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 .
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted on 11/14/24 is being considered by the examiner.
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 (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) 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)(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.
Claim(s) 1 and 6-11 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) as being anticipated by Nair et al. (US 2022/0272530 A1).
Consider claim 1, Nair teaches a network entity (abstract) for wireless communication, comprising:
at least one memory; and at least one processor coupled with the at least one memory (all network device would include a memory and processor) and configured to cause the network entity to:
select a user equipment (UE) that is unregistered with the network entity (claim 1-2 and paragraph 52-57);
generate a nonce based on a device identifier for the selected UE and also generate a temporary identifier that is based on the nonce and the device identifier (claims 1-2 and paragraph 52-57, generating a hash value by hashing the public subscription identifiers with identifier of the external entity and one or more of a time duration and a random number. The random number is the claimed nonce. The public subscription identifier is the claimed device identifier. The secure identifier is the claimed temporary identifier); and
transmit a registration request message that includes the nonce and the temporary identifier to the selected UE for registering with the network entity (abstract and paragraph 10, claims 4-8, a message is sent to the external entity with the source identifier as part of the identification and registration exchange).
Consider claim 6, Nair also teaches wherein the network entity is an Internet of Things (IoT) server and the UE is an ambient energy powered IoT device (paragraph 3-4).
Consider claim 7, Nair also teaches wherein the at least one processor is configured to cause the network entity to generate the hash using the nonce and the device identifier (paragraph 3-4).
Consider claim 9, Nair also teaches wherein the at least one processor is configured to cause the network entity to generate the hash using the nonce, the device identifier, a length of the nonce, and a root key (paragraph 3-4).
Consider claim 9, Nair also teaches wherein the at least one processor is configured to cause the network entity to generate the hash as an output of a hash function using one or more parameters, including the device identifier, a random number, or time information (paragraph 3-4).
Consider claim 10, Nair also teaches wherein the nonce is a truncated output of the hash function (paragraph 3-4).
Consider claim 11, Nair also teaches wherein the at least one processor is configured to cause the network entity to generate the hash using based on one or more parameters, including a random number, time information, a timer, a counter, or an additional nonce (paragraph 3-4).
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
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 (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) 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 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.
Claim(s) 2-3 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Nair et al. (US 2022/0272530 A1) in view of Mattela et al. (S 2019/0068592 A1).
Consider claims 2-3, Nair does not teach wherein the at least one processor is further configured to cause the network entity to: receive, from the selected UE, a response message that includes the temporary identifier and an indication of a match of the temporary identifier as received from the network entity and a corresponding temporary identifier as stored in the selected UE and wherein the at least one processor is further configured to cause the network entity to: register the selected UE in response to the match of the temporary identifier generated by the network entity and the corresponding temporary identifier stored by the selected UE.
Mattela further teaches wherein the at least one processor is further configured to cause the network entity to: receive, from the selected UE, a response message that includes the temporary identifier and an indication of a match of the temporary identifier as received from the network entity and a corresponding temporary identifier as stored in the selected UE and wherein the at least one processor is further configured to cause the network entity to: register the selected UE in response to the match of the temporary identifier generated by the network entity and the corresponding temporary identifier stored by the selected UE (paragraph 5-6, 10, 19 and 22, the IoT device receives the association acknowledgement. Decrypts the private device identifier, compares it to its own device identifier and if they match, sends one or more association request).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify and utilize the above teachings for the purposes of preventing unauthorized network use.
Claim(s) 4 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Nair et al. (US 2022/0272530 A1) in view of Sauerwald e al. (US 2013/0034229 A1).
Consider claim 4, Nair teaches wherein the at least one processor is further configured to cause the network entity to: generate a hash based on the nonce and the device identifier (paragraph 52-57).
Nair does not teach truncate the hash to generate a security key K for encrypting the device identifier to derive the temporary identifier, wherein the temporary identifier corresponds to remaining bits of the hash.
Sauerwald further teaches truncate the hash to generate a security key K for encrypting the device identifier to derive the temporary identifier, wherein the temporary identifier corresponds to remaining bits of the hash (paragraph 12, truncate the hash to create an encryption key).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify and utilize the above teachings for the purposes of reducing the key size to conserve resource.
Claim(s) 14 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) as being anticipated by Meijers et al. (US 2013/0214909 A1).
Consider claim 14, Meijers teaches a User equipment (UE) for wireless communication (abstract), comprising:
at least one memory; and at least one processor coupled with the at least one memory and configured to cause the UE to: generate a temporary identifier that is based on a nonce and a device identifier of the UE (paragraph 259 and Fig. 20, step 2004, the device identifier reads on the claimed temporary ID); and
transmit a registration request message that includes the nonce and the temporary identifier to a network entity (paragraph 201 and 263, the mobile device may invoke the registration process or by providing device ID).
Claim(s) 15 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Meijers et al. (US 2013/0214909 A1) in view of Stojanovski et al. (US 2022/0070664 A1).
Consider claim 15, Meijers does not teach wherein the at least one processor is further configured to cause the UE to: receive, from the network entity, a response message that includes the temporary identifier.
Stojanovski further teaches wherein the at least one processor is further configured to cause the UE to: receive, from the network entity, a response message that includes the temporary identifier (paragraph 39, the SMF sends a response to the UE and it is well known in the art a transmitted message would include the recipient’s identifier).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify and utilize the above teachings for the purposes of ensuring a message is delivered properly.
Claim(s) 16-17 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Meijers et al. (US 2013/0214909 A1) in view of Sauerwald e al. (US 2013/0034229 A1).
Consider claim 16, Meijers do not teach wherein the temporary identifier is a truncated portion of an output hash based on the nonce and the device identifier.
Sauerwald further teaches wherein the temporary identifier is a truncated portion of an output hash based on the nonce and the device identifier (paragraph 12).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify and utilize the above teachings for the purposes of reducing the key size to conserve resource.
Consider claim 17, Sauerwald further teaches wherein the at least one processor is configured to cause the UE to generate a security key K for encrypting the device identifier to derive the temporary identifier (paragraph 12).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify and utilize the above teachings for the purposes of reducing the key size to conserve resource.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 5 and 12-13 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.
Claims 18-20 are allowed.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to JUSTIN YE LEE whose telephone number is (571)272-5258. The examiner can normally be reached 9:30-8:00.
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, Kathy Wang-Hurst can be reached at 5712705371. 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.
/JUSTIN Y LEE/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2644 7/28/26
Prosecution Insights