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 .
DETAILED ACTION
Election/Restrictions
Applicant’s election without traverse of Group I (Claims 1-8, 19-22, 29 and 32) in the reply filed on August 21, 2026 is acknowledged.
Priority
Receipt is acknowledged of papers submitted under 35 USC 119(a)-(d), which papers have been placed of record in the application file.
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statements submitted on March 4, 2024 and September 5, 2025 have been considered by the examiner and made of record in the application file.
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.
Claims 1-6 and 19 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Reza Soosahabi: “SPARROW: A Novel Covert Communication Scheme Exploiting Broadcast Signals in LTE, 5G & Beyond”, 27 August 2021, hereinafter Soosahabi).
Consider claim 1. Soosahabi discloses a method comprising:
receiving at least one L-bit sequence from a User Equipment (page 7, left column, lines 8-9, "This strategy allows the UEs to randomly select the CRI content in Msg3" and page 7, left column, lines 35-44, paragraph "1) Uplink Message");
extracting at least one k-bit value from the at least one L-bit sequence (page 7, left column, lines 9-11, "However, it requires the cellular station to obfuscate the content received in Msg3 with a random pattern" and page 7, left column- right column, lines 46-4, paragraph "2) Obfuscated Broadcast"); and
sending the at least one k-bit value (page 7, left column, lines 11-12, "before broadcasting it inMsg4.").
Consider claim 2 and as applied to claim 1. Soosahabi discloses wherein the number of bits of the at least one L-bit sequence is less than k (figure 6, where N is L and K is the length of Msg4 which is clearly N (or L in claim 1)<K (length of Msg 4).
Consider claim 3 and as applied to claim 1. Soosahabi discloses wherein the number of bits the at least one k-bit value is variable (figure 7, where different K-values are used, using different error schemes).
Consider claim 4 and as applied to claim 3. Soosahabi discloses wherein the number of bits k depends is selected from the group consisting of the number of User Equipments performing a random-access procedure, the network load, the desired security level, or a policy (figure 7, where different K-values are used, using different error schemes).
Consider claim 5 and as applied to claim 1. Soosahabi discloses wherein a mask used to mask the at least one L-bit sequence is determined depending on at least one of the number of User Equipments performing a random-access procedure, the network load, the desired security level, or a policy (figure 7, where different K-values are used, using different error schemes).
Consider claim 6 and as applied to claim 1. Soosahabi discloses wherein the least one k-bit value is extracted by masking the at least one L-bit sequence mask, wherein the mask is determined using a seed (formulas 5 and 7, the “h” part which is used by the UE).
Consider claim 19. Soosahabi discloses a method comprising:
determining or receiving a cryptographic key, wherein the cryptographic key is linked to the access device and the User Equipment (figure 8, “S”);
determining or receiving at least one a L-bit sequence (figure 8, “N bits”);
encrypting the at least one L-bit sequence with cryptographic key into at least one k-bit value (figure 8, “B(x)”); and
sending the at least one k-bit value (figure 8, “Y”).
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.
This application currently names joint inventors. In considering patentability of the claims the examiner presumes that the subject matter of the various claims was commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the claimed invention(s) absent any evidence to the contrary. Applicant is advised of the obligation under 37 CFR 1.56 to point out the inventor and effective filing dates of each claim that was not commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the later invention in order for the examiner to consider the applicability of 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(C) for any potential 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) prior art against the later invention.
Claims 20 and 21 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Reza Soosahabi: “SPARROW: A Novel Covert Communication Scheme Exploiting Broadcast Signals in LTE, 5G & Beyond”, 27 August 2021, hereinafter Soosahabi) and as applied to claim 19 above in view of Huth et al. (US PGPUB 2017/0171749 A1, hereinafter Huth).
Consider claim 20 and as applied to claim 19. Soosahabi disclose the claimed invention but fails to teach wherein the method further comprises determining the cryptographic key based on the physical channel characteristics between a User Device user device and an access device.
However, Huth teaches wherein the method further comprises determining the cryptographic key based on the physical channel characteristics between a User Device user device and an access device (paragraph 21).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of applicant’s claimed invention to have incorporated the teachings of Huth into the invention of Soosahabi in order to a more secure channel for the transmission of data.
Consider claim 21 and as applied to claim 19. Soosahabi disclose the claimed invention but fails to teach wherein the method further comprises receiving a public key, wherein the public key is associated with the access device.
However, Huth teaches wherein the method further comprises receiving a public key, wherein the public key is associated with the access device (paragraph 25).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of applicant’s claimed invention to have incorporated the teachings of Huth into the invention of Soosahabi in order to a more secure channel for the transmission of data.
Claims 7, 8, 22, 29 and 32 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Reza Soosahabi: “SPARROW: A Novel Covert Communication Scheme Exploiting Broadcast Signals in LTE, 5G & Beyond”, 27 August 2021, hereinafter Soosahabi) in view of Menzel et al. (US Patent 7,079,656 B1, hereinafter Menzel).
Consider claim 7. Soosahabi discloses a method comprising:
receiving at least one L-bit sequence from a User Equipment (page 7, left column, lines 8-9, "This strategy allows the UEs to randomly select the CRI content in Msg3" and page 7, left column, lines 35-44, paragraph "1) Uplink Message");
extracting at least one k-bit value from the at least one L-bit sequence (page 7, left column, lines 9-11, "However, it requires the cellular station to obfuscate the content received in Msg3 with a random pattern" and page 7, left column- right column, lines 46-4, paragraph "2) Obfuscated Broadcast"); and
sending the at least one k-bit value (page 7, left column, lines 11-12, "before broadcasting it inMsg4.").
Soosahabi substantially discloses the claimed invention but fails to explicitly teach a receiver circuit, a microcontroller circuit and a transmitter circuit.
However, Menzel teaches a receiver circuit, a microcontroller circuit and a transmitter circuit (column 5 lines 20-26, read as a transmitter/receiver and control devices).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of applicant’s claimed invention to have incorporated the teachings of Menzel into the invention of Soosahabi in order to enable an encryption of the information at the radio interface independently of the nature and plurality of core networks, enabling a functional separation of encryption and authentication.
Consider claim 8. Soosahabi discloses an apparatus comprising:
receive at least one first a k-bit sequence (page 7, left column, lines 11-12, "before broadcasting it inMsg4.");
store at least one L-bit sequence (page 7, left column, lines 8-9, "This strategy allows the UEs to randomly select the CRI content in Msg3"); and
determine a mask, wherein the microcontroller circuit is arranged to extract at least one second k-bit value by masking the at least one L-bit sequence with the mask (page 7, right column, lines 5-24, paragraph "3) Downlink Processing"),
compare the at least one second k-bit value with the at least one first k-bit value (page 7, right column, lines 5-24, paragraph "3) Downlink Processing").
Soosahabi substantially discloses the claimed invention but fails to explicitly teach a receiver circuit, a memory circuit, a microcontroller circuit and a transmitter circuit.
However, Menzel teaches a receiver circuit, a memory circuit, a microcontroller circuit and a transmitter circuit (column 5 lines 20-26, read as a transmitter/receiver, memory and control devices).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of applicant’s claimed invention to have incorporated the teachings of Menzel into the invention of Soosahabi in order to enable an encryption of the information at the radio interface independently of the nature and plurality of core networks, enabling a functional separation of encryption and authentication.
Consider claim 22. Soosahabi discloses a method comprising:
determining or receiving a cryptographic key, wherein the cryptographic key is linked to the access device and the User Equipment (figure 8, “S”);
determining or receiving at least one a L-bit sequence (figure 8, “N bits”);
encrypting the at least one L-bit sequence with cryptographic key into at least one k-bit value (figure 8, “B(x)”); and
sending the at least one k-bit value (figure 8, “Y”).
Soosahabi substantially discloses the claimed invention but fails to explicitly teach a transceiver circuit and a control circuit.
However, Menzel a transceiver circuit and a control circuit (column 5 lines 20-26, read as a transmitter/receiver and control devices).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of applicant’s claimed invention to have incorporated the teachings of Menzel into the invention of Soosahabi in order to enable an encryption of the information at the radio interface independently of the nature and plurality of core networks, enabling a functional separation of encryption and authentication.
Consider claim 29 and as applied to claim 1. Soosahabi discloses the claimed invention but fails to teach a computer program on a non-transitory medium, wherein the computer program when executed on a processor performs the method as claimed in claim 1.
However, Menzel teaches a computer program on a non-transitory medium, wherein the computer program when executed on a processor performs the method as claimed in claim 1 (column 5 lines 20-26).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of applicant’s claimed invention to have incorporated the teachings of Menzel into the invention of Soosahabi in order to enable an encryption of the information at the radio interface independently of the nature and plurality of core networks, enabling a functional separation of encryption and authentication.
Consider claim 32 and as applied to claim 19. Soosahabi discloses the claimed invention but fails to teach a computer program stored on a non-transitory medium, wherein the computer program when executed on a processor performs the method as claimed in claim 19.
However, Menzel teaches a computer program stored on a non-transitory medium, wherein the computer program when executed on a processor performs the method as claimed in claim 19 (column 5 lines 20-26).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of applicant’s claimed invention to have incorporated the teachings of Menzel into the invention of Soosahabi in order to enable an encryption of the information at the radio interface independently of the nature and plurality of core networks, enabling a functional separation of encryption and authentication.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Yin (US Patent 8,374,629 B2) discloses a mobility management method includes: receiving a first location update request sent by a Mobile Agent (MA); and determining, according to the first location update request and a binding relation between an MA context and a UE context, that a User Equipment (UE) moves together with the MA. A mobility management apparatus includes: a location update request receiving unit, configured to receive a first location update request sent by the MA; and a location moving determining unit, configured to determine, according to the first location update request and a binding relation between the MA context and the UE context, that the UE moves together with the MA.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to CHRISTOPHER M BRANDT whose telephone number is (571)270-1098. The examiner can normally be reached Mon - Fri 8:00-5:00.
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, Anthony Addy can be reached at 571-272-7795. 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.
/CHRISTOPHER M BRANDT/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2645 September 18, 2026
Prosecution Insights