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 .
Response to Amendment
1. This action is in response to the amendment filed on February 3, 2026. Claims 1-14 were previously pending consideration. Per the received amendment, claims 2, 5, 7, 10, 11, 12, and 13 have been cancelled.
2. Claims 1, 3-4, 6, 8-9, and 14 are currently pending consideration.
Response to Arguments
3. Applicant's arguments filed on February 3, 2026 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive for the following reasons:
4. The Applicant argues that the Cited Prior Art (CPA), Kashchenko et al. (U.S. Patent 7,584,508), does not disclose the at least one component for which the occurrence of the factor that reduces the reliability thereof has been detected continues operation of the at least one component with reduced reliability during a period in which the factor that reduces the reliability persists, and each of the one or more components that has received the notification of the instruction of security enhancement implements the security enhancement. This argument is not found persuasive. The CPA discloses reducing a computational load while adjust security (column 7, lines 5-40: the security module includes a variety of components and the security module provides the ability to dynamically adjust the operation of individual functions or components based on the needs of the system including being more or less aggressive in a firewall; column 8, lines 53 – column 9, line 10: can run a reduced function firewall; column 13, lines 19-33: risk profile module assesses risk periodically and adjusts the security level of the components). The CPA discloses that a component continues operation with reduced reliability while the factor that reduces reliability persists (column 12, lines 55-60: the operation of security module 400 is reduced while the subset of more essential security-related functionality is provided, thereby facilitating usability of PID 10 while providing security protection for PID10 corresponding to the current set of security risks). There are different factors that can require the reduced operation of the firewall, wherein the firewall is one of many components that would receive the instruction of security enhancements. For example, the CPA discloses that when the battery life is running low reducing the functionality of the security module (Figure 6, column 15, lines 26-40). The allocation of resources can be dictated by a risk profile module (column 16, lines 25-53) wherein updates can be allocated based on desired functionality (column 16, lines 35-53). Therefore, the argument is not found persuasive and the rejection is applied to the claims as presented below.
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)(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.
4. Claim(s) 1, 3-4, 6, 8-9, and 14 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Kashchenko et al. (U.S. Patent 7,584,508).
Regarding claim 1, Kashchenko discloses:
A system comprising one or more components and a system control part, comprising:
at least one processor (column 4, lines 65-67: a processor); and
a memory in circuit communication with the at least one processor (column 4, lines 65-67: processor interfaced with a RAM and non-volatile memory), wherein the processor is configured to execute program instructions stored in the memory to perform:
notifying an instruction of security enhancement to the one or more components when detecting an occurrence of a factor that reduces reliability of at least one component of the one or more components (column 7, lines 5-40: the security module includes a variety of components and the security module provides the ability to dynamically adjust the operation of individual functions or components based on the needs of the system including being more or less aggressive in a firewall), and
notifying an instruction to remove security enhancement to the components when detecting a recovery of the component's reliability (column 7, lines 5-40: the security module includes a variety of components and the security module provides the ability to dynamically adjust the operation of individual functions or components based on the needs of the system including being more or less aggressive in a firewall; column 8, lines 53 – column 9, line 10: can run a reduced function firewall; column 13, lines 19-33: risk profile module assesses risk periodically and adjusts the security level of the components), wherein
at least one component for which the occurrence of the factor that reduces the reliability thereof has been detected continues operation of the at least one component with reduced reliability during a period in which the factor that reduces the reliability persists (column 7, lines 5-40: the security module includes a variety of components and the security module provides the ability to dynamically adjust the operation of individual functions or components based on the needs of the system including being more or less aggressive in a firewall; column 8, lines 53 – column 9, line 10: can run a reduced function firewall; column 13, lines 19-33: risk profile module assesses risk periodically and adjusts the security level of the components), and
each of the one or more components that has received the notification of the instruction of security enhancement implements the security enhancement (column 7, lines 5-40: the security module includes a variety of components and the security module provides the ability to dynamically adjust the operation of individual functions or components based on the needs of the system including being more or less aggressive in a firewall; column 8, lines 53 – column 9, line 10: can run a reduced function firewall; column 13, lines 19-33: risk profile module assesses risk periodically and adjusts the security level of the components).
Claim 4 is rejected as applied above in rejecting claim 1. Furthermore, Kashchenko discloses:
The system according to claim 1, each of the one or more components that has received the notification of the instruction to remove security enhancement removes the security enhancement (column 7, lines 5-40: the security module includes a variety of components and the security module provides the ability to dynamically adjust the operation of individual functions or components based on the needs of the system including being more or less aggressive in a firewall; column 8, lines 53 – column 9, line 10: can run a reduced function firewall; column 13, lines 19-33: risk profile module assesses risk periodically and adjusts the security level of the components).
Regarding claim 6, Kashchenko discloses:
A control method in a system comprising one or more components and a system control part, the control method performed by the system control part, the control method comprising:
notifying an instruction security enhancement to the one or more components when detecting an occurrence of a factor that reduces reliability of at least one component of the one or more components (column 7, lines 5-40: the security module includes a variety of components and the security module provides the ability to dynamically adjust the operation of individual functions or components based on the needs of the system including being more or less aggressive in a firewall); and
notifying an instruction to remove security enhancement to the one or more components when detecting a recovery of at least one component’s reliability (column 7, lines 5-40: the security module includes a variety of components and the security module provides the ability to dynamically adjust the operation of individual functions or components based on the needs of the system including being more or less aggressive in a firewall; column 8, lines 53 – column 9, line 10: can run a reduced function firewall; column 13, lines 19-33: risk profile module assesses risk periodically and adjusts the security level of the components), and wherein
at least one component for which the occurrence of the factor that reduces the reliability thereof has been detected continues operation of the at least one component with reduced reliability during a period in which the factor that reduces the reliability persists (column 7, lines 5-40: the security module includes a variety of components and the security module provides the ability to dynamically adjust the operation of individual functions or components based on the needs of the system including being more or less aggressive in a firewall; column 8, lines 53 – column 9, line 10: can run a reduced function firewall; column 13, lines 19-33: risk profile module assesses risk periodically and adjusts the security level of the components), and
each of the one or more components that has received the notification of the instruction of security enhancement implements the security enhancement (column 7, lines 5-40: the security module includes a variety of components and the security module provides the ability to dynamically adjust the operation of individual functions or components based on the needs of the system including being more or less aggressive in a firewall; column 8, lines 53 – column 9, line 10: can run a reduced function firewall; column 13, lines 19-33: risk profile module assesses risk periodically and adjusts the security level of the components).
Regarding claim 9, Kashchenko discloses:
A computer-readable non-transitory recording medium recording a program, the program, in a system comprising one or more components and a system control part, causing a computer included in the system control part to execute processings of:
notifying an instruction of security enhancement to the one or more components when detecting an occurrence of a factor that reduces reliability of at least one component of the one or more components (column 7, lines 5-40: the security module includes a variety of components and the security module provides the ability to dynamically adjust the operation of individual functions or components based on the needs of the system including being more or less aggressive in a firewall); and
notifying an instruction to remove security enhancement to the one or more components when detecting a recovery of the at least one component’s reliability (column 7, lines 5-40: the security module includes a variety of components and the security module provides the ability to dynamically adjust the operation of individual functions or components based on the needs of the system including being more or less aggressive in a firewall; column 8, lines 53 – column 9, line 10: can run a reduced function firewall; column 13, lines 19-33: risk profile module assesses risk periodically and adjusts the security level of the components), and wherein the program
causing a computer included in the at least one component for which the occurrence of the factor that reduces the reliability thereof has been detected continues operation of the at least one component with reduced reliability during a period in which the factor that reduces the reliability persists (column 7, lines 5-40: the security module includes a variety of components and the security module provides the ability to dynamically adjust the operation of individual functions or components based on the needs of the system including being more or less aggressive in a firewall; column 8, lines 53 – column 9, line 10: can run a reduced function firewall; column 13, lines 19-33: risk profile module assesses risk periodically and adjusts the security level of the components), and
causing a computer included in each of the one or more components that has received the notification of the instruction of security enhancement implements the security enhancement (column 7, lines 5-40: the security module includes a variety of components and the security module provides the ability to dynamically adjust the operation of individual functions or components based on the needs of the system including being more or less aggressive in a firewall; column 8, lines 53 – column 9, line 10: can run a reduced function firewall; column 13, lines 19-33: risk profile module assesses risk periodically and adjusts the security level of the components).
Claim 14 is rejected as applied above in rejecting claim 6. Furthermore, Kashchenko discloses:
The control method according to claim 6, wherein each of the one or more components that has received the notification of the instruction to remove security enhancement removes the security enhancement (column 7, lines 5-40: the security module includes a variety of components and the security module provides the ability to dynamically adjust the operation of individual functions or components based on the needs of the system including being more or less aggressive in a firewall; column 8, lines 53 – column 9, line 10: can run a reduced function firewall; column 13, lines 19-33: risk profile module assesses risk periodically and adjusts the security level of the components).
Conclusion
THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a).
A shortened statutory period for reply to this final action is set to expire THREE MONTHS from the mailing date of this action. In the event a first reply is filed within TWO MONTHS of the mailing date of this final action and the advisory action is not mailed until after the end of the THREE-MONTH shortened statutory period, then the shortened statutory period will expire on the date the advisory action is mailed, and any nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) pursuant to 37 CFR 1.136(a) will be calculated from the mailing date of the advisory action. In no event, however, will the statutory period for reply expire later than SIX MONTHS from the mailing date of this final action.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to KAVEH ABRISHAMKAR whose telephone number is (571)272-3786. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 9-5:30.
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, Jung Kim can be reached at 571-272-3804. 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.
/KAVEH ABRISHAMKAR/
02/26/2026Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2494