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 .
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and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114.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 2/2/2026 has been entered.
As per instant Amendment, claims 1, 4 and 7 have been amended and claims 1, 4 and 7 are independent claims. Claims 1-9 have been examined and are pending. This Action is made Non-Final.
Response to Arguments
The claim interpretation of claims 1 and 7 under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) are withdrawn as the claims have been amended.
Applicants’ arguments with respect to claims 1-9 have been considered but are moot in view of the new ground(s) of rejection.
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, 4, 5, 7, and 8 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Choi et al. (US 2018/0324200 A1) in view of Mont et al. (US 2017/0223039 A1) and Lynn et al. (US 2003/0233567 A1).
Regarding Claim 1;
Choi discloses a sensing device for monitoring connection between an access point and a plurality of stations ([0026] - For example, the sensing device 100 may monitor a wireless frame, and may process information, such as the MAC address, security configuration contents, frame appearance frequency, transfer rate, amount of data, SSID, and IEEE 802.11 a/b/g/n of a terminal or AP that has transmitted the wireless frame based on the monitored wireless frame, a channel, and an RSSI. Furthermore, the sensing device 100 may transmit the processed information to the server 130 and [0030] - The sensing device 100 may select an AP and a terminal to be blocked based on a determination based on the blocking target list and the blocking policy, and may perform blocking.), the sensing device comprising:
a ... memory [...] configured to store [...and...] create a wireless communication message to block connection between a target station among the plurality of stations and the access point ([0029] - The server 130 may transmit a blocking target list or blocking policy information to the sensing device 100 based on a blocking determination and [0031] - For example, the blocking of the sensing device 100 based on the blocking target list and the blocking policy [...] and [0032]-[0034] and [0036]-[0037] - The controller 105 may generate a blocking message related to a received wireless frame as the results of monitoring based on policy information and a blocking list related to wireless intrusion prevention. Furthermore, the controller 105 may control the generated blocking message to be transmitted to an AP and terminal configured to control to transmit/receive the wireless frame.); and
a sensing transceiver configured to obtain a message transmitted or received by the target station and the access point ([0026] - For example, the sensing device 100 may monitor a wireless frame, and may process information, such as the MAC address, security configuration contents, frame appearance frequency, transfer rate, amount of data, SSID, and IEEE 802.11 a/b/g/n of a terminal or AP that has transmitted the wireless frame based on the monitored wireless frame, a channel, and an RSSI. Furthermore, the sensing device 100 may transmit the processed information to the server 130 ) and when the target station is a station included in a list of targets to be blocked provided from a server as a result of analyzing based on the message 0026] and [0029] - The server 130 may transmit a blocking target list or blocking policy information to the sensing device 100 based on a blocking determination and [0031] - For example, the blocking of the sensing device 100 based on the blocking target list and the blocking policy [...] and [0032]-[0034] and [0036]-[0037] - The controller 105 may generate a blocking message related to a received wireless frame as the results of monitoring based on policy information and a blocking list related to wireless intrusion prevention. Furthermore, the controller 105 may control the generated blocking message to be transmitted to an AP and terminal configured to control to transmit/receive the wireless frame.), transmit, to the target station, a block message (fake beacon) with an address of the access point [and] an address of the target station ([0026] and [0029] - The server 130 may transmit a blocking target list or blocking policy information to the sensing device 100 based on a blocking determination and [0031] - For example, the blocking of the sensing device 100 based on the blocking target list and the blocking policy [...] and [0032]-[0034] and [0036]-[0037] - The controller 105 may generate a blocking message related to a received wireless frame as the results of monitoring based on policy information and a blocking list related to wireless intrusion prevention. Furthermore, the controller 105 may control the generated blocking message to be transmitted to an AP and terminal configured to control to transmit/receive the wireless frame and [0042] - The sensor blocking unit 120 may set an address from which a deauthentication frame is transmitted as the BSSID of the AP, may set an address at which the deauthentication frame is received as the MAC address of the terminal, may generate the deauthentication frame, and may transmit the deauthentication frame to the terminal. Furthermore, the sensor blocking unit 120 may set an address from which a deauthentication frame is transmitted as the MAC address of the terminal, may set an address at which the deauthentication frame is received as the BSSID of the AP, may generate the deauthentication frame, and may transmit the deauthentication frame to the AP. Each of the AP and the terminal that has received the deauthentication frame from the sensing device 100 may determine that a counterpart has transmitted the deauthentication frame providing notification of a connection end, and may stop the connection.);
Choi fails to explicitly disclose
...a template memory of a wireless intrusion prevention (WIPS) for the access point configured to store a block template which is used to create a wireless communication message by the WIPS to block connection; and
[...] a channel switching request command to request switching of a channel on which the target station and the access point communicate inserted to the block template.
However, in an analogous art, Mont teaches [concepts of]:
a template memory of a wireless intrusion prevention (WIPS) for the access point configured to store a block template which is used to create a wireless communication message by the WIPS to block connection...; and [information] inserted to the block template ([0021] - As mentioned above, a SDN network includes a SDN controller, a number of switches, routers, wireless access points, and instructions are processed by the switches, routers, and wireless access points to define the forwarding behavior of data packets. Further, the term switch can apply equally to WAN router, wireless access point, or other SDN networking device. In one example, the SDN controller in the SDN network makes decisions about how network traffic is processed by instructing switches within the SDN network to define the forwarding behavior of data packets traveling across the SDN network and [0022]-[0025] - The system (100) further includes a remediation system (110). In keeping with the given example, the remediation system (110) obtains, from the network (106), security information about the network (106) to determine traffic patterns of the network (106)... The system (100) further includes a remediation system (110). In keeping with the given example, the remediation system (110) obtains, from the network (106), security information about the network (106) to determine traffic patterns of the network (106)... The remediation system (110) further deploys, via a SDN controller, a SDN flow rule based on the at least one SDN flow rule template in the network (106) to remediate the security threat by altering a control path of the network (106) and [0039] - In one example, the playbook library (228) may include a quarantine flow rule template, an interdict flow rule template, a block flow rule template, a decoy flow rule template, an obfuscate flow rule template, other flow rule templates, or combinations thereof.).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinarily skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the teachings of Mont to the sending device of Choi to include a template memory of a wireless intrusion prevention (WIPS) for the access point configured to store a block template which is used to create a wireless communication message by the WIPS to block connection [...] and [information] inserted to the block template.
One would have been motivated to combine the teachings of Mont to Choi to do so as it provides / allows [to reduce] the lifetime of an individual security breach in the network by improving detection rates of a security threat, reduces the time to triage, and remediates the security threat (Mont, [0015]).
Further, in an analogous art, Lynn teaches [concepts of]:
a channel switching request command to request switching of a channel on which the target station and the access point communicate inserted to [a request] ([0031] - In some embodiments supporting dynamic channel change, a honeypot trap variation can be included. In such embodiments, a honeypot trap may be activated culminating in a channel change request to the potentially compromised access point. Configuration data associated with an access point on a wireless computer network potentially compromised by an intruder is received. Information contained within and/or derived from the received configuration data is stored. Communication with the intruder is continued by emulating the identification characteristics of the potentially compromised access point. In some embodiments, communication may appear to come from an access point that appears less secure than the potentially compromised access point. A channel change request is transmitted to the potentially compromised access point to reroute communication between the potentially compromised access point and authorized stations may continue to a different channel).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinarily skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the teachings of Lynn to the sending device and message with information of Choi in view Mont to [additionally] include a channel switching request command to request switching of a channel on which the target station and the access point communicate inserted to [a request]
One would have been motivated to combine the teachings of Lynn to Choi in view Mont to do so as it provides / allows enhanced security associated with electronic communications - more specifically [...] assessing security risks and identifying and responding to threats in wireless network environments (Lynn, [0003]).
Regarding Claim 2;
Choi in view of Mont and Lynn disclose the device to Claim 1.
Lynn further teaches wherein the channel switching request command comprises a channel value to be changed, and the channel value to be changed is a channel value different from a channel value used by the access point ([0031] - In some embodiments supporting dynamic channel change, a honeypot trap variation can be included. In such embodiments, a honeypot trap may be activated culminating in a channel change request to the potentially compromised access point. Configuration data associated with an access point on a wireless computer network potentially compromised by an intruder is received. Information contained within and/or derived from the received configuration data is stored. Communication with the intruder is continued by emulating the identification characteristics of the potentially compromised access point. In some embodiments, communication may appear to come from an access point that appears less secure than the potentially compromised access point. A channel change request is transmitted to the potentially compromised access point to reroute communication between the potentially compromised access point and authorized stations may continue to a different channel and [0155]).
Similar rationale and motivation is noted for the combination of Lynn to Choi in view of Mont and Lynn, as per claim 1, above.
Regarding Claim(s) 4 and 5; claim(s) 4 and 5 is/are directed to a/an method associated with the device claimed in claim(s) 1 and 2. Claim(s) 4 and 5 is/are similar in scope to claim(s) 1 and 2, and is/are therefore rejected under similar rationale.
Regarding Claim(s) 7 and 8; claim(s) 7 and 8 is/are directed to a/an device associated with the device claimed in claim(s) 1 and 2. Claim(s) 7 and 8 is/are similar in scope to claim(s) 1 and 2, and is/are therefore rejected under similar rationale.
Claim(s) 3, 6, and 9 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Choi et al. (US 2018/0324200 A1) in view of Mont et al. (US 2017/0223039 A1) and Lynn et al. (US 2003/0233567 A1) and further in view of Avonts (US 2009/0168706 A1).
Regarding Claim 3;
Choi in view of Mont and Lynn disclose the device to Claim 2.
Lynn further teaches wherein the channel value to be changed is a channel value ([0031] - In some embodiments supporting dynamic channel change, a honeypot trap variation can be included. In such embodiments, a honeypot trap may be activated culminating in a channel change request to the potentially compromised access point. Configuration data associated with an access point on a wireless computer network potentially compromised by an intruder is received. Information contained within and/or derived from the received configuration data is stored. Communication with the intruder is continued by emulating the identification characteristics of the potentially compromised access point. In some embodiments, communication may appear to come from an access point that appears less secure than the potentially compromised access point. A channel change request is transmitted to the potentially compromised access point to reroute communication between the potentially compromised access point and authorized stations may continue to a different channel and [0155]).
Similar rationale and motivation is noted for the combination of Lynn to Choi in view of Mont and Lynn, as per claim 1, above.
However, in an analogous art, Avonts teaches wherein the channel value to be changed is a channel value created randomly ([0026] and [0029] - The use of such metrics is preferable because they are the best indication of the quality of a link. However, the node could select a random channel to change or select the channel which has been in use for the longest period of time).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinarily skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the teachings of Avonts to the channel value of Choi in view Mont and Lynn to [additionally] include wherein the channel value to be changed is a channel value created randomly
One would have been motivated to combine the teachings of Avonts to Choi in view Mont and Lynn to do so as it provides / allows decreasing interference and increasing overall throughput in the air medium (Avonts, [0001]).
Regarding Claim(s) 6; claim(s) 6 is/are directed to a/an method associated with the device claimed in claim(s) 3. Claim(s) 6 is/are similar in scope to claim(s) 3, and is/are therefore rejected under similar rationale.
Regarding Claim(s) 9; claim(s) 9 is/are directed to a/an device associated with the device claimed in claim(s) 3. Claim(s) 9 is/are similar in scope to claim(s) 3, and is/are therefore rejected under similar rationale.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. See PTO-892 attached.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to KARI L SCHMIDT whose telephone number is (571)270-1385. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 10am - 6pm (MDT).
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, Luu Pham can be reached at (571)270-5002. 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.
/KARI L SCHMIDT/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2439