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 .
DETAILED ACTION
Currently pending claims are 1 – 14 & 20 – 29.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 101
35 U.S.C. 101 reads as follows:
Whoever invents or discovers any new and useful process, machine, manufacture, or composition of matter, or any new and useful improvement thereof, may obtain a patent therefor, subject to the conditions and requirements of this title.
Claim 20 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 101 because the claimed invention is directed to non-statutory subject matter where “A user equipment (UE)” as recited in the claim does not fall into any of statutory classes defined in 35 U.S.C 101. It may be merely directed to software per se or the claimed subject matter is drawn to the abstract structure of architecture. Examiner respectfully suggests to amend the claim as “An apparatus (or system) of a user equipment (UE)”. Any other claims not addressed are rejected by virtue of their dependency.
Claim 25 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 101 because the claimed invention is directed to non-statutory subject matter where “A network node” as recited in the claim does not fall into any of statutory classes defined in 35 U.S.C 101. It may be merely directed to software per se or the claimed subject matter is drawn to the abstract structure of architecture. Examiner respectfully suggests to amend the claim as “An apparatus (or system) of a network node”. Any other claims not addressed are rejected by virtue of their dependency.
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.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph:
The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the applicant regards as his invention.
Claims 1 & 20 recite the limitation "performing an integrity check on the second message”. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim because the claim language of "the second message", as recited, is unclear with respect to exactly what is a second message (such as a conjunction with what kind of protocol data unit is not clear at all) and as such, that prevents continuing a precise progress of the examination as needed – Accordingly, Examiner respectfully notes due to no response from the client-side attorney, as when requested, it should be reasonably assumed, under this situation, NOT to necessitate a re-opening of a second Non-final Office action once related to prior-art issues of ground rejections.
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.
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 of this title, 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 exclaimed 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 – 14 & 20 – 29 are rejected under 35 U.S.C.103 as being unpatentable over Lee et al. (U.S. Patent 11,070,981), in view of Teyeb et al. (U.S. Patent 11,051,354).
As per claim 1 & 20, Lee teaches a method performed by a user equipment (UE), comprising:
receiving a first message for initial Access Stratum (AS) security activation via a higher layer protocol, wherein the first message includes configuration information for security in a lower layer protocol responsible for radio resource allocation (Lee: FIG. 3 / E-355, Col. 2 Line 31 – 36 / Line 17 – 20 & Col. 16 Line 53 – 64:
(a) a network entity provisions to a UE (i.e. received by the UE) an initial access stratum (AS) security protection algorithm for securing an initial AS message to assure initial AS security activation (Lee: Col. 2 Line 33 – 36) that includes security setup information (i.e. configuration) for integrity protection besides of encryption protection between the UE and the network (i.e. base station) (Lee: Col. 2 Line 17 – 20), wherein the configuration information is provided through a 1st message of a higher layer Radio Resource Control (RRC) protocol corresponding to a lower layer MAC protocol (Lee: see above & Col. 16 Line 53 – 64: networking layered-protocol structure) – this is consistent with the disclosure of the instant specification (SPEC-PG.PUB: Para [0035] Line 1 – 3: the higher layer is an RRC protocol and the lower layer is an MAC protocol).
(b) Examiner notes, even though Lee teaches provisioning an initial access stratum (AS) security protection including security setup information (i.e. configuration) for integrity protection between the UE and the network base station via a RRC connection protocol (see above), however, Lee does not disclose expressly configuration information for security of integrity check for a lower layer protocol.
(c) Teyeb (& Lee) teaches configuration information for security (i.e. integrity protection) in a lower layer protocol (Teyeb: Col. 3 Line 2 – 7 & Col. 6 Line 33 – 35: (a) during a connection of an RRC protocol, a process of integrity check is indicated and performed from the lower layer protocol (Teyeb: Col. 3 Line 2 – 7) and (b) generating / deriving an integrity protection key for a RRC message (i.e. Radio Resource Control (RRC) protocol), wherein the integrity key is associated with previous configuration information designated for the integrity protection algorithm (Teyeb: Col. 6 Line 33 – 35).
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention was made to propose the modification of provisioning configuration information for security (i.e. integrity protection) in a lower layer protocol because Teyeb teaches to alternatively, effectively and securely provide a comprehensive security mechanism by providing integrity check as indicated and performed from the lower layer protocol, wherein generating / deriving an integrity protection key for a RRC message (i.e. Radio Resource Control (RRC) protocol) and the integrity key is associated with previous configuration information designated for the integrity protection algorithm (see above) within the Lee’s system of provisioning an initial access stratum (AS) security protection including security setup information (i.e. configuration) for integrity protection between the UE and the network base station via a RRC connection protocol (see above).
in response to receiving the first message, deriving an integrity key for the lower layer protocol based on the configuration information (Teyeb: Col. 6 Line 33 – 35: generating / deriving an integrity protection key for a RRC message (i.e. Radio Resource Control (RRC) protocol), wherein the integrity key is associated with existing previous configuration information designated for the integrity protection algorithm (i.e. qualified as one type of configuration information, as recited).
performing an integrity check on the second message based on the derived integrity key, wherein the first message is included in a second message of the lower layer protocol (Teyeb: see above, Col. 3 Line 5 – 6 & Col. 6 Line 33 – 35:
(a) performing an integrity check on the lower layer message (i.e. 2nd message) of a protocol data unit (Teyeb: Col. 3 Line 5 – 6) in accordance with a generation of an integrity protection key (Teyeb: Col. 6 Line 33 – 35), wherein
(b) according to a typical industrial standard of processing the networking layered-protocol structure in the field, on the TX side, before the HW transceiver (T/R) transmitting out the data, the higher-layer protocol data unit is processed first and is then encapsulated at the inner-layer of a data unit to be delivered to the DEST entity while the lower-layer protocol is encapsulated at the outer-layer of the TX message (packet / message) such that the lower-layer protocol data unit is thereby transmitted out first. Accordingly, on the RX side, the lower-layer protocol data unit of the RX message (packet) is received first at the HW-T/R (i.e. the outer-layer of the protocol data unit) and thus upon the completion of receiving the message (packet), the lower-layer MAC protocol data unit of the 2nd –message that includes the higher-layer RRC protocol data unit of the 1st –message as a complete message is then presented and applied to the security applications for a complete integrity check using the derived integrity protection key (Lee: see above & Col. 16 Line 53 – 64) – this is consistent with the disclosure of the instant specification (SPEC-PG.PUB: Figure 9 – the higher-layer RRC message is encapsulated inside (within) the lower layer MAC protocol message as a complete message during the communications over the network). As such, on the receiving side, the first message of the higher-layer protocol data unit is included within (inside) a second message of the lower layer protocol data unit as a complete message to meet the claim language as recited; and
(c) integrity protection mechanisms should be equally important to be applied at both ends of the source and destination entities.
As per claim 10 & 25, Lee teaches a method performed by a network node, comprising:
transmitting a first message for initial Access Stratum (AS) security activation via a higher layer protocol, wherein the first message includes configuration information for security in a lower layer protocol responsible for radio resource allocation (Lee: FIG. 3 / E-355, Col. 2 Line 31 – 36 / Line 17 – 20, Col. 16 Line 53 – 64:
(a) a network entity provisions and transmits to a UE an initial access stratum (AS) security protection algorithm for securing an initial AS message to assure initial AS security activation (Lee: Col. 2 Line 33 – 36) that includes security setup information (i.e. configuration) for integrity protection besides of encryption protection between the UE and the network (i.e. base station) (Lee: Col. 2 Line 17 – 20), wherein the configuration information is provided through a 1st message of a higher layer Radio Resource Control (RRC) protocol corresponding to a lower layer MAC protocol (Lee: Col. 16 Line 58 – 64) – this is consistent with the disclosure of the instant specification (SPEC-PG.PUB: Para [0035] Line 1 – 3: the higher layer is an RRC protocol and the lower layer is an MAC protocol),
(b) Examiner notes, even though Lee teaches provisioning an initial access stratum (AS) security protection including security setup information (i.e. configuration) for integrity protection between the UE and the network base station via a RRC connection protocol (see above), however, Lee does not disclose expressly configuration information for security of integrity check for a lower layer protocol.
(c) Teyeb (& Lee) teaches configuration information for security (i.e. integrity protection) in a lower layer protocol (Teyeb: Col. 3 Line 2 – 7 & Col. 6 Line 33 – 35: (a) during a connection of an RRC protocol, a process of integrity check is indicated and performed from the lower layer protocol (Teyeb: Col. 3 Line 2 – 7) and (b) generating / deriving an integrity protection key for a RRC message (i.e. Radio Resource Control (RRC) protocol), wherein the integrity key is associated with previous configuration information designated for the integrity protection algorithm (Teyeb: Col. 6 Line 33 – 35); and the first message is included in a second message of the lower layer protocol (Lee: see above: according to a typical industrial standard of processing the networking layered-protocol structure in the field, on the TX side, before the HW transceiver (T/R) transmitting out the data, the higher-layer protocol data unit is processed first and is then encapsulated at the inner-layer of a data unit to be delivered to the DEST entity while the lower-layer protocol is encapsulated at the outer-layer of the TX message (packet / message) such that the lower-layer protocol data unit is thereby transmitted out first. Accordingly, on the RX side, the lower-layer protocol data unit of the RX message (packet) is received first at the HW-T/R (i.e. the outer-layer of the protocol data unit) and thus upon the completion of receiving the message (packet), the lower-layer protocol data unit of the 2nd –message that includes the higher-layer protocol data unit of the 1st –message as a complete message is then presented and applied to the security applications for a complete integrity check using the derived integrity protection key (Lee: see above & Col. 16 Line 53 – 64: networking layered-protocol structure) – this is consistent with the disclosure of the instant specification (SPEC-PG.PUB: Figure 9 – the higher-layer RRC message is encapsulated inside (within) the lower layer MAC protocol message as a complete message during the communications over the network) (see above) – As such, on the receiving side, the first message of the higher-layer protocol data unit is included within (inside) a second message of the lower layer protocol data unit as a complete message to meet the claim language as recited.
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention was made to propose the modification of provisioning configuration information for security (i.e. integrity protection) in a lower layer protocol because Teyeb teaches to alternatively, effectively and securely provide a comprehensive security mechanism by providing integrity check as indicated and performed from the lower layer protocol, wherein generating / deriving an integrity protection key for a RRC message (i.e. Radio Resource Control (RRC) protocol) and the integrity key is associated with previous configuration information designated for the integrity protection algorithm (see above) within the Lee’s system of provisioning an initial access stratum (AS) security protection including security setup information (i.e. configuration) for integrity protection between the UE and the network base station via a RRC connection protocol (see above).
deriving an integrity key for the lower layer protocol based on the configuration information; and integrity protecting the second message based on the derived integrity key (Teyeb: Col. 6 Line 33 – 35 & Col. 3 Line 2 – 6: (a) generating / deriving an integrity protection key for a RRC message (i.e. as per Radio Resource Control (RRC) protocol), wherein the integrity key is associated with existing previous configuration information designated for the integrity protection algorithm (i.e. qualified as one type of configuration information, as recited, (b) performing an integrity check from the lower layer message (i.e. 2nd message) of a protocol data unit (Teyeb: Col. 3 Line 5 – 6) in accordance with a generation of an integrity protection key (Teyeb: Col. 6 Line 33 – 35), and (c) integrity protection mechanisms should be equally important to be applied at both ends of the source and destination entities).
As per claim 2, 11, 21 & 26, Lee as modified teaches wherein the higher layer protocol is a Radio Resource Control (RRC) protocol, the lower layer protocol is a Medium Access Control (MAC) protocol, and the second message comprises a MAC protocol data unit (PDU) (Lee: see above & Col. 2 Line 33 – 36 and Col. 16 Line 58 – 64: a network entity provisions to a UE (i.e. received by the UE) an initial access stratum (AS) security protection algorithm for securing an initial AS message to assure initial AS security activation (Lee: Col. 2 Line 33 – 36) that includes security setup information (i.e. configuration) for integrity protection besides of encryption protection between the UE and the network (i.e. base station) (Lee: Col. 2 Line 17 – 20), wherein the configuration information is provided through a 1st message of a higher layer Radio Resource Control (RRC) protocol corresponding to a lower layer MAC protocol (Lee: Col. 16 Line 58 – 64)).
As per claim 3, 12, 22 & 27, Lee as modified teaches determining whether the integrity check failed; and in response to determining that the integrity check failed, performing at least one of: transmitting a Radio Resource Control (RRC) message indicating a security failure; transmitting an indication to the network indicating a security failure to the Medium Access Control (MAC) layer; and performing an integrity check at the MAC layer internally at the UE (Lee: see above & Col. 2 Line 24 – 30 and Col. 16 Line 58 – 64: upon detection of integrity check failure, the UE detaches from the target base station of the network that provides an implication of a security failure to the network) || (Teyeb: see above & Col. 3 Line 2 – 6: upon detection of integrity check failure, a UE initiates a re-connection procedure with RRC connection message that provides an implication of a security failure to the network).
As per claim 4, 13, 23 & 28, Lee as modified teaches determining whether the integrity check succeeded; and in response to determining that the integrity check succeeded, performing one or more of: transmitting at least one subsequent Medium Access Control (MAC) protocol data unit (PDU) with integrity protection; and receiving at least one subsequent Medium Access Control (MAC) protocol data unit (PDU) with integrity protection (Lee: see above & Col. 2 Line 17 – 20 and Col. 16 Line 58 – 64 || Teyeb: see above & Col. 3 Line 2 – 6: upon a success of the integrity check, performing integrity protection performed and indicated from the low layer).
As per claim 5, Lee as modified teaches in response to determining that the integrity check succeeded, transmitting a Radio Resource Control (RRC) complete message within a MAC PDU that is integrity protected using a MAC-I* calculated according to the derived integrity key (Lee: see above & Col. 2 Line 17 – 20 and Col. 16 Line 58 – 64 || Teyeb: see above & Col. 3 Line 2 – 6) – this is consistent with the disclosure of the instant specification (SPEC-PG.PUB: Figure 9 – the higher-layer RRC message is encapsulated inside (within) the lower layer MAC protocol message as a complete message during the communications over the network).
As per claim 6, 8 – 9, 14 & 29, Lee as modified teaches wherein the configuration information comprises an indication of at least one integrity protection algorithm for Medium Access Control (MAC) layer security, and/or an indication of at least one encryption and/or ciphering algorithm for the MAC layer security (Lee: see above & Col. 2 Line 33 – 35, Col. 37 Line 20 – 30 and Col. 16 Line 58 – 64: an additional UE-specific encryption (ciphering) key / algorithm) || Teyeb: see above & Col. 3 Line 2 – 6 and Col. 6 Line 33 – 35: security protection on the lower layer).
As per claim 7, 24 & 28, the instant claim is directed to a claimed content having functionality corresponding to the Claims 1 – 6, and are rejected by a similar rationale.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to LONGBIT CHAI whose telephone number is (571)272-3788. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday 9:00am-5:00pm.
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, Lynn D. Feild can be reached at 571-272-2092. 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.
---------------------------------------------------
/Longbit Chai/
Longbit Chai E.E. Ph.D.
Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2431
No. #2594 – 2025 ---------------------------------------------------