DETAILED ACTION
The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
This action is response to the application filed on 08/08/2024. The application is a continuation (CON) of the patent US 12,075,238 B2.
Claims 1-20 are currently pending for examination.
No information disclosure statement (IDS) has been filed.
Examiner’s Note
Applicants are suggested to include figures 6 and 7 with related text in the claims to provide the application in a better position for an allowance.
Drawings
Figure 1 of the drawings is objected to under 37 CFR 1.83(a) because they fail to show how a bank card (e.g., a credit/debit card) can be a transmitting device, as described in the specification in paragraphs 0027 and 0028. In other words, how a bank card can have a memory, processor and other specialized hardware, etc. Any structural detail that is essential for a proper understanding of the disclosed invention should be shown in the drawing. MPEP § 608.02(d). Corrected drawing sheets in compliance with 37 CFR 1.121(d) are required in reply to the Office action to avoid abandonment of the application. Any amended replacement drawing sheet should include all of the figures appearing on the immediate prior version of the sheet, even if only one figure is being amended. The figure or figure number of an amended drawing should not be labeled as “amended.” If a drawing figure is to be canceled, the appropriate figure must be removed from the replacement sheet, and where necessary, the remaining figures must be renumbered and appropriate changes made to the brief description of the several views of the drawings for consistency. Additional replacement sheets may be necessary to show the renumbering of the remaining figures. Each drawing sheet submitted after the filing date of an application must be labeled in the top margin as either “Replacement Sheet” or “New Sheet” pursuant to 37 CFR 1.121(d). If the changes are not accepted by the examiner, the applicant will be notified and informed of any required corrective action in the next Office action. The objection to the drawings will not be held in abeyance.
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.
Claims 1-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) as failing to set forth the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regard as their invention. Applicants are suggested to review all claims for clarification, and some of them (not all) are indicated below.
Claim 1 recites:
“… in response to determining that a second communication device is within a wireless range for secure communication with the first communication device, capture, via one or more sensors of the first communication device, one or more non-light sensory patterns, encoding a security key, that are outputted by the second communication device via a sensory communication method different from a short-range wireless radio communication method…”, however, it is not clear (1) how to define a wireless range, which provides secure or not secure communication (e.g., within two feet for secure, etc.) – or it is not clear to define a boundary of the limitations; (2) whether a plurality of sensors of the first communication device are capturing the plurality of non-light sensory patterns or encoding a security key; (3) whether “encoding a security key” is outputted by the second communication device or not; (4) whether “the short-range wireless radio communication method” is used for determining “a wireless radio range” or not (or using four different protocols, such as “a wireless radio method”, “a non-light sensory method”, “a sensory communication method”, “a short-range wireless radio communication method”, etc.);
“… determine, using one or more decoding schemes, the security key based on the one or more non-light sensory patterns…”, however, it is not clear how to use a plurality of decoding schemes to determine a single security key based on a plurality of non-light sensory patters (e.g., thermal energy patterns) – or omitting necessary step/component which cause the limitations unclear.
Claim 7 (claim 15 includes similar limitations) recites:
“… in connection with detecting a second communication device within a range for secure communication with …”, however, it is not clear (1) what it means for the term, “in connection with detecting …”; (1) how to define a range, which provides secure or not secure communication (e.g., within two feet for secure, etc.) – or it is not clear to define a boundary of the limitations;
“… determine, using one or more decoding schemes, a security key based on the sensory pattern…”, however, it is not clear how to use a plurality of decoding schemes to determine a single security key based on a sensory patter (e.g., applying two different decoding schemes to the sensory pattern, etc.) – or omitting necessary step/component which cause the limitations unclear.
Claims 2-6, 8-14 and 16-20 depend from the claim 1, 7 or 15, and are analyzed and rejected accordingly.
Claims 2, 3, 8, 9, 16 and 17 recite “… sensory pattern comprises (or represents the security key) using … thermal energy or vibrations … encoding … security key”, however, it is not clear how the sensory pattern comprises the thermal energy and vibrations for encoding – omitting necessary step/component which cause the limitations unclear.
Claims 4, 10 and 18 recite “… decoding schemes are acquired using a separate sensory (or third) communication method …”, however, it is not clear whether the plurality of decoding schemes are acquired by the separate sensory/third communication method of the first communication devices or not (e.g., the first communication device having more than three different communication protocols) – or it is not clear to define a boundary of the limitations.
Claims 5, 11 and 19 recite “… determining that the first/second communication device is positioned over or at least a part of a structure”, however, it is not clear what “a device is positioned over” means (may be incomplete limitation).
Claims 6, 12 and 20 recite “The first communication device … second communication device being within the wireless radio range … comprises a proximity … is less than predetermined value pre-programmed to … the second communication device”, however, it is not clear how the first communication determines the radio range using predetermined value pre-programmed to the second communication device (e.g., the second communication device sends the pre-programmed predetermined value to the first communication device before the first communication device making determination of the range – see also claim 1, 7 or 15) – or omitting necessary step/component which cause the limitations unclear.
Double Patenting
The non-statutory double patenting rejection is based on a judicially created doctrine grounded in public policy (a policy reflected in the statute) so as to prevent the unjustified or improper timewise extension of the “right to exclude” granted by a patent and to prevent possible harassment by multiple assignees. A non-statutory double patenting rejection is appropriate where the claims at issue are not identical, but at least one examined application claim is not patentably distinct from the reference claim(s) because the examined application claim is either anticipated by, or would have been obvious over, the reference claim(s). See, e.g., In re Berg, 140 F.3d 1428, 46 USPQ2d 1226 (Fed. Cir. 1998); In re Goodman, 11 F.3d 1046, 29 USPQ2d 2010 (Fed. Cir. 1993); In re Longi, 759 F.2d 887, 225 USPQ 645 (Fed. Cir. 1985); In re Van Ornum, 686 F.2d 937, 214 USPQ 761 (CCPA 1982); In re Vogel, 422 F.2d 438, 164 USPQ 619 (CCPA 1970); and In re Thorington, 418 F.2d 528, 163 USPQ 644 (CCPA 1969).
A timely filed terminal disclaimer in compliance with 37 CFR 1.321(c) or 1.321(d) may be used to overcome an actual or provisional rejection based on a nonstatutory double patenting ground provided the reference application or patent either is shown to be commonly owned with this application, or claims an invention made as a result of activities undertaken within the scope of a joint research agreement. A terminal disclaimer must be signed in compliance with 37 CFR 1.321(b).
The USPTO internet Web site contains terminal disclaimer forms which may be used. Please visit http://www.uspto.gov/forms/. The filing date of the application will determine what form should be used. A web-based eTerminal Disclaimer may be filled out completely online using web-screens. An eTerminal Disclaimer that meets all requirements is auto-processed and approved immediately upon submission. For more information about eTerminal Disclaimers, refer to http://www.uspto.gov/patents/process/file/efs/guidance/eTD-info-I.jsp.
Claims 1, 2, 15 and 16 are rejected on the ground of non-statutory obviousness-type double patenting as being unpatentable over claims 1, 4, 7, 9, 11, 17 and 19 of the US patent 11,032,322 B2. Although the claims at issue are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other.
Current application No. 18/798759
Reference Patent No. US 11,032,322 B2
Claim 1: A first communication device for performing secure communications, the first communication device comprising: one or more processors and memory storing instructions that, when executed by the one or more processors, cause the one or more processors to:
in response to determining that a second communication device is within a wireless radio range for secure communications with the first communication device, capture, via one or more sensors of the first communication device, one or more non-light sensory patterns, encoding a security key, that are outputted by the second communication device via a sensory communication method different from a short-range wireless radio communication method;
determine, using one or more decoding schemes, the security key based on the one or more non-light sensory patterns; and
receive encrypted messages via the short-range wireless radio communication method and decrypt the encrypted messages using the security key.
Claim 1: A system for secure communication between a transmitting device and a receiving device comprising: … one or more memory devices storing instructions; and one or more processors configured to execute the instructions to perform operations comprising …
Claim 9: The system of claim 1, wherein the operations further comprise determining to communicate via the second communication method based on a proximity of a location of the transmitting device to a location of the receiving device (equivalent to being within a wireless radio range).
in response to determining that the pairing configuration has changed, transmitting a key request and receiving a sensory pattern via a second communication method;
Claim 7: The system of claim 1, wherein the sensory pattern is one of a light pattern, a sound pattern, a thermal energy pattern, or a vibration pattern (equivalent to the non-light sensory patterns).
after receiving the sensory pattern, determining decryption key, the decryption key (equivalent to the security key) being encoded based on a ciphering scheme specified by the sensory pattern; acquiring, from the pairing server, at least one of the security keys and determining whether the decryption key matches the at least one of the security keys … receiving encrypted messages via a first communication method, the first communication method being different from the second communication method; and decrypting the encrypted messages using the decryption key.
Claim 4: … wherein the first communication method comprises radio frequency communication (equivalent to the short-range wireless radio communication method).
Claim 2: The first communication device of claim 1, wherein the one or more non-light sensory patterns comprise using sound, thermal energy, and/or vibration to encode the security key.
Claim 7: The system of claim 1, wherein the sensory pattern is one of a light pattern, a sound pattern, a thermal energy pattern, or a vibration pattern
Claims 15 and 16 have similar limitations with the claims 11, 17 and 19 of the patent 11,032,322 B2, and they are analyzed and rejected accordingly (see the above table for the matching claim limitations).
Claims 7 and 15 are rejected on the ground of non-statutory obviousness-type double patenting as being unpatentable over claims 18 and 10, respectively of the US patent 12,075,238 B2. Although the claims at issue are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other.
Current application No. 18/798759
Reference Patent No. US 12,075,238 B2
Claim 7: One or more non-transitory computer-readable media storing computer program instructions that, when executed by one or more processors, effectuate operations comprising:
in connection with detecting a second communication device within a range for secure communications with a first communication device using a first communication method, receiving a sensory pattern from the second communication device via a second communication method different from the first communication method;
determining, using one or more decoding schemes, a security key based on the sensory pattern; and
receiving, via the first communication method, encrypted messages and decrypting the encrypted messages using the security key.
Claim 18: One or more non-transitory computer-readable media storing computer program instructions that, when executed by one or more processors of a first communication device effectuate operations comprising …
determining, using a first communication method, that the second communication device is within a range for secure communication based on a detected distance of the second communication device from the first communication device; in response to determining the second communication device is within the range … receiving a sensory pattern via the second communication method the second communication method being different from the first communication method;
determining, using one or more decoding schemes … a second security key based on the sensory pattern; and
receiving encrypted messages via the first communication method and decrypt the encrypted messages using the second security key.
Claim 15: A method, implemented by one or more processors, comprising:
receiving a sensory pattern in connection with a second communication device being detected within a range for secure communications with a first communication device using a
first communication method, wherein the sensory pattern is received from the second communication device via a second communication method different from the first communication method;
determining, using one or more decoding schemes, a security key based on the sensory pattern; and
receiving, via the first communication method, encrypted messages and decrypting the encrypted messages using the security key.
Claim 10: A method for performing secure communications, the method comprising …
determining, using a first communication method, that a second communication device is within a range for secure communication based on a detected distance of the second communication device from the first communication device…
the second communication method being different from the first communication method; receiving a sensory pattern via the second communication method from the second communication device based on the key request;
determining, using one or more decoding schemes … a second security key based on the sensory pattern; and
receiving encrypted messages via the first communication method and decrypt the encrypted messages using the second security key.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
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 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 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)(1) the claimed invention was patented, described in a printed publication, or in public use, on sale or otherwise available to the public before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claims 1-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Modzelewski et al. (US 2014/0281547 A1).
As per claim 1, Modzelewski teaches a first communication device for performing secure communications [see figs. 1, 3-5, 6A, 6B], the first communication device comprising: one or more processors and memory storing instructions that, when executed by the one or more processors [see paras. 0069, 0074], cause the one or more processors to:
in response to determining that a second communication device is within a wireless radio range for secure communications with the first communication device, capture, via one or more sensors of the first communication device, one or more non-light sensory patterns, encoding a security key, that are outputted by the second communication device via a sensory communication method different from a short-range wireless radio communication method [figs. 1-6B; par. 0006, lines 1-5; par. 0008, lines 1-8; par. 0035, lines 1-29; par. 0036, lines 1-16; par. 0038, lines 8-14; par. 0044, lines 1-10 of Modzelewski teaches in response to determining that a second communication device is within a wireless radio range (e.g., the range of wireless communication medium, such as RF, Wi-Fi, Bluetooth, etc.) for secure communications with the first communication device, capture, via one or more sensors of the first communication device, one or more non-light sensory patterns (e.g., the audio signal representing the private key), encoding a security key, that are outputted by the second communication device via a sensory communication method (e.g., the sound communication medium) different from a short-range wireless radio communication method (e.g., the short-range of wireless communication method, such as RF, Wi-Fi, Bluetooth, etc.)];
determine, using one or more decoding schemes, the security key based on the one or more non-light sensory patterns; and receive encrypted messages via the short-range wireless radio communication method and decrypt the encrypted messages using the security key [figs. 1-8; par. 0044, lines 1-10; par. 0045, lines 1-13 of Modzelewski teaches determine, using one or more decoding schemes, the security key based on the one or more non-light sensory patterns (e.g., obtaining the private key based on the audio signal using decoding process); and receive encrypted messages via the short-range wireless radio communication method (e.g., the Bluetooth, etc.) and decrypt the encrypted messages (e.g., the Bluetooth message) using the security key].
As per claim 2, Modzelewski teaches the first communication device of claim 1.
Modzelewski further teaches wherein the one or more non-light sensory patterns comprise using sound, thermal energy, and/or vibration to encode the security key [fig. 4; par. 0044, lines 1-10 of Modzelewski teaches wherein the one or more non-light sensory patterns (e.g., the audio signal) comprise using sound, thermal energy, and/or vibration to encode the security key – see also rejections to the claim 1].
As per claim 3, Modzelewski teaches the first communication device of claim 1.
Modzelewski further teaches wherein a cipher or encoding scheme is used to translate the security key into the one or more non-light sensory patterns [fig. 4; par. 0045, lines 1-4 of Modzelewski teaches wherein a cipher or encoding scheme (e.g., the resonating scheme) is used to translate the security key into the one or more non-light sensory patterns (e.g., the audio signal)].
As per claim 4, Modzelewski teaches the first communication device of claim 1.
Modzelewski further teaches wherein the one or more decoding schemes are acquired using a separate sensory communication method or a portion of the one or more non-light sensory patterns [fig. 4; par. 0045, lines 1-13 of Modzelewski teaches wherein the one or more decoding schemes are acquired using a separate sensory communication method or a portion of the one or more non-light sensory patterns (e.g., decoding to convert the audio signal to the private key)].
As per claim 5, Modzelewski teaches the first communication device of claim 1.
Modzelewski further teaches wherein the second communication device being within the wireless radio range for secure communications with the first communication device comprises determining that the first communication device or the second communication device is positioned over or on at least a part of a structure [figs. 1, 4; par. 0035, lines 1-29; par. 0036, lines 1-16; par. 0044, lines 1-10 of Modzelewski teaches wherein the second communication device being within the wireless radio range (e.g., the range of wireless communication medium, such as RF, Wi-Fi, Bluetooth, etc.) for secure communications with the first communication device comprises determining that the first communication device or the second communication device is positioned over or on at least a part of a structure – see also rejections to the claim 1].
As per claim 6, Modzelewski teaches the first communication device of claim 1.
Modzelewski further teaches wherein the second communication device being within the wireless radio range for secure communications with the first communication device comprises a proximity of the first communication device to the second communication device is less than predetermined value pre-programmed to at least one of the first communication device or the second communication device [figs. 1, 4; par. 0035, lines 1-29; par. 0036, lines 1-16; par. 0044, lines 1-10 of Modzelewski teaches wherein the second communication device being within the wireless radio range(e.g., the range of wireless communication medium, such as RF, Wi-Fi, Bluetooth, etc.) for secure communications with the first communication device comprises a proximity of the first communication device to the second communication device is less than predetermined value (e.g., within the range) pre-programmed to at least one of the first communication device or the second communication device – see also rejections to the claim 1].
Claims 7-12 are medium claims that corresponds to the (parts of) the device claims 1-6, and are analyzed and rejected accordingly.
As per claim 13, Modzelewski teaches the one or more non-transitory computer-readable media of claim 7.
Modzelewski further teaches wherein the sensory pattern is received in response to determining that a previously used security key is to be replaced [par. 0042, lines 1-7; par. 0046, lines 1-9; par. 0052, lines 8-13 of Modzelewski teaches wherein the sensory pattern is received in response to determining that a previously used security key is to be replaced (e.g., changing to the new private key)].
As per claim 14, Modzelewski teaches the one or more non-transitory computer-readable media of claim 7.
Modzelewski further teaches wherein the first communication method comprises wireless technologies, the second communication method comprises close-range non-radio modes of communication [figs. 1, 4; par. 0035, lines 1-29; par. 0036, lines 1-16; par. 0044, lines 1-10 of Modzelewski teaches wherein the first communication method comprises wireless technologies (e.g., the Bluetooth, Wi-Fi, etc.), the second communication method comprises close-range non-radio modes of communication (e.g., sound, thermal, etc.)].
Claims 15-20 are method claims that corresponds to the (parts of) the device claims 1-6, and are analyzed and rejected accordingly.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to MAUNG T LWIN whose telephone number is (571)270-7845. The examiner can normally be reached on Monday - Friday 10:00 am - 6:00 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, Farid Homayounmehr can be reached on 571-272-3739. 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.
/MAUNG T LWIN/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2495