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 . Claims 1-20 are currently pending in the filing of 07/01/2024.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(b):
(b) CONCLUSION.—The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention.
Claim 11 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor (or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the applicant), regards as the invention.
Specifically, dependent claim 11 recites features which have insufficient antecedent support for features includes in these claims. Claim 11 recites “the integrity check” without providing antecedent support for this feature.
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 1-3, 5-6, 9-15, 17, and 20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over US 20220014966 to Kim et al. (hereinafter Kim), in view of US 20210021579 to Thorslund et al. (hereinafter Thorslund).
Regarding claim 1, Kim teaches,
A secure transmission method, comprising ([0008] & [0010] teach compression and ciphering of data sent on a network. See also fig. 1F sending and fig. 1L receiving.)
encrypting, by a first device, a packet header of a to-be-sent packet according to a transport layer security protocol to obtain an encrypted packet header, … ([0007-8] teaches ciphering the UDC header. See also Abstract & [0010]. One of skill in the art understands the UDC and PDCP are operated at the same level, which corresponds to the transport layer security protocol. [0010] teaches using data to generate a compressed & ciphered block and header.) (Applicant’s printed publication at [0116] describes PDCP layer protocol being performed at the transport layer security protocol.) … wherein the to-be-sent packet comprises first data, and the first data is ([0010] teaches a PDCP service compressing and ciphering data used to generate a header and block / data. [0006] teaches not applying the compression / ciphering to a block because it has already been compressed / processed by an upper layer / “application layer”. See also fig. 1F & its description in [0133-136] describing uplink / sending of the data and explicitly teaches “application layer” data being processed by PDCP layer.)
sending, by the first device, a first encrypted packet to a second device, wherein the first encrypted packet comprises the encrypted packet header and the first data. ([0010] teaches transmitter / transmitting, and [0011] teaches a transceiver to receive the packet. See also, fig. 1F & [0133-136] teach transmitter performing compression and receiver performing decompression, with ciphering included in the compression.)
Kim fails to explicitly teach first data that is already encrypted not being encrypted again,
However, Thorslund teaches,
encrypting, by a first device, a packet header of a to-be-sent packet according to (Abstract, teaches different protocols / “layers” and the encryption of portions of the data. See fig. 3. [0005] teaches different protocols such as HTTP, where data may already be encrypted, where the payload data is not encrypted because it is already encrypted with a sufficient protocol, and the plain text in the header is encrypted, thus preventing, unnecessary double encryption of payload data. [0033] teaches different layers of protocols.) (As discussed above, Kim [0006] teaches not compressing data that has already been compressed at a higher level.)
sending, by the first device, a first encrypted packet to a second device, wherein the first encrypted packet comprises the encrypted packet header and the first data. (fig. 3, step 312)
Before the effective filing date of the invention, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to combine the teachings of Kim, which teaches selective compression and ciphering of headers and data / blocks based on a determination of whether compression has occurred at a higher layer, ([0006]) and the compression and ciphering of headers ([0008] & [0010]), with Thorslund, which also teaches ciphering / encryption of data and headers ([0005]), and additionally teaches encrypting a header while not encrypting the payload, when the payload has already been encrypted ([0005]). One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to perform such an addition to provide Kim with the added ability to encrypt plain text packet data and not again encrypt already encrypted payload data, as taught by Thorslund, for the purpose of maintaining security while increasing computational efficiency by not performing unnecessary double encryption.
Regarding claim 2, Kim and Thorslund teach,
The method according to claim 1, wherein the application layer security protocol comprises:
a packet data convergence protocol (PDCP) layer protocol. (Kim, [0144-147] teaches the PDCP different than the SDAP layer, where [0147] teaches the SDAP layer performing the ciphering of the UDC header. One of skill in the art will understand that in OSI the application layer is above layer 2, which includes the PDCP. Alternatively, the examiner may interpret this feature as PDCP being at or under the layer of the application layer / layer 7 in the OSI model.) (As discussed above in the rejection of claim 1, applicant’s printed publication at [0116] describes PDCP layer protocol being performed at the transport layer security protocol.)
Regarding claim 3, Kim and Thorslund teach,
The method according to claim 1,
wherein the transport layer security protocol comprises a media access control security protocol or an internet protocol security protocol. (Kim, [0059] teaches medium access controls (MACs) which is the same as media access controls, as part of the radio link controls, which are at the transport layer.)
Regarding claim 5, Kim and Thorslund teach,
The method according to claim 1,
wherein the to-be-sent packet further comprises second data that is not encrypted by the application layer security protocol, the first encrypted packet further comprises encrypted data, (Thorslund, [0008] discussed below) and the method further comprises:
encrypting, by the first device, the second data according to the transport layer security protocol to obtain the encrypted data. (Thorslund, [0008] teaches a packet that includes encrypted first data and unencrypted second data, where the second data is encrypted but the first data is not again encrypted.) (Kim, [0006] & [0010] teaches the upper layer providing already compressed / ciphered data that is not again compressed / ciphered, preventing un-needed encryption.)
Regarding claim 6, Kim and Thorslund teach,
The method according to claim 5,
wherein the second data is located before the first data. (Thorslund, [0008] teaches a packet that includes encrypted first data and unencrypted second data, where the second data is encrypted but the first data is not again encrypted. It would be a matter of simple design choice to reorder first and second portion to be unencrypted and encrypted, and well within the ability of one of ordinary skill in the art. [0027] teaches that the order of the first and second portions are merely an example, by teaching an encrypted portion (e.g., first portion) and an unencrypted portion (e.g., second portion). Again, within the ability of one of ordinary skill in the art.)
Regarding claim 9, Kim and Thorslund teach,
The method according to claim 1, wherein the first data is air interface data. (Kim, [0135] teaches ciphering all data, except for the UDC header to be used for uplink, which at least figs. 1A & 1B are used for radio transmission / “air interface data”.)
Regarding claim 10, Kim and Thorslund teach,
The method according to claim 1, wherein before the first encrypted packet is generated, the method further comprises: (Kim, fig. 1E teaches multiple packets between the transmitter and receiver.)
receiving, by the first device, a second encrypted packet from the second device; and (Kim, fig. 1E and fig. 2E teach data transmission. [0006] teaches multiple IP flows. [0010-11] teach the transmission of compresses and ciphered data to a receiver. [0163] teaches the deciphering and decompression in detail.)
performing, by the first device, an integrity check on the second encrypted packet according to the transport layer security protocol, wherein the integrity check fails. (Kim, fig. 1L teaches performing integrity protection, [0160] teaches an error detected by the integrity detection using data from a header.)
Regarding claim 11, Kim and Thorslund teach,
The method according to claim 1, wherein before the first encrypted packet is generated, the method further comprises:
sending, by the first device, a third encrypted packet to the second device, wherein the third encrypted packet is generated by encrypting the to-be-sent packet according to the transport layer security protocol; and (Kim, fig. 1E and fig. 2E teach data transmission. [0006] teaches multiple IP flows. [0010-11] teach the transmission of compresses and ciphered data to a receiver. [0006] & [0010] teaches the upper layer providing already compressed / ciphered data that is not again compressed / ciphered, preventing un-needed encryption. The decision not to encrypt is performed by the lower layer / “transport layer”.)
receiving, by the first device, indication information from the second device, wherein the indication information indicates that the integrity check on the third encrypted packet fails. (Kim, fig. 1L teaches performing integrity protection, [0160] teaches an error detected by the integrity detection using data from a header.)
Regarding claim 12, Kim and Thorslund teach,
The method according to claim 1,
wherein the first device is a source device for packet transmission or a routing device that connects the source device and a destination device in Ethernet, the destination device is for packet transmission in the Ethernet, and the second device is the destination device or the routing device that connects the source device and the destination device. (Kim, [0059] teaches the PDCU routing transmissions / reception. [0213] teaches the Ethernet being used to perform the features discussed above in the rejection of claim 1.) (Thorslund, Abstract & [0005] teach an intermediary device performing the packet transmission Th
Regarding claim 13, Kim and Thorslund teach,
A secure transmission method, comprising
receiving, by a second device, an encrypted packet from a first device, wherein the encrypted packet comprises an encrypted packet header and first data, and the first data is encrypted by an application layer security protocol without being encrypted by a transport layer security protocol; and
decrypting, by the second device, the encrypted packet header according to the transport layer security protocol. (Kim, [0010] as discussed above in the rejection of claim 1, teaches transmission of the data, [0011] teaches receiving the data of claim 13. See also [0163] teaching the deciphering and decompression of the data that was received. Fig. 1B teaches the reception and decompression / deciphering of the data from UE by LTE eNB.) (Thorslund, [0005] teaches the encryption of some of the data, while [0006] teaches the decryption of the received data.)
Claim 13 is rejected using the same basis of arguments used to reject claim 1 above.
Regarding claim 14, Kim and Thorslund teach,
The method according to claim 13, wherein the application layer security protocol comprises a packet data convergence protocol (PDCP) layer protocol.
Claim 14 is rejected using the same basis of arguments used to reject claim 2 above.
Regarding claim 15, Kim and Thorslund teach,
The method according to claim 13, wherein the transport layer security protocol comprises a media access control security protocol or an internet protocol security protocol.
Claim 15 is rejected using the same basis of arguments used to reject claim 3 above.
Regarding claim 17, Kim and Thorslund teach,
The method according to claim 13,
wherein the encrypted packet further comprises encrypted data, and the method further comprises:
decrypting, by the second device, the encrypted data according to the transport layer security protocol to obtain second data.
Claim 17 is rejected using the same basis of arguments used to reject claim 5 above.
Regarding claim 20, Kim and Thorslund teach,
The method according to claim 13, wherein the first data is air interface data.
Claim 20 is rejected using the same basis of arguments used to reject claim 9 above.
Claims 4 and 16 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kim, in view of Thorslund, in view of US 20190082040 to Aziz et al (hereinafter Aziz).
Regarding claim 4, Kim and Thorslund teach,
The method according to claim 1, further comprising:
sending, by the first device, length information of the packet . (Kim, [0279] teaches PDCP sequence number length, [0006] teaches the UDC expressing the data in terms of position and length.)
Kim and Thorslund fail to explicitly teach length of packet header in the information,
However, Aziz teaches,
sending, by the first device, length information of the packet header of the to-be-sent packet to the second device. ([0045] teaches including length data including packet length and packet header length.)
Before the effective filing date of the invention, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to combine the teachings of Kim, which teaches selective compression and ciphering of headers and data / blocks based on a determination of whether compression has occurred at a higher layer, ([0006]) and the compression and ciphering of headers using PDCP ([0008] & [0010]), with Thorslund, which also teaches ciphering / encryption of data and headers ([0005]), and additionally teaches encrypting a header while not encrypting the payload, when the payload has already been encrypted ([0005]),with Aziz, which also teaches PDCU used in wireless cellular networks ([0045]), and additionally teaches including length data including packet length and packet header length ([0045]). One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to perform such an addition to provide Kim and Thorslund with the added ability to include information to allow a determination of the packet and packet header length, as taught by Aziz, for the purpose of increasing computational efficiency by including data to speed up processing by identifying size of data to be processed.
Regarding claim 16, Kim, Thorslund, and Aziz teach,
The method according to claim 13, further comprising:
receiving, by the second device, first length information from the first device; and
determining, by the second device based on the first length information, a length of the encrypted packet header before being encrypted.
Claim 16 is rejected using the same basis of arguments used to reject claim 4 above.
Claims 7 and 18 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kim, in view of Thorslund, in view of US 20130031448 to Cheng (hereinafter Cheng).
Regarding claim 7, Kim and Thorslund teach,
The method according to claim 5, further comprising:
Kim and Thorslund fail to explicitly teach length information included in second data / header data,
However, Cheng teaches,
sending, by the first device, length information of the second data to the second device. ([0025] teaches a length indicator for encrypted data / “second data”.)
Before the effective filing date of the invention, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to combine the teachings of Kim, which teaches selective compression and ciphering of headers and data / blocks based on a determination of whether compression has occurred at a higher layer, ([0006]) and the compression and ciphering of headers using PDCP ([0008] & [0010]), with Thorslund, which also teaches ciphering / encryption of data and headers ([0005]), and additionally teaches encrypting a header while not encrypting the payload, when the payload has already been encrypted ([0005]), with Cheng, which also teaches encryption of data to be transmitted ([0010] & [0025]) and the use of packet data convergence protocol (PDCP) ([0005]), and additionally teaches a length indicator of the encrypted data ([0025]). One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to perform such an addition to provide Kim and Thorslund with the added ability to include length data and encryption modes in the header, as taught by Cheng, for the purpose of increasing computational efficiency so that encryption and the portion of the encrypted data may be identified to increase computational efficiency while maintain security.
Regarding claim 18, Kim, Thorslund, and Cheng teach,
The method according to claim 17, further comprising:
receiving, by the second device, second length information from the first device; and
determining, by the second device based on the second length information, a length of the second encrypted data before being encrypted.
Claim 18 is rejected using the same basis of arguments used to reject claim 7 above.
Claims 8 and 19 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kim, in view of Thorslund, in view of US 20190230667 to Loehr et al. (hereinafter Loehr).
Regarding claim 8, Kim and Thorslund teach,
The method according to claim 5,
Kim and Thorslund fail to explicitly teach second data / header that includes control data,
However, Loehr teaches,
wherein the second data comprises control data, management plane data, or synchronization clock data transmitted on a fronthaul interface. ([0192] teaches PDCP transmission using a header that includes control data. [0024] teaches that control data is used for RRC signaling. Examiner notes that a fronthaul interface is high capacity wireless, which is taught by 5G, as taught in [0132]. See also at least Kim which is directed to cellular wireless networks.)
Before the effective filing date of the invention, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to combine the teachings of Kim, which teaches selective compression and ciphering of headers and data / blocks based on a determination of whether compression has occurred at a higher layer, ([0006]) and the compression and ciphering of headers using PDCP ([0008] & [0010]), with Thorslund, which also teaches ciphering / encryption of data and headers ([0005]), and additionally teaches encrypting a header while not encrypting the payload, when the payload has already been encrypted ([0005]), with Loehr, which also teaches ciphering / deciphering of broadcast cellular data ([0003]) and PDCP ([0192]), and additionally teaches PDCP transmission using a header that includes control data ([0192]). One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to perform such an addition to provide Kim and Thorslund with the added ability to utilize control data to better control signaling, as taught by Loehr, for the purpose of increasing network efficiency in a PDCP environment.
Regarding claim 19, Kim, Thorslund, and Loehr teach,
The method according to claim 17, wherein the second data comprises control data, management plane data, or synchronization clock data transmitted on a fronthaul interface.
Claim 19 is rejected using the same basis of arguments used to reject claim 8 above.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to BRIAN WILLIAM AVERY whose telephone number is (571) 272-3942. The examiner can normally be reached on 9AM-5PM.
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, Farid Homayounmehr can be reached on (571) 272-3739.
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 https://ppair-my.uspto.gov/pair/PrivatePair. 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.
/B.W.A./
/FARID HOMAYOUNMEHR/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2495