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 .
Applicant's amendments filed on 05/20/2026 has been received and entered. Currently Claims 1,3-8 and 10-20 are pending. Claims 5-8 and 13 are withdrawn from consideration.
Response to Arguments
Applicant argues on pages 11-12 of applicant’s remarks that the cited references of Park and Barrett does not disclose or suggest “wherein the evaluation value indicates a degree of influence of the information on the first apparatus” as recited in the claims.
The examiner respectfully disagrees. Park teaches detecting misbehavior of a nearby vehicle based on received driving information of the nearby vehicle and create a misbehavior report that includes the driving information and analysis results and send the report to a server ([0040], [0054]-[0055], [0069]-[0071]). One of ordinary skill in the art would recognize that the analysis results indicates that the nearby vehicle is a misbehaving vehicle. One of ordinary skill in the art would also recognize that since the nearby vehicle is misbehaving, it indicates some sort of degree of influence of the received driving information on the vehicle itself. The examiner notes that the claims do not recite how the first apparatus/vehicle is being influenced by the evaluation value.
In response to applicant's argument that Park and Barrett are nonanalogous arts, it has been held that a prior art reference must either be in the field of the inventor’s endeavor or, if not, then be reasonably pertinent to the particular problem with which the inventor was concerned, in order to be relied upon as a basis for rejection of the claimed invention. See In re Oetiker, 977 F.2d 1443, 24 USPQ2d 1443 (Fed. Cir. 1992). In this case, applicant’s invention is directed to detecting abnormality based on a certificate and received information and to revoke the certificate of the abnormal device. Similarly, Park is directed to detecting a misbehavior vehicle based on received driving information of the vehicle and to revoke the certificate of the misbehavior vehicle. And Barrett is directed to verifying a validity of a certificate, detecting misbehavior and generating a misbehavior report. Therefore, both Park and Barrett are analogous arts, and one of ordinary skill in the art would look towards and combine both Park and Barrett to arrive at claim 1. The examiner also refers to the below 103 rejections of the claims.
Claim Objections
Claim 15 is objected to because of the following informalities: the claim recites “causes the first apparatus to”. The examiner notes that claim 15 is “An abnormality determination apparatus comprising…”.
Claim 16 is objected to because of the following informalities: the claim recites “causes the first apparatus to”. The examiner notes that claim 16 is “A server apparatus comprising…”.
Appropriate corrections are required.
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.
Claims 1, 3-4, 10-12 and 14-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Park et al. US 2016/0140842 (hereinafter Park), in view of Barrett et al. US 2021/0344514 (hereinafter Barrett).
As per claim 1, Park teaches an abnormality determination system comprising: a first apparatus; and a server apparatus (Park Fig, 5),
wherein the first apparatus is configured to include: at least one processor: and at least one memory storing a program which, when executed by the at least one processor. causes the first apparatus to: in a case where information is received from the second apparatus, determine whether the information indicates an abnormality (Park paragraph [0038]-[0039], [0040], [0068]-[0069], receive message, analyze the received message and detect misbehavior); and
in a case where the information indicates an abnormality, transmit the information indicating the abnormality and an evaluation value of the information indicating the abnormality to the server apparatus, wherein the evaluation value indicates a degree of influence of the information on the first apparatus (Park paragraph [0040], [0054]-[0055], [0069]-[0071], detect misbehavior and create a misbehavior report that includes the driving information and analysis results and send the report to a server) (One of ordinary skill in the art would recognize that the analysis results indicates that the nearby vehicle is a misbehaving vehicle. One of ordinary skill in the art would also recognize that since the nearby vehicle is misbehaving, it indicates some sort of degree of influence of the received driving information on the vehicle itself.), and
wherein the server apparatus is configured to determine whether to revoke the certificate of the second apparatus based on the information indicating the abnormality and the evaluation value of the information indicating the abnormality in a case where the server apparatus receives the information indicating the abnormality and the evaluation value of the information indicating the abnormality from the first apparatus (Park paragraph [0058]-[0060], [0071]-[0073], receive misbehavior report and analyze and verify the misbehavior report to verify that the vehicle is actually misbehaving. If the vehicle is misbehaving, revoke the vehicles certificate),
wherein, in a case where it is determined that the certificate of the second apparatus is to be revoked, the certificate of the second apparatus is revoked (Park paragraph [0060]-[0061], [0073], revoke certificate).
Park does not explicitly disclose in a case where information based on a certificate of a second apparatus is received, determine whether certificate of the second apparatus is valid;
in a case where the certificate of the second apparatus is valid, transmit abnormality information to a server.
Barrett teaches in a case where information based on a certificate of a second apparatus is received, determine whether certificate of the second apparatus is valid (Barrett paragraph [0041]-[0042], [0044]-[0046], receive a signed message with the sender’s certificate. Verify the validity of the certificate and verify the signature of the message);
in a case where the certificate of the second apparatus is valid, transmit abnormality information to a server (Barrett paragraph [0044]-[0047], [0070]-[0072], verify validity of sender’s certificate, generate misbehavior report, and send the report to a server).
Thus it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the invention of Park of receiving a message, analyzing the message to determine misbehavior, and sending a report to a server with the teachings of Barrett to include signing a message, sending a certificate with the signed message, verifying the certificate and signature in order to provide integrity protection of the messages. It would have also been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the invention of Park of receiving a message, analyzing the message to determine misbehavior, and sending a report to a server with the teachings of Barrett to include distributing a certificate revocation list to devices in the V2X system in order to provide certificate management and allow the vehicles in the V2X system to determine if a corresponding certificate is valid when receiving signed messages.
As per claim 3, Park in view of Barrett teaches the abnormality determination system according to claim 1, wherein the first apparatus is mounted to a first mobile object (Park paragraph [0028], [0035]).
As per claim 4, Park in view of Barrett teaches the abnormality determination system according to claim 3, wherein the first mobile object is a vehicle or a drone (Park paragraph [0028], [0035]).
As per claim 10, Park in view of Barrett teaches the abnormality determination system according to claim 1, wherein information indicating revocation of the certificate of the second apparatus is transmitted to the first apparatus in a case where it is determined that the certificate of the second apparatus is to be revoked, and, wherein the first apparatus is configured to update a revocation list based on the information indicating the revocation of the certificate of the second apparatus (Park paragraph [0060]-[0061], [0073], server revokes certificate; Barrett paragraph [0045], [0051], [0074], [0079], [0081], server revokes certificate, updates certificate revocation list (CRL), and provides the updated CRL to the plurality of devices in the V2X system).
As per claim 11, Park in view of Barrett teaches the abnormality determination system according to claim 10, further comprising the second apparatus, wherein the information indicating the revocation of the certificate of the second apparatus is transmitted to the first apparatus and the second apparatus in a case where it is determined that the certificate of the second apparatus is to be revoked, and wherein the second apparatus is configured to update a revocation list based on the information indicating the revocation of the certificate of the second apparatus (Park paragraph [0060]-[0061], [0073], server revokes certificate; Barrett paragraph [0045], [0051], [0074], [0079], [0081], server revokes certificate, updates certificate revocation list (CRL), and provides the updated CRL to the plurality of devices in the V2X system).
As per claim 12, Park in view of Barrett teaches the abnormality determination system according to claim 1, further comprising the second apparatus, wherein information indicating revocation of the certificate of the second apparatus is transmitted to the second apparatus in a case where it is determined that the certificate of the second apparatus is to be revoked, and wherein the second apparatus is configured to revoke the certificate of the second apparatus based on the information indicating the revocation of the certificate of the second apparatus (Park paragraph [0060]-[0061], [0073], server revokes certificate; Barrett paragraph [0045], [0051], [0074], [0079], [0081], server revokes certificate, updates certificate revocation list (CRL), and provides the updated CRL to the plurality of devices in the V2X system).
As per claim 14, Park in view of Barrett teaches the abnormality determination system according to claim 1, wherein whether to revoke the certificate of the second apparatus is determined based on the information indicating the abnormality and a history of an evaluation value of information indicating an abnormality (Park paragraph [0058]-[0060], [0071]-[0073], receive misbehavior report and analyze and verify the misbehavior report to verify that the vehicle is actually misbehaving. Consider a number of times of reception of misbehavior reports received from a plurality of vehicles. If the vehicle is misbehaving, revoke the vehicles certificate; Barrett paragraph [0073]-[0074], analyze misbehavior reports received from a plurality of vehicles).
As per claim 15, Park teaches an abnormality determination apparatus comprising: at least one processor; and at least one memory storing a program which, when executed by the at least one processor, causes apparatus to: in a case where information is received from the second apparatus, determine whether the information indicates an abnormality (Park paragraph [0038]-[0039], [0040], [0068]-[0069], receive message, analyze the received message and detect misbehavior); and
in a case where the information indicates an abnormality, transmit the information indicating the abnormality and an evaluation value of the information indicating the abnormality to a server apparatus (Park paragraph [0040], [0054]-[0055], [0069]-[0071], detect misbehavior and create a misbehavior report that includes the driving information and analysis results and send the report to a server),
wherein the evaluation value indicates a degree of influence of the information on the first apparatus (Park paragraph [0040], [0054]-[0055], [0069]-[0071], detect misbehavior and create a misbehavior report that includes the driving information and analysis results) (One of ordinary skill in the art would recognize that the analysis results indicates that the nearby vehicle is a misbehaving vehicle. One of ordinary skill in the art would also recognize that since the nearby vehicle is misbehaving, it indicates some sort of degree of influence of the received driving information on the vehicle itself.),
wherein, in a case where it is determined that the certificate of the second apparatus is to be revoked, the certificate of the second apparatus is revoked (Park paragraph [0060]-[0061], [0073], revoke certificate).
Park does not explicitly disclose in a case where information based on a certificate of a second apparatus is received, determine whether the certificate of the second apparatus is valid;
in a case where the certificate of the second apparatus is valid, transmit abnormality information to a server.
Barrett teaches in a case where information based on a certificate of a second apparatus is received, determine whether the certificate of the second apparatus is valid (Barrett paragraph [0041]-[0042], [0044]-[0046], receive a signed message with the sender’s certificate. Verify the validity of the certificate and verify the signature of the message);
in a case where the certificate of the second apparatus is valid, transmit abnormality information to a server (Barrett paragraph [0044]-[0047], [0070]-[0072], verify validity of sender’s certificate, generate misbehavior report, and send the report to a server).
Thus it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the invention of Park of receiving a message, analyzing the message to determine misbehavior, and sending a report to a server with the teachings of Barrett to include signing a message, sending a certificate with the signed message, verifying the certificate and signature in order to provide integrity protection of the messages. It would have also been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the invention of Park of receiving a message, analyzing the message to determine misbehavior, and sending a report to a server with the teachings of Barrett to include distributing a certificate revocation list to devices in the V2X system in order to provide certificate management and allow the vehicles in the V2X system to determine if a corresponding certificate is valid when receiving signed messages.
As per claim 16, Park teaches a server apparatus comprising: at least one processor; and at least one memory storing a program which, when executed by the at least one processor, causes apparatus to: in a case where a first apparatus receives information from the second apparatus, and the information indicates an abnormality, receive the information indicating the abnormality and an evaluation value of the information indicating the abnormality from the first apparatus, wherein the evaluation value indicates a degree of influence of the information on the first apparatus (Park paragraph [0038]-[0039], [0040], [0068]-[0069], receive message, analyze the received message and detect misbehavior; Park paragraph [0040], [0054]-[0055], [0069]-[0071], detect misbehavior and create a misbehavior report that includes the driving information and analysis results and send the report to a server) (One of ordinary skill in the art would recognize that the analysis results indicates that the nearby vehicle is a misbehaving vehicle. One of ordinary skill in the art would also recognize that since the nearby vehicle is misbehaving, it indicates some sort of degree of influence of the received driving information on the vehicle itself.); and
in a case where the information indicating the abnormality and the evaluation value of the information indicating the abnormality are received from the first apparatus, determine whether to revoke the certificate of the second apparatus based on the information indicating the abnormality and the evaluation value of the information indicating the abnormality (Park paragraph [0058]-[0060], [0071]-[0073], receive misbehavior report and analyze and verify the misbehavior report to verify that the vehicle is actually misbehaving. If the vehicle is misbehaving, revoke the vehicles certificate),
wherein, in a case where it is determined that the certificate of the second apparatus is to be revoked, the certificate of the second apparatus is revoked (Park paragraph [0060]-[0061], [0073], revoke certificate).
Park does not explicitly disclose in a case where information based on a certificate of a second apparatus is received, and the certificate of the second apparatus is valid, receive abnormality information.
Barrett teaches in a case where information based on a certificate of a second apparatus is received, and the certificate of the second apparatus is valid, receive abnormality information (Barrett paragraph [0041]-[0042], [0044]-[0046], receive a signed message with the sender’s certificate. Verify the validity of the certificate and verify the signature of the message. Barrett paragraph [0044]-[0047], [0070]-[0072], verify validity of sender’s certificate, generate misbehavior report, and send the report to a server).
Thus it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the invention of Park of receiving a message, analyzing the message to determine misbehavior, and sending a report to a server with the teachings of Barrett to include signing a message, sending a certificate with the signed message, verifying the certificate and signature in order to provide integrity protection of the messages. It would have also been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the invention of Park of receiving a message, analyzing the message to determine misbehavior, and sending a report to a server with the teachings of Barrett to include distributing a certificate revocation list to devices in the V2X system in order to provide certificate management and allow the vehicles in the V2X system to determine if a corresponding certificate is valid when receiving signed messages.
As per claims 17-20, the claims claim a method and a non-transitory storage medium essentially corresponding to the system and apparatus claims 1 and 15-16 above, and they are rejected, at least for the same reasons.
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 HENRY TSANG whose telephone number is (571)270-7959. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 9am - 5pm EST.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Farid Homayounmehr can be reached at (571) 272-3739. 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.
/HENRY TSANG/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2495
Prosecution Insights