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 .
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.
Claims 1, 2, 9, 19, 20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Liu, U.S. Publication No. 2020/0218821, in view of Hirano, U.S. Publication No. 2015/0204964.
Referring to claim 1, Liu discloses a secure channel establishment procedure wherein the HCM of a host device receives a request from a data processing accelerator ([0106] & Figure 13A, step 1301: HCM/host device reads on the claimed first party; data processing accelerator reads on the claimed second party), which meets the limitation of obtaining, by a first protocol layer of the first party, [an MAC address of a second party] according to a data transmission request from an application layer, wherein the data transmission request comprises [an NLP address of the second party]. The HCM generates a first public/private key pair ([0101]), which meets the limitation of generating, by the first protocol layer, a first temporary key pair, wherein the first temporary key pair comprises a first temporary public key and a first temporary private key. The HCM transmits the first public key to the data processing accelerator and the HCM then receives a second public key from the data processing accelerator ([0107]: reception of the second public key from the data processing accelerator can be said to be “according” to the first public key because the second public key is sent in response to receiving the first public key), which meets the limitation of obtaining, by the first protocol layer, a second temporary public key of the second party according to the first temporary public key. The HCM generates a first session key based on the first private key and the second public key ([0106] & Figure 13A, step 1302: session key reads on the claimed shared key), which meets the limitation of generating, by the first protocol layer, a shared key according to the second temporary public key and the first temporary private key. The session key is utilized to encrypt first data for transmission to the data processing accelerator ([0106] & Figure 13A, steps 1303-1304), which meets the limitation of determining, by the first protocol layer, a data message, wherein the data message carries [the MAC address of the second party] and encrypted data obtained by encrypting using the shared key, and a receiving party of the data message is the second party. Liu discloses that the data processing accelerator includes an identifier such as a MAC address. However, Liu does not specify that the request from the data processing accelerator includes a different address that is utilized to obtain the MAC address.
Hirano discloses the reception of a request that includes a source address such that a MAC address is acquired from the source address ([0037]), which meets the limitation of obtaining, by a first protocol layer of the first party, an MAC address of a second party according to a data transmission request form an application layer, wherein the data transmission request comprises an NLP address of the second party. A response is transmitted that includes the acquired MAC address ([0038]), which meets the limitation of determining, by the first protocol layer, a data message, wherein the data message carries the MAC address of the second party. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention for the HCM of Liu to have utilized the source address of the request in order to acquire the MAC address for inclusion in the transmitted data in order to ensure that the correct device receives the communication as suggested by Hirano ([0099]).
Referring to claim 2, Hirano discloses the reception of a request that includes a source address such that a MAC address is acquired from the source address ([0037]), which meets the limitation of determining, by the first protocol layer, the MAC address of the second party according to the NLP address of the second party and a first corresponding relationship, the first corresponding relationship comprising a corresponding relationship between the NLP address of the second party and the MAC address of the second party. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention for the HCM of Liu to have utilized the source address of the request in order to acquire the MAC address for inclusion in the transmitted data in order to ensure that the correct device receives the communication as suggested by Hirano ([0099]).
Referring to claim 9, Liu discloses a secure channel establishment procedure wherein an HCM generates a first public/private key pair ([0101]) and the HCM transmits the first public key to the data processing accelerator ([0107]: HCM reads on the claimed first party; data processing accelerator reads on the claimed second party), which meets the limitation of obtaining, by a second protocol layer of the second party, a first temporary public key of a first party. The data processing accelerator generates a second public/private key pair ([0102]), which meets the limitation of generating, by the second protocol layer, a second temporary key pair, wherein the second temporary key pair comprises a second temporary public key and a second temporary private key. The data processing accelerator generates the session key based on the received first public key and the second private key ([0107]), which meets the limitation of generating, by the second protocol layer, a shared key according to the first temporary public key and the second temporary private key. The data processing accelerator transmits the second public key to the HCM ([0107]), which meets the limitation of generating, by the second protocol layer, a message carrying the second temporary public key, wherein a receiving party of the message is the first party, and the second temporary public key is used for the first party to generate the shared key. The session key is utilized to decrypt encrypted first data, transmitted from the HCM ([0106]), using the generated session key ([0107]), which meets the limitation of decrypting, by the first protocol layer, encrypted data carried in a data message according to be shared key, wherein a sending party of the data message is the first party, and the data message further carries [an MAC address of the second party]. Liu discloses that the data processing accelerator includes an identifier such as a MAC address. However, Liu does not specify that the request from the data processing accelerator includes a different address that is utilized to obtain the MAC address.
Hirano discloses the reception of a request that includes a source address such that a MAC address is acquired from the source address ([0037]). A response is transmitted that includes the acquired MAC address ([0038]), which meets the limitation of the data message further carries an MAC address of the second party. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention for the HCM of Liu to have utilized the source address of the request in order to acquire the MAC address for inclusion in the transmitted data in order to ensure that the correct device receives the communication as suggested by Hirano ([0099]).
Referring to claims 19, 20, Liu discloses that the HCM/host device and the data processing accelerator can include a processor ([0178] & Figure 32, element 1501), which meets the limitation of an encrypted communication apparatus, and the apparatus comprising a processor configured to perform the method according to claims 1, 9.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 17-18 are allowed.
Claims 3-8, 10-16 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.
The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter:
The prior art does not disclose or make obvious the claimed messages that include a source address that is a public key of the sender, a destination address that is the public key of the intended recipient, and a signature generated using the private key of the sender that corresponds with the public key.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Campagna, U.S. Patent No. 10,511,591, discloses a shared secret generation system.
Aoki, U.S. Publication No. 2011/0023087, discloses dynamic destination address control.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to BENJAMIN E LANIER whose telephone number is (571)272-3805. The examiner can normally be reached M-Th: 6:20-4:50.
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, Alexander Lagor can be reached at 5712705143. 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.
/BENJAMIN E LANIER/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2437