DETAILED ACTION
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
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)(2) the claimed invention was described in a patent issued under section 151, or in an application for patent published or deemed published under section 122(b), in which the patent or application, as the case may be, names another inventor and was effectively filed before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claims 1, 3-5, 7-8, 10-12, 14-18 and 20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) as being anticipated by Fowler et al. (US 11,750,593).
Regarding claim 1, Fowler et al. (hereinafter “Fowler”) teaches a method comprising:
receiving, by a telecommunication system, a communication associated with a caller requesting to make a telephone call to a recipient, wherein the communication includes a reference to a security certificate (i.e., an identity header of a call message request (SIP INVITE message) of a call initiated by a caller (i.e., a salesman (“A” party) to a potential customer (“B” party) wherein the identity header (read on “reference”) comprises the URI to retrieve the associated public key; col.4, lines 43-62) and the SIP INVITE message included the identity header is routed to or received by a service provider 130 (read on “a telecommunication system”) as shown in figure 1; col.4, lines 63-65);
accessing, by the telecommunication system, the security certificate via the reference, wherein the security certificate includes a public key and a document identifier (i.e., the STI-VS 132 identifies the URI found in the identity head to retrieve or access the service provider A’s public certificate (read on “security certificate”)(col.4, line 67 through col.5, lines 4) wherein the public certificate comprises a public and private key pair which is placed or stored on the STI-CR 112; col.4, lines 16-26; further the STI-VS 132 retrieves the telephone number (TN) authorization list from the public certificate data (i.e., the public key) along with the service provider code (SPC) value (read on “document identifier”) within the list (col.5, lines 5-8));
retrieving, by the telecommunication system, identity information from a storage location using the document identifier (i.e., the STI-VS 132 retrieves the SPC (read on “identity information”) in a mapping table for service provider from the STI-CR 112 (read on “storage location”) using the network service provider identifier being calculated from the SPC value (as the document identifier); col.5, lines 8-17); and
in response to verifying the identity information using the public key, flagging, by the telecommunication system, the caller as verified (i.e., if the mapping matches, TN authorization verification is successful or the caller is verified and the call is connected; col.5, lines 15-20).
Regarding claim 3, Fowler further teaches a public and private key pair to be stored in the secure key store 122 and a corresponding public certificate placed in the assigned secure telephone identity certificate repository (STI-CR) 112 ‘certificate repository’ (col.4, lines 16-26). Thus, the repository (STI-CR) 112 ‘certificate repository’ is a data repository or blockchain.
Regarding claims 4-5, Fowler further teaches limitations of the claim, such as a verification process failing, not verifying or not completing (col.6, lines 61-67; col.8, lines 30-35).
Regarding claim 7, Fowler further teaches limitations of the claim, such as the secure key store stored a public and private key pair and the secure STI-CR 112 stored the corresponding public certificate of the public and private key pair (col.4, lines 16-25). Thus, the TN authorization list, retrieved by the STI-VS 132, comprises identify information, such as the public certification data along with the service provider code (SPC) value within the list stored in the secure STI-CR 112 (as a decentralized identifier document)(col.4, line 67 through col.5, line 10).
Regarding claim 8, Fowler teaches a telecommunication system (i.e., service provider 130, as shown in figures 1 and 9) comprising:
one or more processors (i.e., processing unit 904); and
one or more memories (i.e., memory 906) including instructions executable by the one or more processors (col.9, lines 4-23) to cause the one or more processors to:
receive a communication associated with a caller requesting to make a telephone call to a recipient, wherein the communication includes a reference to a security certificate (i.e., an identity header of a call message request (SIP INVITE message) of a call initiated by a caller (i.e., a salesman (“A” party) to a potential customer (“B” party) wherein the identity header (read on “reference”) comprises the URI to retrieve the associated public key; col.4, lines 43-62) and the SIP INVITE message included the identity header is routed to or received by a service provider 130 (read on “a telecommunication system”) as shown in figure 1; col.4, lines 63-65);
access the security certificate via the reference, wherein the security certificate includes a public key and a document identifier (i.e., the STI-VS 132 identifies the URI found in the identity head to retrieve or access the service provider A’s public certificate (read on “security certificate”)(col.4, line 67 through col.5, lines 4) wherein the public certificate comprises a public and private key pair which is placed or stored on the STI-CR 112; col.4, lines 16-26; further the STI-VS 132 retrieves the telephone number (TN) authorization list from the public certificate data (i.e., the public key) along with the service provider code (SPC) value (read on “document identifier”) within the list (col.5, lines 5-8));
retrieve identity information from a storage location using the document identifier (i.e., the STI-VS 132 retrieves the SPC (read on “identity information”) in a mapping table for service provider from the STI-CR 112 (read on “storage location”) using the network service provider identifier being calculated from the SPC value (as the document identifier); col.5, lines 8-17); and
in response to verifying the identity information using the public key, flag the caller as verified (i.e., if the mapping matches, TN authorization verification is successful or the caller is verified and the call is connected; col.5, lines 15-20).
Regarding claim 10, Fowler further teaches a public and private key pair to be stored in the secure key store 122 and a corresponding public certificate placed in the assigned secure telephone identity certificate repository (STI-CR) 112 ‘certificate repository’ (col.4, lines 16-26). Thus, the repository (STI-CR) 112 ‘certificate repository’ is a data repository or blockchain.
Regarding claims 11-12, Fowler further teaches limitations of the claim, such as a verification process failing, not verifying or not completing (col.6, lines 61-67; col.8, lines 30-35).
Regarding claim 14, Fowler further teaches limitations of the claim, such as the secure key store stored a public and private key pair and the secure STI-CR 112 stored the corresponding public certificate of the public and private key pair (col.4, lines 16-25). Thus, the TN authorization list, retrieved by the STI-VS 132, comprises identify information, such as the public certification data along with the service provider code (SPC) value within the list stored in the secure STI-CR 112 (as a decentralized identifier document)(col.4, line 67 through col.5, line 10).
Regarding claim 15, Fowler teaches a non-transitory computer-readable medium comprising program code that is executable by a processor to cause the processor to:
receive a communication associated with a caller requesting to make a telephone call to a recipient, wherein the communication includes a reference to a security certificate (i.e., an identity header of a call message request (SIP INVITE message) of a call initiated by a caller (i.e., a salesman (“A” party) to a potential customer (“B” party) wherein the identity header (read on “reference”) comprises the URI to retrieve the associated public key; col.4, lines 43-62) and the SIP INVITE message included the identity header is routed to or received by a service provider 130 (read on “a telecommunication system”) as shown in figure 1; col.4, lines 63-65);
access the security certificate via the reference, wherein the security certificate includes a public key and a document identifier (i.e., the STI-VS 132 identifies the URI found in the identity head to retrieve or access the service provider A’s public certificate (read on “security certificate”)(col.4, line 67 through col.5, lines 4) wherein the public certificate comprises a public and private key pair which is placed or stored on the STI-CR 112; col.4, lines 16-26; further the STI-VS 132 retrieves the telephone number (TN) authorization list from the public certificate data (i.e., the public key) along with the service provider code (SPC) value (read on “document identifier”) within the list (col.5, lines 5-8));
retrieve identity information from a storage location using the document identifier (i.e., the STI-VS 132 retrieves the SPC (read on “identity information”) in a mapping table for service provider from the STI-CR 112 (read on “storage location”) using the network service provider identifier being calculated from the SPC value (as the document identifier); col.5, lines 8-17); and
in response to verifying the identity information using the public key, flag the caller as verified (i.e., if the mapping matches, TN authorization verification is successful or the caller is verified and the call is connected; col.5, lines 15-20).
Regarding claim 16, Fowler further teaches a public and private key pair to be stored in the secure key store 122 and a corresponding public certificate placed in the assigned secure telephone identity certificate repository (STI-CR) 112 ‘certificate repository’ (col.4, lines 16-26). Thus, the repository (STI-CR) 112 ‘certificate repository’ is a data repository or blockchain.
Regarding claims 17-18, Fowler further teaches limitations of the claim, such as a verification process failing, not verifying or not completing (col.6, lines 61-67; col.8, lines 30-35).
Regarding claim 20, Fowler further teaches limitations of the claim, such as the secure key store stored a public and private key pair and the secure STI-CR 112 stored the corresponding public certificate of the public and private key pair (col.4, lines 16-25). Thus, the TN authorization list, retrieved by the STI-VS 132, comprises identify information, such as the public certification data along with the service provider code (SPC) value within the list stored in the secure STI-CR 112 (as a decentralized identifier document)(col.4, line 67 through col.5, line 10).
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 2 and 9 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Fowler et al. (US 11,750,593) in view of Ranalli (US 2025/0392663) and Hoffner et al. (US 2017/0300402).
Regarding claims 2 and 9, Fowler teaches the SIP invite comprising identifier head having a passport (Personal Assertion Token) and other information fields, such as the URI (col.4, lines 51-59 and col.5, lines 1-2). Fowler failed to teach further the JSON web code, URL and URN. However, PASSporT is an IETF standard that defined a JSON Token structure for identifying the originator (i.e., caller or calling device) of a communication (para. [0008]). Hoffner et al. (hereinafter “Hoffner”) teaches the JSON schema and a URI may be a URN, a URN and/or other format of a path, address or other network location (para. [0030]).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to incorporate the features of JSON web code, URL and URN in the identifier header, as taught by Ranalli and Hoffner, in order to pass or convey identification information for the communication in the network.
Claims 6, 13 and 19 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Fowler et al. (US 11,750,593) in view of Frendo et al. (US 2023/0276205).
Regarding claims 6, 13 and 19, Fowler teaches all subject matters as claimed above, except for the features of wherein the identity information includes at least a description of the caller and a reason for calling. However, Frendo et al. (hereinafter “Frendo”) teaches a system and methods of transmitting or conveying a reason for a call from a user device (caller’s device) to a recipient’s device in paragraphs [0014]-[0017].
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to incorporate the feature of wherein the identity information includes at least a description of the caller and a reason for calling, as taught by Frendo, into view of Fowler in order to aware of the call recipient and reason for the call prior to answer the incoming call.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to BINH TIEU whose telephone number is (571)272-7510. The examiner can normally be reached on 9-5. The Examiner’s fax number is (571) 273-7510 and E-mail address: BINH.TIEU@USPTO.GOV.
Examiner interviews are available via telephone or 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, FAN S. TSANG can be reached on (571) 272-7547.
Any response to this action should be mailed or handed carry deliveries to:
Commissioner of Patents and Trademarks
401 Dulany Street
Alexandria, VA 22314
Or faxed to: (571) 273-8300
Information regarding the status of an application may be obtained from the Patent Application Information Retrieval (FAIR) 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 FAIR system, see fitp://nair-direct.usoto.aqev. If you have any questions on access to the Private PAIR system, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free).
/Binh Kien Tieu/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2694
Date: July 2026
Prosecution Insights