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
This action is in response to the communication filed on 6/6/2024.
Claims 1-14 are examined and rejected.
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted on 6/6/2024. Accordingly, the information disclosure statement is being considered by the examiner.
Examiner Notes
Examiner notes that there is a typographical error for claims 9-14 should be dependent on claim 8 instead of claim 1, request to correct the minor error.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
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 1-14 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable by U.S. Publication 2015/0188949 to Mahaffey et al. (hereinafter known as “Mahaffey”) and in view of U.S. Publication 2022/0109996 to Lee et al. (hereinafter known as “Lee”).
As per claim 1 Mahaffey teaches, an access point (AP) comprising:
a memory;
a processor operatively coupled to the memory, the processor configured to run a client connection manager (Mahaffey Fig 6 para 198-200 teaches SNC service manager 610, which is configured to communicate with server 650 and SNC connections made with computing device 601); and
a baseband processor operatively connected to the processor, the baseband processor configured to operate a plurality of basic service sets (BSSs), each BSS associated with a respective BSS identifier (BSSID) and an associated security mode (Mahaffey para 153, 176 and 229 BSSID, 164-166 teaches SSL, VPN connection with access point, base station identifier (BSSID) and extended set identification (ESSID) secure VPN mode);
wherein the client connection manager steers a station (STA) associated with a BSSID of the plurality of BSSIDs to a second BSSID of the plurality of BSSIDs based on determining that the second BSSID uses a preferred security mode and that capability information of the STA indicates that the STA is capable of the preferred security mode (Mahaffey Fig 7 para 162-165 teaches where users may desire a secure connection (e.g., VPN) for safe communications from a mobile device with QOS encryption process for each device(s) in network. Para 340 teaches level of security different from the first type of network connection and second type of network connection is established (step 1535)).
Mahaffey does not teach however Lee teaches, secure UE to UE relay device with secure connection (Lee Fig 1 para 27 teaches BTS (Base transceiver station), with secure Upper link and down link secure transmission).
Mahaffey – Lee are analogous as they are from same domain of authentication of gateways in network along with managing the path and policy associated with user(s).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, having the teachings of Mahaffey – Lee before him or her, to combine, Mahafey’s teaching of managing gateway’s in network with user authentication, managing paths with policies (Mahafey abstract) with Lee’s secure UE to UE (user equipment) connection via relay device (Lee abstract). The suggestion/motivation for doing so would have been to enhance secure communication link establishment for UE-to-UE relay (Lee para 2).
As per claim 2 combination of Mahaffey – Lee teaches, the AP of claim 1, wherein the client connection manager steers the STA by causing the baseband processor to transmit a BSS transition management message to the STA (Mahaffey para 339-341 teaches where context information before a network connection is established, determining based on policy what types of network connections (security levels) are appropriate for the current context which covers claimed limitation).
As per claim 3 combination of Mahaffey – Lee teaches, the AP of claim 1, wherein the preferred security mode is more secure than a security mode that the STA is using prior to being steered (Mahaffey para 340-341 teaches in Fig 15 step 1530, based on the application of the security policy a determination is made as to whether there should be a second type of network connection between the computing device and the remote destination).
As per claim 4 combination of Mahaffey – Lee teaches, the AP of claim 1, wherein the preferred security mode is Wi-Fi Protected Access (WPA), WPA2, or WPA3 (Mahaffey para 196, 350-352 teaches wi-fi network with WPA function).
As per claim 5 combination of Mahaffey – Lee teaches, the AP of claim 1, wherein the AP is collocated with a gateway (Mahaffey para 60-61 teaches in FIG. 4, there can be a local gateway 403 on the device 402).
As per claim 6 combination of Mahaffey – Lee teaches, the AP of claim 1, wherein the connection manager receives the capability information from the STA during an association procedure (Mahaffey para 201-203 teaches where SNC service manager 610 is installed on computing device 601 and built into operating system 602).
As per claim 7 combination of Mahaffey – Lee teaches, the AP of claim 1, where the connection manager received the capability information from another connection manager (Mahaffey para 198-200 teaches multiple cloud managers), a cloud (Mahaffey para 358 teaches cloud), or a mesh controller (Mahaffey para 196 teaches mesh).
As per claim 8 Mahaffey teaches, a method implemented by a connection manager running on an Access Point (AP), the method comprising:
steering a station (STA) associated with a first BSS identifier (BSSID) of a plurality of BSSIDs to a second BSSID of the plurality of BSSIDs based on determining that the second BSSID uses a preferred security mode ((Mahaffey para 153, 176 and 229 BSSID, 164-166 teaches SSL, VPN connection with access point, base station identifier (BSSID) and extended set identification (ESSID) secure VPN mode) and that capability information of the STA indicates that the STA is capable of the preferred security mode (Mahaffey Fig 7 para 162-165 teaches where users may desire a secure connection (e.g., VPN) for safe communications from a mobile device with QOS encryption process for each device(s) in network. Para 340 teaches level of security different from the first type of network connection and second type of network connection is established (step 1535)).
Mahaffey – Lee are analogous as they are from same domain of authentication of gateways in network along with managing the path and policy associated with user(s).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, having the teachings of Mahaffey – Lee before him or her, to combine, Mahafey’s teaching of managing gateway’s in network with user authentication, managing paths with policies (Mahafey abstract) with Lee’s secure UE to UE (user equipment) connection via relay device (Lee abstract). The suggestion/motivation for doing so would have been to enhance secure communication link establishment for UE-to-UE relay (Lee para 2).
Claim 9,
Claim 9 is rejected in accordance with claim 2.
Claim 10,
Claim 10 is rejected in accordance with claim 3.
Claim 11,
Claim 11 is rejected in accordance with claim 4.
Claim 12,
Claim 12 is rejected in accordance with claim 5.
Claim 13,
Claim 13 is rejected in accordance with claim 6.
Claim 14,
Claim 14 is rejected in accordance with claim 7.
Prior Art of Record
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Mahaffey et al US Publication 20150188949
Lee et al US Publication 20220109996
Youn et al US Publication 20170289898
Tandai al US Publication 20170013482
Masini et al US Publication 20160302122
Jakkahalli et al US Publication 20070081477
Yimaz et al US Patent 10506438
Abeysekara et al US Patent 12185221
Fuss et al US Patent 12170648
Hara et al US Patent 11728904
O’Flaherty et al US Patent 11677642
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to VIRAL S LAKHIA whose telephone number is (571)270-3363. The examiner can normally be reached on 8 am - 6 pm.
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, Lynn Feild can be reached on 571-272-2092. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300.
Information regarding the status of an application may be obtained from the Patent Application Information Retrieval (PAIR) system. Status information for published applications may be obtained from either Private PAIR or Public PAIR. Status information for unpublished applications is available through Private PAIR only. For more information about the PAIR system, see http://pair-direct.uspto.gov. Should you have questions on access to the Private PAIR system, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative or access to the automated information system, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000.
/VIRAL S LAKHIA/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2431