKH and BARTON with the teaching of SALONI in order to improve network access and security (see SALONI, para. [0001-2]).
Allowable Subject Matter
Claim 7 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.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Sinha et al. (US. Pub. No. 2010/0296496 A1) teaches Wi-Fi network security.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to WEN WU HUANG whose telephone number is (571)272-7852. The examiner can normally be reached Mon-Fri 10-6.
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, Wesley Kim can be reached at (571) 272-7867. 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.
/WEN W HUANG/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2648