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 .
Continued Examination Under 37 CFR 1.114
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and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114.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 02/12/2026 has been entered.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 02/12/2026 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
Applicants generally argues (REMARKS, page 7-9) that the previously cited prior arts, particularly Numminen et al. (US 20080198901 A1), Vishwakarma et al. (US 20200336170 A1) and Walker et al. (US 20070097934 A1), when considering them individually does not teach the limitation of “each of [the plurality of frequency offset values] having been generated from a truly random process such that the plurality of frequency offset values stored on the data structure have no mathematical relationship therebetween” and that these reference “cannot be combined… because doing so would render each of these disclosures unsuitable for their intended purpose.”
First it is noted that the amended limitation of “the data structure includes a plurality of frequency offset values, each of which having been generated from a truly random process such that the plurality of frequency offset values stored on the data structure have therebetween” does not change the scope of the previously corresponding rejected limitation of “the data structure includes a plurality of frequency offset values, each of which having been generated from a truly random process such that there is no mathematical relationship between the plurality of frequency offset values”. It is simply reworded to say the same thing and hence, the Office asserts that the previously cited prior art in combination teaches all the limitation as previously addressed. Second, in response to applicant's argument that these reference “cannot be combined… because doing so would render each of these disclosures unsuitable for their intended purpose,” the test for obviousness is not whether the features of a secondary reference may be bodily incorporated into the structure of the primary reference; nor is it that the claimed invention must be expressly suggested in any one or all of the references. Rather, the test is what the combined teachings of the references would have suggested to those of ordinary skill in the art. See In re Keller, 642 F.2d 413, 208 USPQ 871 (CCPA 1981). Each prior art are related to each other’s field of endeavor, such as wireless communication, using frequency hopping, using random number generation and storing related parameter, value, data in storage medium and structures such as look-up table. For instant, Numminen et al. teaches frequency hopping communication using plurality of frequency values stored in a lookup table (LUT)/data structure and using random number generator to access the LUT where Vishwakarma et al. teaches the frequency values stored in a lookup table can be referred as frequency “offset” values that can be stored in a “lookup table” and finally Walker et al. teaches random numbers can be “generated from truly random process.” Hence these combined prior arts fairly teach generating and storing in a data structure truly random frequency offset values for use in setting a carrier frequency which appears to be similar to instantly claimed and disclosed (see PgPub version Para. [0066]) process of generating “truly random numbers” which “ensures that there is no mathematical relationship between one frequency offset value in the data structure and the next.” Therefore, the Office asserts that it is well within the skill of a person of ordinary skill in the art to combine these prior arts for the reason stated in the rejection to arrive at the claimed invention.
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, 3-5, 10, 11, 13, 16, 17, 28, 32, 34 and 35 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Numminen et al. (US 20080198901 A1 previously cited) in view of Vishwakarma et al. (US 20200336170 A1 previously cited) further in view of Walker et al. (US 20070097934 A1 previously cited).
Regarding Claim 1, Numminen et al. discloses;
A computer-implemented method comprising:
obtaining a key value (Fig. 2, Para. [0026]: Fuzzier 231 outputs M-bits based at least on Clock input representing a current time value received from External clock signal from “GPS-system”/current time value source);
using the key value to determine…frequency… value a data structure…for a frequency…value associated with the key value, (Fig. 1, 2, Para. [0024]-[0025]: M-bits is used to query a lookup table, “LUT 233,” to determine associated “correct frequency”), wherein the data structure includes a plurality of frequency…values (Para. [0024]: “The LUT has a list of frequencies stored, each of which corresponds to a different value of the data word”)…;
determining a hop frequency value (Fig. 1, Para. [0025]: “a frequency hopping receiver and a transmitter” sets a carrier frequency based on determining “the correct frequency” corresponding to the data word)… and,
setting a carrier frequency of a transceiver module to the hop frequency value for transmitting and receiving radio signals using the carrier frequency (Fig. 1, Para. [0025]: “the output from the LUT 233 is used as input to the Frequency Synthesizers 114, 124, of the transmit and receive parts [transceiver], in order to generate the correct frequency.” That is, Frequency Synthesizers 114, 124 of “a frequency hopping receiver and a transmitter [transceiver]” sets a carrier frequency/“the correct frequency” for transmitting and receiving radio signals using the correct frequency).
Although, Numminen et al. teaches that the M-bit data word/key value is used to determine the frequency value as addressed above, they do not teach the frequency value(s) corresponds to:
“an initial frequency offset value”; or the “list of frequencies stored” in the “LUT 233”/ data structure are:
“stored on a storage medium” and corresponding to “frequency offset” values;
determining “the correct frequency” corresponding to the data word is:
“based on the initial frequency offset value”; and
“each of which having been generated from a truly random process such that the plurality of frequency offset values stored on the data structure have therebetween.”
On the other hand, in similar field of endeavor ( Fig. 1, Para. [0004]: “a frequency hopping arrangement for a communication”), Vishwakarma et al. teaches:
“an initial frequency offset value” (Fig. 2-4, Par. [0054]: “A start offset (F.sub.offset) between 0 and 0.500, representing kHz [i.e. an initial frequency offset value], is randomly selected and/or generated to define the lowest hopping frequency)”); where “These frequencies can then be stored in a lookup table (referred to herein as “Legal F.sub.step Values”) [data structure] are:
“stored on a storage medium” (Fig. 1: Database/memory - 108/122) and corresponding to “frequency offset” values (Fig. 2-4, Par. [0055]: “These frequencies can then be stored in a lookup table (referred to herein as “Legal F.sub.step Values [“frequency offset” values]”) of size N.sub.fstepLegal that can be indexed with an integer”));
determining “the correct frequency” corresponding to the data word is:
“based on the initial frequency offset value” (Para. [0054]: “A start offset (F.sub.offset) between 0 and 0.500, representing kHz, is randomly selected and/or generated to define the lowest hopping frequency. As such, (902.00+F.sub.offset+channel spacing)=F.sub.start. That is, initial “initial frequency offset value”/“start offset (F.sub.offset)” value is used to determine a starting/”F.sub.start”/correct frequency for beginning a frequency hopping communicating).
“each of which having been generated from a truly random process such that the plurality of frequency offset values stored on the data structure have therebetween.”
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention that the PRN-generator generating correct frequency value for carrier frequency hopping usings at least a frequency among plurality frequencies in a LUT 233 in Numminen et al.’s invention may comprise an initial frequency offset value/start offset (F.sub.offset) used for determining a first transmitting/receiving hopping frequency from “a lookup table/Legal F.sub.step Values, stored in a memory, containing plurality of frequency offset values as taught by Vishwakarma et al. where doing so would (Vishwakarma et al., Para. [0003]) at least reduce “latency” and “interference…when multiple devices are attempting to transmit information within the same relative area and/or proximity.”
Numminen et al. in view of Vishwakarma et al. do not teach:
“each of which having been generated from a truly random process such that the plurality of frequency offset values stored on the data structure have therebetween.”
On the other hand, in the field of “secure direct links between wireless network stations”, Walker et al. teaches:
“each of which having been generated from a truly random process such that the plurality of frequency offset values stored on the data structure have therebetween” (Para. [0072]: “the random numbers described herein may be generated by a true random number generator… the random numbers may be generated using either software- or hardware-based mechanisms, using well-known algorithms.”)
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention that the plurality of frequency offset values in a lookup table, LUT 233, in Numminen et al. in view of Vishwakarma et al.’s invention can be generated using computer-implemented true random number generator as taught by Walker et al. where doing so would (Walker et al., Para. [0008]) create/generate “direct links [carrier frequencies] with adequate security levels.”
Regarding Claim 3, Numminen et al. in view of Vishwakarma et al. further view of Walker et al. discloses all as applied to claim 1 above, where Vishwakarma et al. further teaches
determining the hop frequency value by adding the frequency offset value to, or subtracting the frequency offset value from, a carrier frequency value (Para. [0054]: “. As such, (902.00+F.sub.offset+channel spacing)=F.sub.start.” That is the start hop frequency value is determined by adding the F.sub.offset /frequency offset value to a carrier frequency value - 902.00).
Regarding Claim 4, Numminen et al. in view of Vishwakarma et al. further view of Walker et al. discloses all as applied to claim 1 above, where Vishwakarma et al. further teaches;
including repeatedly, at a predefined hop interval (Para. [0052]: “the system shall use at least 50 hopping frequencies and the average time of occupancy on any frequency shall not be greater than 0.4 seconds [a predefined hop interval] within a 20 second period”):
determining a next frequency offset value by stepping through the data structure from the initial frequency offset value in a predetermined sequence (Para. [0058]: “Also, beginning with index position zero (0), one or more embodiments include iterating through the index of table “Legal F.sub.step Values” at intervals of R.sub.selectionOffset to select the number of frequencies that will be used by the squad, and subsequently add these entries to a new lookup table (referred to herein as “Squad Frequencies”) which contains only these frequencies until a total of N.sub.fstepActive frequencies are ultimately selected”); and,
setting the carrier frequency of the transceiver module to a next hop frequency value based on the next frequency offset value (Para. [0058], [0062]: “Also, beginning with index position zero (0), one or more embodiments include iterating through the index of table “Legal F.sub.step Values” at intervals of R.sub.selectionOffset to select the number of frequencies that will be used by the squad, and subsequently add these entries to a new lookup table (referred to herein as “Squad Frequencies”) which contains only these frequencies until a total of N.sub.fstepActive frequencies are ultimately selected”; “After a first device (in the squad) finishes transmitting a packet, the device switches to the next frequency in the hopping list.”).
Regarding Claim 5, Numminen et al. in view of Vishwakarma et al. further view of Walker et al. discloses all as applied to claim 4 above, where Vishwakarma et al. further teaches;
wherein the predefined hop interval at which the next carrier frequency is determined is between 0.001 and 1 seconds (Para. [0052]: “the system shall use at least 50 hopping frequencies and the average time of occupancy on any frequency shall not be greater than 0.4 seconds [a predefined hop interval] within a 20 second period”).
Regarding Claim 11, Numminen et al. in view of Vishwakarma et al. further view of Walker et al. discloses all as applied to claim 1 above, where Numminen et al. further teaches;
wherein the method is conducted at an apparatus (Fig. 1, Para. [0011]: “the system comprises a transmit part 110 and a receive part 120”), wherein the apparatus is a communication device (Para. [0011]: “the transmit part of a first radio and the receive part of a second radio”. That is, transmit part 110 and a receive part 120 of system 100 is a communication device).
Regarding Claim 13, Numminen et al. in view of Vishwakarma et al. further view of Walker et al. discloses all as applied to claim 1 above, where Vishwakarma et al. further teaches;
wherein a quantity of the plurality of frequency offset values is determined based on operational requirements (Para. [0059]: “a table of all legal hopping frequencies can be produced that contains all legal hopping channels within the ISM bandwidth for the given parameters (BW and F.sub.offset)” where the “table of all legal hopping frequencies” is generated based on operational requirements such as “squad size, geo-location-specific values relative to radio law (such as minimum hopping channels and channel spacing), and random values derived from random seed functions”).
Regarding Claim 16, Numminen et al. in view of Vishwakarma et al. further view of Walker et al. discloses all as applied to claim 1 above, where Vishwakarma et al. further teaches;
wherein the data structure includes at least one hundred thousand frequency offset values (Fig. 2, Para. [0059]: “Channel spacing, for example can be set at 25, equating to 25 kHz. For F.sub.offset, an example random value of 349 can be generated…a value of 649 is produced for N.sub.fstepLegal.”)
Regarding Claim 35, Numminen et al. in view of Vishwakarma et al. further view of Walker et al. discloses all as applied to claim 1 above, where Numminen et al. further teaches;
wherein the key value is based on or includes a current time value obtained from a current time value source (Fig. 2, Para. [0026]: Fuzzier 231 outputs M-bits based at least on Clock input representing a current time value received from External clock signal from “GPS-system”/current time value source).
Regarding Claim 10, Numminen et al. in view of Vishwakarma et al. further view of Walker et al. discloses all as applied to claim 35 above, where Numminen et al. further teaches;
including receiving a passcode (Fig. 2: receiving a “Key”), and wherein obtaining the key value includes generating the key value as a function of the current time value and the passcode or a derivative thereof (Fig. 2: M-bits data word are generated based on the “Key” and “Clock”).
Regarding Claim 17, Numminen et al. discloses;
An apparatus including a memory for storing computer-readable program code and a processor for executing the computer-readable program code, wherein the computer-readable program code comprises program instructions that, when executed on the processor, cause the apparatus to perform operations, comprising:
using the key value to determine…frequency… value querying a data structure…for a frequency…value associated with the key value, (Fig. 1, 2, Para. [0024]-[0025]: M-bits is used to query a lookup table, “LUT 233,” to determine associated “correct frequency”), wherein the data structure includes a plurality of frequency…values (Para. [0024]: “The LUT has a list of frequencies stored, each of which corresponds to a different value of the data word”)…;
determining a hop frequency value (Fig. 1, Para. [0025]: “a frequency hopping receiver and a transmitter” sets a carrier frequency based on determining “the correct frequency” corresponding to the data word)… and,
setting a carrier frequency of a transceiver module to the hop frequency value for transmitting and receiving radio signals using the carrier frequency (Fig. 1, Para. [0025]: “the output from the LUT 233 is used as input to the Frequency Synthesizers 114, 124, of the transmit and receive parts [transceiver], in order to generate the correct frequency.” That is, Frequency Synthesizers 114, 124 of “a frequency hopping receiver and a transmitter [transceiver]” sets a carrier frequency/“the correct frequency” for transmitting and receiving radio signals using the correct frequency).
Although, Numminen et al. teaches that the M-bit data word/key value is used to determine the frequency value as addressed above, they do not teach the frequency value(s) corresponds to:
“an initial frequency offset value”; or the “list of frequencies stored” in the “LUT 233”/ data structure are:
“stored on a storage medium” and corresponding to “frequency offset” values;
determining “the correct frequency” corresponding to the data word is:
“based on the initial frequency offset value”; and
“each of which having been generated from a truly random process such that the plurality of frequency offset values stored on the data structure have therebetween.”
On the other hand, in similar field of endeavor ( Fig. 1, Para. [0004]: “a frequency hopping arrangement for a communication”), Vishwakarma et al. teaches:
“an initial frequency offset value” (Fig. 2-4, Par. [0054]: “A start offset (F.sub.offset) between 0 and 0.500, representing kHz [i.e. an initial frequency offset value], is randomly selected and/or generated to define the lowest hopping frequency)”); where “These frequencies can then be stored in a lookup table (referred to herein as “Legal F.sub.step Values”) [data structure] are:
“stored on a storage medium” (Fig. 1: Database/memory - 108/122) and corresponding to “frequency offset” values ((Fig. 2-4, Par. [0055]: “These frequencies can then be stored in a lookup table (referred to herein as “Legal F.sub.step Values [“frequency offset” values]”) of size N.sub.fstepLegal that can be indexed with an integer”));
determining “the correct frequency” corresponding to the data word is:
“based on the initial frequency offset value” (Para. [0054]: “A start offset (F.sub.offset) between 0 and 0.500, representing kHz, is randomly selected and/or generated to define the lowest hopping frequency. As such, (902.00+F.sub.offset+channel spacing)=F.sub.start. That is, initial “initial frequency offset value”/“start offset (F.sub.offset)” value is used to determine a starting/”F.sub.start”/correct frequency for beginning a frequency hopping communicating);
“each of which having been generated from a truly random process such that the plurality of frequency offset values stored on the data structure have therebetween.”
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention that the PRN-generator generating correct frequency value for carrier frequency hopping usings at least a frequency among plurality frequencies in a LUT 233 in Numminen et al.’s invention may comprise an initial frequency offset value/start offset (F.sub.offset) used for determining a first transmitting/receiving hopping frequency from “a lookup table/Legal F.sub.step Values, stored in a memory, containing plurality of frequency offset values as taught by Vishwakarma et al. where doing so would (Vishwakarma et al., Para. [0003]) at least reduce “latency” and “interference…when multiple devices are attempting to transmit information within the same relative area and/or proximity.”
Numminen et al. in view of Vishwakarma et al. do not teach:
“each of which having been generated from a truly random process such that the plurality of frequency offset values stored on the data structure have therebetween.”
On the other hand, in the field of “secure direct links between wireless network stations”, Walker et al. teaches:
“each of which having been generated from a truly random process such that the plurality of frequency offset values stored on the data structure have therebetween” (Para. [0072]: “the random numbers described herein may be generated by a true random number generator… the random numbers may be generated using either software- or hardware-based mechanisms, using well-known algorithms.”)
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention that the plurality of frequency offset values in a lookup table, LUT 233, in Numminen et al. in view of Vishwakarma et al.’s invention can be generated using computer-implemented true random number generator as taught by Walker et al. where doing so would (Walker et al., Para. [0008]) create/generate “direct links [carrier frequencies] with adequate security levels.”
Regarding Claim 28, Numminen et al. in view of Vishwakarma et al. further view of Walker et al. discloses all as applied to claim 17 above, where Walker et al. further teaches;
wherein the storage medium is a removable storage medium (Fig. 8, [0086], [0088]: “on-volatile (NV) storage device, such as depicted by an NV store 812 comprise a rewritable non-volatile memory, such as a flash memory device [well known flash memory device includes at least a USB flash drive, an SD card and a solid state drive (SSD) etc.]” or “an optical storage media [well known optical storage media is a compact disk]”) and wherein the apparatus includes an interface for receiving and connecting to the removable storage medium (Fig. 8: “memory controller 806” provide an interface for receiving and connecting to the NV store 812).
Regarding Claim 32, Numminen et al. in view of Vishwakarma et al. further view of Walker et al. discloses all as applied to claim 17 above, where Vishwakarma et al. further teaches;
wherein the data structure includes at least one hundred thousand frequency offset values (Fig. 2, Para. [0059]: “Channel spacing, for example can be set at 25, equating to 25 kHz. For F.sub.offset, an example random value of 349 can be generated… a value of 649 is produced for N.sub.fstepLegal.”)
Regarding Claim 34, Numminen et al. discloses;
obtaining a key value (Fig. 2, Para. [0026]: Fuzzier 231 outputs M-bits based at least on Clock input representing a current time value received from External clock signal from “GPS-system”/current time value source);
using the key value to determine…frequency… value by querying a data structure…for a frequency…value associated with the key value, (Fig. 1, 2, Para. [0024]-[0025]: M-bits is used to query a lookup table, “LUT 233,” to determine associated “correct frequency”), wherein the data structure includes a plurality of frequency…values (Para. [0024]: “The LUT has a list of frequencies stored, each of which corresponds to a different value of the data word”)…;
determining a hop frequency value (Fig. 1, Para. [0025]: “a frequency hopping receiver and a transmitter” sets a carrier frequency based on determining “the correct frequency” corresponding to the data word)… and,
setting a carrier frequency of a transceiver module to the hop frequency value for transmitting and receiving radio signals using the carrier frequency (Fig. 1, Para. [0025]: “the output from the LUT 233 is used as input to the Frequency Synthesizers 114, 124, of the transmit and receive parts [transceiver], in order to generate the correct frequency.” That is, Frequency Synthesizers 114, 124 of “a frequency hopping receiver and a transmitter [transceiver]” sets a carrier frequency/“the correct frequency” for transmitting and receiving radio signals using the correct frequency).
Although, Numminen et al. teaches that the M-bit data word/key value is used to determine the frequency value as addressed above, they do not teach:
“A non-transitory computer storage medium comprising computer- readable instructions, said instructions”;
the frequency value(s) corresponds to:
“an initial frequency offset value”; or the “list of frequencies stored” in the “LUT 233”/ data structure are:
“stored on a storage medium” and corresponding to “frequency offset” values;
determining “the correct frequency” corresponding to the data word is:
“based on the initial frequency offset value”; and
“each of which having been generated from a truly random process such that the plurality of frequency offset values stored on the data structure have therebetween.”
On the other hand, in similar field of endeavor ( Fig. 1, Para. [0004]: “a frequency hopping arrangement for a communication”), Vishwakarma et al. teaches:
“an initial frequency offset value” (Fig. 2-4, Par. [0054]: “A start offset (F.sub.offset) between 0 and 0.500, representing kHz [i.e. an initial frequency offset value], is randomly selected and/or generated to define the lowest hopping frequency)”); where “These frequencies can then be stored in a lookup table (referred to herein as “Legal F.sub.step Values”) [data structure] are:
“stored on a storage medium” (Fig. 1: Database/memory - 108/122) and corresponding to “frequency offset” values ((Fig. 2-4, Par. [0055]: “These frequencies can then be stored in a lookup table (referred to herein as “Legal F.sub.step Values [“frequency offset” values]”) of size N.sub.fstepLegal that can be indexed with an integer”));
determining “the correct frequency” corresponding to the data word is:
“based on the initial frequency offset value” (Para. [0054]: “A start offset (F.sub.offset) between 0 and 0.500, representing kHz, is randomly selected and/or generated to define the lowest hopping frequency. As such, (902.00+F.sub.offset+channel spacing)=F.sub.start. That is, initial “initial frequency offset value”/“start offset (F.sub.offset)” value is used to determine a starting/”F.sub.start”/correct frequency for beginning a frequency hopping communicating).
“each of which having been generated from a truly random process such that there is no mathematical relationship between the values.”
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention that the PRN-generator generating correct frequency value for carrier frequency hopping usings at least a frequency among plurality frequencies in a LUT 233 in Numminen et al.’s invention may comprise an initial frequency offset value/start offset (F.sub.offset) used for determining a first transmitting/receiving hopping frequency from “a lookup table/Legal F.sub.step Values, stored in a memory, containing plurality of frequency offset values as taught by Vishwakarma et al. where doing so would (Vishwakarma et al., Para. [0003]) at least reduce “latency” and “interference…when multiple devices are attempting to transmit information within the same relative area and/or proximity.”
Numminen et al. in view of Vishwakarma et al. do not teach:
“A non-transitory computer storage medium comprising computer- readable instructions, said instructions”;
“each of which having been generated from a truly random process such that the plurality of frequency offset values stored on the data structure have therebetween.”
On the other hand, in the field of “secure direct links between wireless network stations”, Walker et al. teaches:
“A non-transitory computer storage medium (Fig. 8, Para. [0086]: non-volatile (NV) storage device, such as depicted by an NV store 812) comprising computer- readable instructions, said instructions (Fig. 8, Para. [0086]: “Instruction to be executed…to perform associated AP operations will typically be stored in some type of non-volatile (NV) storage device, such as depicted by an NV store 812”)” and
“each of which having been generated from a truly random process such that the plurality of frequency offset values stored on the data structure have therebetween” (Para. [0072]: “the random numbers described herein may be generated by a true random number generator… the random numbers may be generated using either software- or hardware-based mechanisms, using well-known algorithms.”)
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention that the method for implementing the system 100 in Numminen et al. in view of Vishwakarma et al.’s invention can include instruction stored in a storage device as taught by Walker et al. where the person of ordinary skill in the art would have realized that doing so is simply (KSR) applying a known technique to a known device (a storage device comprising instructions to perform associated device operations) ready for improvement to yield predictable results (enabling Numminen et al.’s frequency hopping receiver and a transmitter to perform the disclosed functions/method) and the plurality of frequency offset values in a lookup table, LUT 233, in Numminen et al. in view of Vishwakarma et al.’s can be replaced/implemented as computer-implemented true random number generator as taught by Walker et al. where doing so would (Walker et al., Para. [0008]) create/generate “direct links [carrier frequencies] with adequate security levels.”
Claims 6-9 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Numminen et al. (US 20080198901 A1 previously cited) in view of Vishwakarma et al. (US 20200336170 A1 previously cited) further in view of Walker et al. (US 20070097934 A1 previously cited) still further in view of MCMILLIN (WO 0074306 A2 previously cited).
Regarding Claim 6, Numminen et al. in view of Vishwakarma et al. further view of Walker et al. discloses all as applied to claim 35 above, where Numminen et al. teaches receiving a clock signal/updated current time value from the GPS system/current time value source as addressed above, however they do not state that the clock signal/updated current time value from the GPS system/current time value source is:
repeatedly received at a predetermined update interval.
On the other hand, MCMILLIN teaches a GPS system/current time value source (Fig. 3: GPS receiver) repeatedly provides a clock signal:
“at a predetermined update interval” (page 108: 9. I/O Port B:0… “the external interrupt input generally used only for 1 pulse-per-second inputs from GPS receivers”).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention that the GPS system providing the external clock signal in Numminen et al. in view of Vishwakarma et al. further view of Walker et al.’s invention can provide the external clock signal at a predetermined update interval of 1 pulse-per-second as taught by MCMILLIN where doing so (MCMILLIN, page 61, line 2-5) improves the resolution…as well as keeping the power requirements for each device to a minimum”
Regarding Claim 7, Numminen et al. in view of Vishwakarma et al. further view of Walker et al. still further in view of MCMILLIN discloses all as applied to claim 6 above, where Numminen et al. further teaches;
wherein the current time value source is a satellite forming part of a global navigation satellite system (GNSS) (Fig. 1. Para. [0026]: the external clock signal is “from the GPS-system” or “other satellite navigation systems than the GPS-system”) and wherein the current time value is received by a satellite navigation system receiver (Fig. 1, 4, Para. [0026]: receiving the external clock signal from a GPS system or “other satellite navigation systems” would inherently require a satellite navigation system/GPS/other satellite navigation system receiver such as GPS Receiver 300 taught by MCMILLIN (Fig. 3, 5)).
Regarding Claim 8, Numminen et al. in view of Vishwakarma et al. further view of Walker et al. still further in view of MCMILLIN discloses all as applied to claim 7 above, where MCMILLIN further teaches;
wherein the predetermined update interval is between 0.5 and 2 seconds (page 108: 9. I/O Port B:0…“the external interrupt input generally used only for 1 pulse-per-second inputs from GPS receivers.” Hence, 1 pulse-per-second is between 0.5 and 2 seconds).
Regarding Claim 9, Numminen et al. in view of Vishwakarma et al. further view of Walker et al. still further in view of MCMILLIN discloses all as applied to claim 8 above, where MCMILLIN further teaches;
wherein the predetermined update interval is 1 second (page 108: 9. I/O Port B:0…“the external interrupt input generally used only for 1 pulse-per-second inputs from GPS receivers”).
Claims 14 and 15 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Numminen et al. (US 20080198901 A1 previously cited) in view of Vishwakarma et al. (US 20200336170 A1) further in view of Walker et al. (US 20070097934 A1 previously cited) still further in view of Kamerman et al. (US 20030190046 A1).
Regarding Claim 14, Numminen et al. in view of Vishwakarma et al. further view of Walker et al. discloses all as applied to claim 1 above, including an LUT comprising a quantity of the plurality of frequency offset values (e.g. Vishwakarma et al., Fig. 2-4) however they do not teach the quantity of the plurality of frequency offset values;
is determined such that no single value is required to be used more than once for predefined operational requirements.
On the other hand, Kamerman et al. teaches:
is determined such that no single value is required to be used more than once for predefined operational requirements (Para. [0110]: “a single use random value created by A or T as part of the execution of the three-party signing protocol.” That is, a quantity of single use random value are determined to be used no more than once for execution of the three-party signing protocol).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention that the list of frequencies [a quantity of frequency offset values] stored in the LUT’s in Numminen et al. in view of Vishwakarma et al. further view of Walker et al.’s invention be generated/determined as single use random value according to three-party signing protocol as taught by Kamerman et al., where doing so would (Kamerman et al., [0038]) allow increased “security of the three-party signing protocol.”
Regarding Claim 15, Numminen et al. in view of Walker et al. discloses all as applied to claim 1 above, however they do not teach that each frequency offset value of the plurality of frequency offset values in the LUT 233;
is a single-use values.
On the other hand, Kamerman et al. teaches:
the values is a single-use values (Para. [0110]: “a single use random value created by A or T as part of the execution of the three-party signing protocol.” That is, single use random value are single use values).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention that the list of frequencies [a quantity of frequency offset values] stored in the LUT in Numminen et al. in view of Vishwakarma et al. further view of Walker et al.’s invention be used as single use random value as taught by Kamerman et al., where doing so would (Kamerman et al., [0038] ) allow increased “security of the three-party signing protocol.”
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Partyka (US 20030174757 A1) discloses (Abstract, Fig. 2, 4, Para. [0051]) “A radio transmission system including many radio transmitters using frequency hopping carriers to intermittently transmit very short messages indicative of status of stimuli associated with the transmitters. The transmitters transmit transmissions independently of a receiver receiving the transmissions and independent of each other. In operation, radio transmitters transmit messages at varying frequencies at time intervals that can be varied as well. The frequency and time intervals are varied according to patterns that can be determined individually for each transmitter. A receiver holds data indicative of the future transmission frequency and time for each transmitter and updates the data based on the time and the content of the received messages. In addition, a simple method is provided to generate a very large number of orthogonal frequency-time hopping sequences that are individual for each transmitter and based on the transmitter ID.” “In an alternative design, a random seed can be generated in the transmitter, for example just after reset, and used in lieu of the ID number to modify the frequency and time patterns. If the random seed has many bits, the probability of generating the same pattern by two transmitters in the system is very small. However, this solution is considered inferior because it requires that additional steps are taken to associate the random seed number with the transmitter ID. In addition, this solution requires a good true random number generator that produces numbers with roughly the same probability in order to prevent frequent repetitions of some numbers.”
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to AMNEET SINGH whose telephone number is (571)272-2414. The examiner can normally be reached 9:30am to 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, Sam K Ahn can be reached at 5712723044. 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.
/AMNEET SINGH/Examiner, Art Unit 2633 /SAM K AHN/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2633