Office Action Predictor
Last updated: April 15, 2026
Application No. 18/833,654

Negotiation Mechanism for Authentication Procedures in Edge Computing

Non-Final OA §103§112
Filed
Jul 26, 2024
Examiner
GOODCHILD, WILLIAM J
Art Unit
2433
Tech Center
2400 — Computer Networks
Assignee
Apple INC.
OA Round
1 (Non-Final)
83%
Grant Probability
Favorable
1-2
OA Rounds
3y 4m
To Grant
99%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 83% — above average
83%
Career Allow Rate
612 granted / 739 resolved
+24.8% vs TC avg
Strong +36% interview lift
Without
With
+35.9%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
3y 4m
Avg Prosecution
18 currently pending
Career history
757
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
10.1%
-29.9% vs TC avg
§103
51.0%
+11.0% vs TC avg
§102
18.4%
-21.6% vs TC avg
§112
11.4%
-28.6% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 739 resolved cases

Office Action

§103 §112
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 § 112 Claim 1 recites the limitation "the UE" in line 4. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. Claim Objections Claim 1 is objected to because of the following informalities: claim 1 refers to “the UE”. UE should be spelled out as to what it means before using an acronym. Appropriate correction is required. 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. Claim(s) 1, 11, 19 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Zhang, (US Publication No. 2010/0146262), hereinafter “Zhang”, and further in view of Kolekar, (International Publication No. Wo2022/031505), hereinafter “Kolekar”. Regarding claims 1, 11, 19, Zhang discloses generate, for transmission to anrequest comprising a list of authentication mechanisms supported by the UE [Zhang, paragraphs 34-45], wherein the Zhang, paragraphs 34-45]; and process, based on signaling from the a response to the request [Zhang, paragraphs 34-45], wherein response comprises an indication of the selected authentication mechanism [Zhang, paragraphs 34-45]. Zhang does not specifically disclose, however Kolekar teaches edge configuration server (ECS) [Kolekar, Abstract, paragraph 112]. It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to include an edge configuration server used to negotiate for mutual authentication in order to provide security for the system. It would have been obvious to combine Kolekar with Zhang as both arts relate to a similar concept. Regarding claims 2, 12, 20, Zhang-Kolekar further discloses generate, after the reception of the response, a key or a certificate for the selected authentication mechanism [Zhang, paragraph 38, 78]. Regarding claim 3, Zhang-Kolekar further discloses generate, prior to the reception of the response, a key or a certificate for one or more authentication mechanisms included in the list of authentication mechanisms [Zhang, paragraph 38, 78]. Regarding claims 4, 13, Zhang-Kolekar further discloses initiate an authentication procedure with the ECS using the selected authentication mechanism [Zhang, paragraphs 34-45, 78]. Regarding claims 5, 14, Zhang-Kolekar further discloses generate, prior to transmitting the request, credentials corresponding to an authentication mechanism included in the list of authentication mechanism supported by the UE, wherein the credentials are included in the request [Zhang, paragraphs 34-45, 78]. Regarding claims 6, 15, Zhang-Kolekar further discloses wherein the request is a first message of an authentication procedure between the UE [Zhang, paragraphs 34-45, 78] and the ECS [Kolekar, Abstract, paragraph 112]. Regarding claims 7, 16, Zhang-Kolekar further discloses wherein the request includes two or more authentication mechanisms comprising at least a first authentication mechanism with corresponding credentials and a second authentication mechanisms without corresponding credentials [Zhang, paragraphs 34-48, 78]. Regarding claims 8, 17, Zhang-Kolekar further discloses wherein the selected authentication mechanism is the first authentication mechanism and the response further indicates that a negotiation between the UE and the ECS is successful [Zhang, paragraphs 34-48, 78]. Regarding claims 9, 18, Zhang-Kolekar further discloses wherein the selected authentication mechanism is the second authentication mechanism, wherein the processing circuitry is further configured to: generate credentials for the selected authentication mechanisms based on the response [Zhang, paragraphs 34-48, 78]. Regarding claim 10, Zhang-Kolekar further discloses wherein the request is configured to indicate that the first authentication procedure is prioritized over the second authentication procedure by the UE [Zhang, paragraphs 34-48, 78]. Conclusion Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to WILLIAM J GOODCHILD whose telephone number is (571)270-1589. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 8am-4:30pm. 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, Jeff Pwu can be reached at 571-272-6798. 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. /William J. Goodchild/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2433
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Jul 26, 2024
Application Filed
Dec 19, 2025
Non-Final Rejection — §103, §112
Mar 30, 2026
Response Filed

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12591666
DETECTING MODEL INVERSION ATTACKS IN FEDERATED LEARNING
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 31, 2026
Patent 12587551
TECHNIQUES FOR MONITORING PRIVILEGED USERS AND DETECTING ANOMALOUS ACTIVITIES IN A COMPUTING ENVIRONMENT
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 24, 2026
Patent 12580925
DETERMINING SECURITY RISKS ASSOCIATED WITH AN ACCESS DESIGN BASED ON ACCESS HEALTH SCORES
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 17, 2026
Patent 12574355
Zero Trust Network Access and Virtual Private Network Client Offloading
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 10, 2026
Patent 12574248
METHOD FOR VERIFYING DIGITAL SIGNATURES, VEHICLE COMPUTING UNIT AND VEHICLE
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 10, 2026
Study what changed to get past this examiner. Based on 5 most recent grants.

AI Strategy Recommendation

Get an AI-powered prosecution strategy using examiner precedents, rejection analysis, and claim mapping.
Powered by AI — typically takes 5-10 seconds

Prosecution Projections

1-2
Expected OA Rounds
83%
Grant Probability
99%
With Interview (+35.9%)
3y 4m
Median Time to Grant
Low
PTA Risk
Based on 739 resolved cases by this examiner. Grant probability derived from career allow rate.

Sign in for Full Analysis

Enter your email to receive a magic link. No password needed.

Free tier: 3 strategy analyses per month