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 .
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, 9, 7 and 19 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over BAEK et al PG PUB 2014/0047565 in view of XIE et al PG PUB 2020/0322206.
Re Claims 1 and 9, BAEK et al teaches in figure 11, a system including a Authentication Requesting unit 10 (a first wireless communication device; an authentication requesting node) and Authentication Processing Unit 60 (a second wireless communication device; an authentication verifying node); in S1112, the Authentication requesting node 10 comprises a transmitting unit 720 (a transmitting unit), See figure 7, that modulates a pilot signal and unique ID of the Authentication requesting node 10 [See 0100 0101] in n communication channels (a plurality of signals) [0045] to the Authentication Processing Unit 60 (the second communication device) in each frequency band [0082]; figure 6 teaches the Authentication Processing Unit 60 (the second communication device) comprising a Signal reception unit 620 and CSI Estimation Unit 640 for receiving n communication channels transmitted from the Authentication Requesting unit 10 and estimating a plurality of CSI based on the respective frequency bands; and a Authentication Processing unit (a physical layer authentication processing unit) that determines whether the Authentication Requesting unit 10 is authenticated based on the estimated plurality of CSI [0102].
BAEK et al fails to explicitly teach the transmitting unit for modulating on “a plurality of set of center frequencies”.
However, XIE et al teaches a transmitter for sequentially modulating the set of pilot and authentication signal in plurality of carrier signals [See abstract] wherein it is known to one skilled that the carrier signals are transmitted in center frequency of the configured frequency band to serve as a tuning point with the highest efficiency. One skilled in the art would have been motivated to have transmitted/received the modulated signals in BAEK et al in the center frequencies to enable tuning point at the highest efficiency. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one skilled to have combined the teachings.
Re Claims 7 and 19, BAEK et al teaches in figure 6, the transmission 620 (a transmitting unit) for the Authentication Processing Unit 60 (the second communication device) that transmits, See figure 11, S1124, an authentication result information (an authentication configuration signal) to the Authentication requesting Unit 10 (the first communication device) when the authentication is legitimate.
Claims 2, 10 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over BAEK et al PG PUB 2014/0047565 in view of XIE et al PG PUB 2020/0322206 as applied to Claims 1 and 9 above and further in view of Iizuka et al PG PUB 2008/0233878.
Re Claims 2, 10, BAEK et al teaches in figure 1 teaches Transmission unit 120 (the transmitting unit) of the Authentication Requesting unit 10 comprising a transmitting module for transmitting the plurality of digital waveforms wherein the transmitter supports, in view of XIE et al, the modulating (a signal modulation module) of unique ID and pilot in OFDM symbols (a data encoding module) or M-ary data symbols [0055];
in figure 6, the receiving unit comprising Signal Transmission and Reception unit 620 (a receiving module/demodulating module) for sequentially receiving/demodulating a plurality of digital waveforms of M-ary data symbols transmitted from the Authentication Requesting unit 10; CSI estimation unit 640 (CSI estimation module) that estimates the modulated (modified) pilot signals from the M-ary data symbols [0072], Response Search Init 660 (a data decoding module) converts and outputs the unique ID (identification information) [0073];
BAEK et al in view of XIE et al fails to explicitly teach “a modulation/demodulation frequency conversion module” that sequentially converts a modulation frequency into the plurality of center frequencies…”.
However, Iizuka et al teaches a figure 1, a Transmission Radio Section 120 receiving from a Pilot signal combination section 112 whereby Frequency Multiplier 123 performs frequency conversion at the center frequencies [See abstract and 0064].
By combining the teachings, the Signal Transmitter of 120 can include Frequency Multiplier 123 to perform frequency conversion M-ary data symbols (pilot and unique ID) in the center frequencies. One skilled in the art would have been motivated to have transmitted/received the modulated signals in BAEK et al in the center frequencies to enable tuning point at the highest efficiency. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one skilled to have combined the teachings.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 3-6 and 8 and 11-18 are objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, but would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
Re Claims 3 and 6, prior art fails to teach a signal post processing module that calculates and outputs a test statistic by inputting of CSI estimated and the plurality of registered CSI and a legitimacy determination module that determines whether the first wireless communication device is authenticated based on the test statistic as claimed.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ANDREW LEE whose telephone number is (571)272-3130. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 8:30AM-5PM ET.
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, KASSIM KHALAD can be reached at 5712703770. 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.
/ANDREW LEE/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2475
Prosecution Insights