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 .
The following is a Non-Final Office Action in response to communications received on April 1, 2024 and March 23, 2026. Applicant has responded to the Election/Restriction requirement mailed on January 23, 2026. Applicant has elected Group I without traverse. Claims 6-7 are thus withdrawn from consideration. Claims 1-5 and 8-9 are pending and addressed below.
Specification
For the record, Examiner acknowledges that the Specification submitted on April 1, 2024 has been accepted.
Drawings
For the record, Examiner acknowledges that the Drawings submitted on April 1, 2024 has been accepted.
Claim Interpretation
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(f):
(f) Element in Claim for a Combination. – An element in a claim for a combination may be expressed as a means or step for performing a specified function without the recital of structure, material, or acts in support thereof, and such claim shall be construed to cover the corresponding structure, material, or acts described in the specification and equivalents thereof.
The following is a quotation of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph:
An element in a claim for a combination may be expressed as a means or step for performing a specified function without the recital of structure, material, or acts in support thereof, and such claim shall be construed to cover the corresponding structure, material, or acts described in the specification and equivalents thereof.
This application includes one or more claim limitations that do not use the word “means,” but are nonetheless being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, because the claim limitation(s) uses a generic placeholder that is coupled with functional language without reciting sufficient structure to perform the recited function and the generic placeholder is not preceded by a structural modifier. Such claim limitation(s) is/are: “a first secret sharing apparatus configured to…”, “a first secret sharing apparatus configured to…”, “an input unit…”, “a distribution processing unit…” and “a storage unit…” in claims 1 and 9.
Because this/these claim limitation(s) is/are being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, it/they is/are being interpreted to cover the corresponding structure described in the specification as performing the claimed function, and equivalents thereof.
If applicant does not intend to have this/these limitation(s) interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, applicant may: (1) amend the claim limitation(s) to avoid it/them being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph (e.g., by reciting sufficient structure to perform the claimed function); or (2) present a sufficient showing that the claim limitation(s) recite(s) sufficient structure to perform the claimed function so as to avoid it/them being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph.
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) 9 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Bellare et al. (U.S. Pub. No. 2012/0163592 and hereinafter referred to as Bellare).
As to claim 9, Bellare discloses a secret sharing storage apparatus comprising:
an input unit to which a random number used for encryption of encrypted data subjected to distribution processing on n pieces of first distributed data is input, the n being an integer of 2 or more (paragraphs [0023], [0098] and [0099], Fig. 8 and Table 1, Bellare teaches inputting an encryption key for generating secret shares for the encryption key where the key is a random number. There random encryption key is used for encrypting shares for first data);
a distribution processing unit configured to perform distribution processing on the random number to generate n pieces of second distributed data (paragraphs [0023], [0086], [0098] and [0099] and Fig. 8, Bellare teaches generating the secret shares for the encryption key); and
a storage unit configured to separately store the n pieces of second distributed data to n storage devices (paragraphs [0023], [0086], [0098] and [0099] and Fig. 8, Bellare teaches storing the key shares in separate storage.).
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.
Claim(s) 1, 2 and 8 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Bellare et al. (U.S. Pub. No. 2012/0163592 and hereinafter referred to as Bellare) in view of Fujiwara et al. (“Unbreakable distributed storage with quantum key distribution network and password authenticated secret sharing” and hereinafter referred to as Fujiwara).
As to claim 1, Bellare discloses a secret sharing storage system comprising:
a plurality of storage devices (paragraphs [0023] and [0086], Bellare teaches multiple storage devices/repositories);
a random number generator configured to generate a random number (paragraphs [0091] and [0098], Bellare teaches a random number generator);
a first apparatus configured to
generate n pieces of first distributed data by performing distribution processing on second data obtained by encrypting first data using the random number, the n being an integer of 2 or more (paragraphs [0023], [0098] and [0099] and Fig. 8, Bellare teaches encrypting data using a randomly generated key and splitting the ciphertext into chunks), and
separately store the n pieces of first distributed data to n storage devices among the plurality of storage devices (paragraphs [0023], [0086], [0098] and [0099] and Fig. 8, Bellare teaches separately storing the chunks); and
a second secret sharing apparatus configured to
generate n pieces of second distributed data by performing distribution processing on the random number (paragraphs [0023], [0098] and [0099], Fig. 8 and Table 1, Bellare teaches generating secret shares for the encryption key where the key is a random number), and
separately store the n pieces of second distributed data to n storage devices among the plurality of storage devices (paragraphs [0023], [0086], [0098] and [0099] and Fig. 8, Bellare teaches storing the key shares in separate storage.). While Bellare does disclose secret sharing for the key and two separate data dividing/storage processes for the key and data, Bellare is not specifically clear on disclosing the data dividing as a secret sharing. Therefore, Bellare does not specifically disclose a first secret sharing as claimed. However, Fujiwara does disclose a first secret sharing (pg. 1, pg. 2 (1) and pg. 4 (1-2), Fujiwara teaches two separate secret sharing’s: one for data and one for passwords.).
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 Bellare with the teachings of Fujiwara for having the first secret sharing because this would increase security.
Claim 8 recites substantially similar subject matter to claim 1 and is therefore, rejected for similar reasons to claim 1 above.
As to claim 2, the combination of teachings between Bellare and Fujiwara disclose the secret sharing storage system of claim 1, wherein: transmission and reception of the random number between a user terminal and the random number generator or a random number distribution device are performed by quantum key encryption communication using a quantum key, the user terminal transmitting the second data to the first secret sharing apparatus, the random number distribution device distributing the random number generated by the random number generator, the quantum key being shared between a quantum key distribution device disposed on the user terminal side and a quantum key distribution device disposed on the random number generator side or the random number distribution device side; and transmission and reception of the random number between the second secret sharing apparatus and the random number generator or the random number distribution device are performed by quantum key encryption communication using a quantum key shared between a quantum key distribution device disposed on the second secret sharing apparatus side and a quantum key distribution device disposed on the random number generator side or the random number distribution device side (pg. 1, pg. 2 (2) and pg. 5, Fujiwara teaches protection of data in transmission using quantum key distribution.).
Examiner supplies the same rationale for the combination of the references as in claim 1 above.
Claim(s) 3 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Bellare and Fujiwara as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Matsuo et al. (U.S. Pub. No. 2022/0147640 and hereinafter referred to as Matsuo).
As to claim 3, the combination of teachings between Bellare and Fujiwara disclose the secret sharing storage system of claim 1. The combination of teachings between Bellare and Fujiwara does not specifically disclose further comprising: one or more first secret sharing preliminary apparatuses having the same function as the first secret sharing apparatus; and one or more second secret sharing preliminary apparatuses having the same function as the second secret sharing apparatus, wherein each of the one or more first secret sharing preliminary apparatuses is operable as an alternative apparatus to the first secret sharing apparatus, and each of the one or more second secret sharing preliminary apparatuses is operable as an alternative apparatus to the second secret sharing apparatus as claimed. However, Matsuo does disclose
further comprising: one or more first secret sharing preliminary apparatuses having the same function as the first secret sharing apparatus; and one or more second secret sharing preliminary apparatuses having the same function as the second secret sharing apparatus, wherein each of the one or more first secret sharing preliminary apparatuses is operable as an alternative apparatus to the first secret sharing apparatus, and each of the one or more second secret sharing preliminary apparatuses is operable as an alternative apparatus to the second secret sharing apparatus (paragraphs [0098]-[0100], Matsuo teaches a secondary controller with the same configuration as the main controller for performing secret sharing.).
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 modified invention of Bellare with the teachings of Matsuo for having secret sharing preliminary apparatuses because this would improve availability/robustness.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 4-5 are objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, but would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
Claim 4 recites, inter alia, “transmit the first information to the second secret sharing apparatus, the second secret sharing apparatus is further configured to determine the storage devices that store the second distributed data based on the first information, and the plurality of storage devices are further configured to generate one of n pieces of third distributed data obtained by performing distribution processing on the first data by using the first distributed data received from the first secret sharing apparatus and the second distributed data received from the second secret sharing apparatus”. The prior art was not found to disclose the cited limitations in combination with the other limitations. Therefore, claim 4 is considered to recite allowable subject matter over the prior art. Dependent claim 5 is considered to recite allowable subject matter over the prior art based on its dependency.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to THADDEUS J PLECHA whose telephone number is (571)270-7506. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 8-4:30.
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, Taghi Arani can be reached at 571-272-3787. 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.
/THADDEUS J PLECHA/Examiner, Art Unit 2438
Prosecution Insights