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 .
Response to Amendment
The Amendment filed May 18, 2026 has been entered. Prior to the Amendment, claims 1-5 as originally presented were pending in the application. By the Amendment, claim 1 is amended, claim 2 is cancelled and claims 6 and 7 are newly added. Accordingly, claims 1 and 3-7 remain pending and ready for examination.
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.
(a)(2) the claimed invention was described in a patent issued under section151, or in an application for patent published or deemed published under section 122(b), in which the patent or application, as the case may be, names another inventor and was effectively filed before the effective filing date of the claimed invention
Claims 1 and 3-5 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. §102(a)(1) as being anticipated by He et al. (US Patent Publication No. 2017/0078300A1).
Regarding claim 1, He et al. discloses a communication setting method (See, Abstract, Figs. 8 and 10) of enabling a first communication device (See, e.g., Fig. 4, #102B(4), a ‘keyboard’) and a second communication device (See, Fig. 4, #102A(1), a ‘Tablet’) that are shipped together as a set (See, ¶[0036], “peripheral devices and the host device could be sold together as a set that can be packaged together.”) and are compliant with common wireless communication to be connected to each other by wireless communication (See, e.g., ¶[0008], “Bluetooth Low Energy (BLE)”), the communication setting method comprising:
a step in which a communication connection information issuance in the first communication device (See, e.g., Fig. 4, #102B(4), a “keyboard”) generates communication connection information (See, Fig. 8, #802 and ¶[0048] “peripheral device provisioning 802 of wireless association data for each included peripheral device 102B (e.g., in this case, a keyboard 102B(4…..is manifest as a Blue[t]ooth Low energy (BLE) Out of Band (OOB) key 805);
a step in which a storage controller in the first communication device (See, Fig. 3, #324 and ¶s[0014]-[0018]) causes a storage in the first communication device (Figs. 1 and 8, #322(1), “NV MEM”) to store, at a predetermined stage before the shipping (See, e.g., ¶s [0048], “At 806, the BLE OOB key can be stored in a non-volatile memory 322(1);” and [0051] describing the storage of the “BLE OOB keys 805 being stored prior to the end user unpacking the devices), communication connection information (See, Fig. 8, #806, and ¶[0048], the “BLE OOB key 805”) that is issued for the first communication device (Fig. 8, #802 and ¶[0048]) and includes predetermined identification information used for the connection (See, ¶[0048], the “BLE OOB key 805 can be “an example type of the passcode and/or device ID”); and
a step in which a storage controller in the second communication device (Fig. 7, #324 and ¶s [0015]; [0043] and [0044]) causes a storage in the second communication device (Fig. 7, # 322(1), “NV MEM”) to store, at a predetermined stage before the shipping (See, e.g., ¶[0051] as discussed above), a same communication connection information as stored in the storage in the first communication device (See, Fig. 8, #814 and ¶[0049]).
Regarding claim 3/1, He et al. further discloses the storage in the first communication device being a non-volatile memory (See, Fig. 3, #322(1); Fig. 8, #806; and ¶[[0048], “At 806, the BLE OOB key can be stored in a non-volatile memory 322(1)”).
Regarding claim 4/1, He et al. further discloses the recited step in which, after the shipping, a communicator in the first communication device executes advertising for pairing with the second communication device within an allowable range of a number of startups (See, ¶s[0028], “Upon determination that the peripheral device 102B has been removed from the protective packaging…..the facilitation component 324 may then automatically cause the peripheral device's wireless circuitry 332 to enter a wireless protocol compliant advertising/broadcasting mode;” and [0039], “Upon powering up, the peripheral devices … can enter an advertising mode where they broadcast their respective individual wireless IDs (and/or other identifying wireless association data).).
Regarding claim 5/1, He et al. further discloses that the second communication device is an information processing device (See, e.g., , Figs. 3-7, #102A(1), a “tablet;” ¶[0014], “Host device 102A(1) is manifest as a tablet;” and ¶[0034], “Host devices 102A and peripheral devices 102B can be viewed as computing devices or devices.”) and the first communication device is a peripheral device of the information processing device (See, e.g., Figs. 3-7, #102B(4), “keyboard;” ¶[0014], “peripheral device 102B(4) is manifest as a wireless keyboard;” and ¶[0036], “secure automatic wireless pairing of host and peripheral devices 102A and 102B”).
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 6 and 7 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. §103 as being unpatentable over He et al. in view of Takada et al. (US Patent Publication No. 2020/0153636).
Regarding claim 6/1, He et al. teaches a communication setting method comprising all of the recited elements of claim 1 as discussed above.
He et al., however, fails to teach explicitly:
a step in which a label is created by printing a code symbol indicating the communication connection information; and
a step in which the label is attached to packing material corresponding to the first communication device.
Takada et al. teaches
a step in which a label (Fig. 1, #3B, “QR Code”) is created by printing a code symbol indicating the communication connection information (See, Fig. 1; and ¶[0058], “the ECU manufacturing company 5 converts the ECU public key attached with the electronic signature acquired from the signature generation device 6 and, for example, the ID of the ECU 3, in which the ECU secret key to be paired with the ECU public key is written, into a QR code (visible information) 3B. The ID of the ECU 3, such as the serial number thereof, is identification information uniquely assigned to the ECU 3.”); and
a step in which the label is attached to packing material corresponding to the first communication device (See, ¶[0058], “The ECU manufacturing company 5 prints the QR code 3B, for example, on the surface of a box 3A in which the ECU 3 is accommodated, using a printing device 5b, for example, in the manufacturing process of the ECU 3. After that, the manufactured ECU 3 is accommodated in the box 3A and shipped.”).
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 the teachings of He et al. to incorporate the teaching of Takada et al. in order to provide a more secure means of sharing authentication key(s) without requiring a transmission of such information over a communication network. (See, e.g., Takada et al. at ¶s[0010] and [0011]).
Regarding claim 7/6, He et al. in view of Takada et al. teach a communication setting method comprising all of the recited elements of claim 6 as discussed above.
Takada et al.. further teaches a step in which a code reading in the second communication device (Fig. 1, #2, “Gateway”) reads the code symbol printed on the label to acquire the communication connection information (See, ¶[0059], “The image reading device 7 can be detachably connected to the gateway 2, for example, via a communication cable 7a and gives information, such as the ECU public key, the electronic signature and the ID obtained by converting the QR code 3B, to the gateway 2.”).
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 the teachings of He et al. to incorporate the teaching of Takada et al. in order to provide a more secure means of sharing authentication key(s) without requiring a transmission of such information over a communication network. (See, e.g., Takada et al. at ¶s[0010] and [0011]).
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 5/18/2026 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
On page 5 of the Amendment, Applicant appears to make the argument that the provisioning step 802 of He et al. Fig. 8, which the Examine relied for the disclosure of the claim limitation “generate communication connection information,” “does not map to generating” because provisioning 802 “is the setting up of hardware and software,” which “does not require communication connection information be generated.”
The Examiner respectfully disagree with the above Applicant’s assertion for at least the following reasons:
First, the above Applicant’s assertion is plainly contradicted by the same passage of ¶[0048] of He et al. that the Applicant himself cites in his remark, namely, "peripheral device provisioning 802 of wireless association data for each included peripheral device 102B" (See, Amendment at P. 5). There is no ambiguity, according to the above statement, and when read in conjunction with Fig. 8, as to which entity doing the provisioning, i.e., each of the peripheral devices (see, e.g., Fig. 8, the bracket labeled “Peripheral Devices 102B), and as to what is being provisioned, i.e., “the wireless association data[, which] is manifest as a Blue[t]ooth Low energy (BLE) Out of Band (OOB) key 805 (He et al., ¶[0048]”). As such, Applicant’s position appears to boil down to an assertion that the word “provisioning” cannot have a meaning synonymous with “generating.”
To that end, according to the Oxford English Dictionary1, the word “provisioning” has the following definition: “To supply with provisions or stores; esp. to supply with a stock of food.” Applying the definition, in view of Fig. 8 (i.e., the directions of arrows in particular), the “supplying” of the wireless association data (e.g., a BLE OOB key (“key” hereafter), see, He et al., ¶[0048]) is performed in the provisioning step 802. Logically, the key must have been created or “generated,” and must be available, prior to being able to be so supplied. Taking Fig. 8 together with the disclosure of ¶[0048], the source, i.e., the creator, of the supplied key can only be either the box 802 (Fig. 8) or, e.g., the Keyboard firmware 806 (in light of the directions of arrows). In either case, He et al., in ¶[0048] and in Fig. 8, discloses the key being generated by a peripheral device 102(B), e.g., the keyboard 102B(4). Thus, the provisioning, i.e., supplying, when interpreted in light of the He et al. Fig. 8 and ¶[0048] in their totality, encompasses the generation of a key.
Second, the Applicant’s characterization, without providing any support thereof, of the provisioning 802 as “the setting up of hardware and software” (Amendment at p. 5), too, is contrary to the facts. He et al., ¶[0048] provides, inter alia, “As mentioned above relative to FIGS. 3 and 7, other implementations can utilize software and/or hardware circuitry rather than firmware.” The only reasonable reading of this sentence is that while, in ¶[0048], some of the operations/process steps are described as being performed using the firmware, other software and/or hardware circuitry can be used to perform such operation/processes. There is nothing, in ¶[0048] or elsewhere in He et al., disclosure, the Applicant can point to in support of the Applicant’s characterization equating the provisioning 802 with “the setting up of hardware and software.” As the Applicant uses the mischaracterization as the reason for the conclusion that the provisioning 802 cannot be or does not require a generation of a key (See, Amendment at P. 5), such reasoning fails.
Third, and finally, for gaining a better understanding of what He et al., actually discloses, a quick review of how a BLE OOB key is generated, e.g., according to the Bluetooth specification publicly available at the time of the He et al. disclosure, may be beneficial. According to the Bluetooth Core Specification V5.02, published December 6, 2026 (“Bluetooth V5”), “in each device, the authentication and encryption routines are implemented in the same way” (P. 1649); “the size of the key used is always 128 bits” (p. 1650); “[e]ach device has a pseudo-random number generator ….. used for …. generating authentication and encryption keys” (p. 1652); “[t]he exchange of the keys takes place during an initialization phase which shall be carried out separately for each two devices that are using authentication and encryption” (p. 1655); “[a] unit key shall be generated when the device is in operation for the first time…. should be stored in non-volatile memory” (p. 1656); “[t]he unit key shall be transferred to the other party and then stored as the link key for that particular party” (p. 1657, the generation of the unit key and the exchange of the same with a device to be paired is depicted in Figure 3.1 appearing at p. 1657, reproduced below); and the stage 1 authentication process using the Out-of-Band (OOB) protocol is described in §§7.2.2, et seq., (Pp. 1686 – 1688).
PNG
media_image1.png
450
1201
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Thus, according to Bluetooth V5, the initiating device (i.e., Unit A in Figure 3.1) generates the unit key or the link key (KA), and provides the same to another device to be paired with. Accordingly, considering what He et al., actually discloses, i.e., the use of a BLE OOB key, and in view of the above discussed Bluetooth V5 publicly available at the He et al. disclosure, one of ordinary skill in the art would have understood that He et al. (e.g., Fig. 8 and ¶[0048]) discloses a peripheral device, e.g., the keyboard 102B(4) generating the key.
For at least above reasons, the arguments/remarks presented by the Applicant is not persuasive. Therefore, the same grounds of rejection provided in the previous Office Action is hereby maintained as reiterated above in the numbered section 5 of this Office Action.
With respect to the newly added claims 6 and 7, new grounds of rejections are presented in this Office Action, which such new grounds being necessitated by the Applicant’s Amendment.
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 extension fee 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 date of this final action.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to KI S KIM whose telephone number is (571)272-9141. The examiner can normally be reached M-Th 7:00AM - 5:30PM.
Examiner interviews are available via telephone, in-person, and video conferencing using a USPTO supplied web-based collaboration tool. To schedule an interview, applicant is encouraged to use the USPTO Automated Interview Request (AIR) at http://www.uspto.gov/interviewpractice.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Moo R Jeong can be reached at (571) 272-9617. 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.
/K.S.K./Examiner, Art Unit 2418 June 8, 2026
/Moo Jeong/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2418
1 Oxford English Dictionary, “provisioning (n.),” July 2023, https://doi.org/10.1093/OED/1045608104. Retrieved June 7, 2026.
2 Bluetooth Core Specification V5.0, Vol. 2, Part H, “Security Specification,” published by the Bluetooth SIG, Inc, Dec. 6, 2016, Pp. 1-75 & 1646-1708, which is made of the record herewith. Compare, Bluetooth Core Specification V5.0 (Revision Notice), published by the Bluetooth SIG, Inc, June 11, 2024, P. 1, a copy of which is provided herewith. Both of these documents are available for download on line at (https://www.bluetooth.com/specifications/specs/core-specification-amended-5-0/).
Prosecution Insights