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
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.
Claim 1 recites the limitation "the not-yet-processed attribute value" in the 8th paragraph of claim 1. A not-yet-processed value was not previously described. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. Hence, claims 1 – 8 are rejected based on 35 USC 112(b).
Claim 9 recites the limitation "the not-yet-processed attribute value" in the 4th paragraph of claim 9. A not-yet-processed value was not previously described. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. Hence, claims 9-14 are rejected based on 35 USC 112(b).
Claim 15 recites the limitation "the not-yet-processed attribute value" in the 4th paragraph of claim 15. A not-yet-processed value was not previously described. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
Claim 15 also recites the limitation "the already-processed processing-target data" in the 4th paragraph of claim 15. An already-processed processing-target data was not previously described. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
Claim 15 also recites the limitation "the data receiving apparatus" in the last paragraph of claim 15. A data receiving apparatus was not previously described. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. Hence, claims 15 – 20 are rejected based on 35 USC 112(b).
Claim 26 recites the limitation "the not-yet-processed attribute value" in the 4th paragraph of claim 26. A not-yet-processed value was not previously described. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. Hence, claims 26 are rejected based on 35 USC 112(b).
Hence claims 1 – 20 and 26 are rejected based on 35 USC 112(b).
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 1 – 20 and 26 would be allowable if rewritten or amended to overcome the rejection(s) under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), 2nd paragraph, set forth in this Office action.
Claims 21 – 25 are allowable over prior art.
The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter: The claims require a data providing apparatus that generates a sanitizable signature, acquire a plurality of range proof data, generate a signature for each range proof data and send the data set, sanitizable signature, range proof data and digital signature to a data processing device.
A data processing device that performs a data generalizing process, processes the sanitizable signature, selects a range proof data corresponding to an attribute, and sends a target data that is already processed, the processed sanitizable signature and the signature corresponding to the range proof data to a data receiving device.
A data receiving device configured to verify the data set that has already being processed, the sanitizable signature processed by the data processing apparatus, verify the digital signatures corresponding to the range proof data and verify the range proof data.
Relevant prior art Umeda teaches a source system in [0050][0078-79], a data processing system [0056-0057][0082][0084] and a target system in [0050][0102]. Umeda further teaches removing data that is not to be processed [0085] and presenting data with anonymized range information for data as described in Fig. 14 and Figs. 16 – 18 [0088]. The prior art does not teach the requirements of the claims.
Relevant prior art Fritzhanns, teaches range proof data being used to verify values of received masked data in [0063][0200][0211][0253]. The prior art does not teach the requirements of the claims.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to OLUGBENGA O IDOWU whose telephone number is (571)270-1450. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 8am - 5pm.
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 5712723804. 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.
/OLUGBENGA O IDOWU/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2494