DETAILED ACTION
The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
This is in response to the correspondence filed on 03/23/26. Claims 1-30 are still pending and have been considered below.
Specification
The amendments and/or arguments submitted by Applicant have been considered and are persuasive; thus, the previous objection(s) have been withdrawn.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 101
The amendments and/or arguments submitted by Applicant have been considered and are persuasive; thus, the previous rejection(s) have been withdrawn.
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) 1, 2, 9-20, 22 and 24-28 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Diorio et al. (2005/0058292) in view of Kawaguchi et al. (2009/0267737).
Claim 1: Diorio et al. discloses a passive wireless device, comprising:
a processing system that includes processor circuitry and memory circuitry that stores code, the processing system configured to cause the passive wireless device to:
receive a first message in accordance with a first physical layer (PHY) security key that secures communication between a source device and the passive wireless device(reader sends change tag key message to tag which is secured with at least the one-time pad value) [page 5, paragraphs 0055-0056 | figure 11]; and
transmit a second message via a backscattering of the first message and in accordance with a second PHY security key that secures communication between the passive wireless device and a reader device(tag backscatters back to the reader a partial key which may be noise encrypted) [page 5, paragraphs 0051 & 0055];
but does not explicitly disclose wherein the source device is a different device than the reader device.
However, Kawaguchi et al. discloses a similar invention [page 2, paragraph 0031] and further discloses wherein the source device is a different device than the reader device(the RFID system is implemented as a group of readers which together can act as one reader by way of a central control point; thus, one reader can transmit to the tag while another different reader receives the response from the tag) [page 3, paragraph 0044 | page 4, paragraph 0053].
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to further modify the disclosure of Diorio et al. with the additional features of Kawaguchi et al., in order to reduce costs while increasing performance of the RFID communication by replacing a single high cost reader with several low cost readers operating in unison, as suggested by Kawaguchi et al. [page 1, paragraphs 0002-0003].
Claim 2: Diorio et al. and Kawaguchi et al. disclose the passive wireless device of claim 1, and Diorio et al. further discloses wherein the processing system is further configured to cause the passive wireless device to: receive, from one or both of the source device and the reader device, an indication of the first PHY security key, the second PHY security key, or a combination thereof(amplitude modulation and phase modulation signals, one-time pad and/or partial keys) [page 3, paragraphs 0039-0040 | page 5, paragraphs 0055-0056].
Claim 9: Diorio et al. and Kawaguchi et al. disclose the passive wireless device of claim 1, and Diorio et al. further discloses wherein the processing system is further configured to cause the passive wireless device to: receive an indication of a first set of PHY security keys that secures communication between the source device and the passive wireless device, wherein a selection of the first PHY security key from the first set of PHY security keys is associated with the indication of the first set of PHY security keys [page 3, paragraphs 0039-0040 | page 5, paragraphs 0055-0056].
Claim 10: Diorio et al. and Kawaguchi et al. disclose the passive wireless device of claim 1, and Diorio et al. further discloses wherein the processing system is further configured to cause the passive wireless device to: receive an indication of a second set of PHY security keys that secures communication between the passive wireless device and the reader device, wherein a selection of the second PHY security key from the second set of PHY security keys is associated with the indication of the second set of PHY security keys [pages 4-5, paragraphs 0050-0051].
Claim 11: Diorio et al. and Kawaguchi et al. disclose the passive wireless device of claim 1, and Diorio et al. further discloses wherein the first PHY security key and the second PHY security key are stored at the passive wireless device prior to receiving the first message and transmitting the second message [pages 4-5, paragraphs 0050-0051].
Claim 12: Diorio et al. and Kawaguchi et al. disclose the passive wireless device of claim 1, and Diorio et al. further discloses wherein: the communication between the source device and the passive wireless device is secured in accordance with performing a first operation on the first message and the first PHY security key, the first operation including one or more of: a first modulation operation, a first multiplication operation, or a first logical XOR operation [page 3, paragraph 0039 | page 5, paragraphs 0053 & 0055]; and the communication between the reader device and the passive wireless device is secured in accordance with performing a second operation on the second message and the first PHY security key, the second operation including one or more of: a second modulation operation, a second multiplication operation, or a second logical XOR operation [page 3, paragraph 0039 | page 5, paragraphs 0053 & 0055].
Claim 13: Diorio et al. and Kawaguchi et al. disclose the passive wireless device of claim 1, and Diorio et al. further discloses wherein: the first message corresponds to a first radio wave associated with a first set of bits and the second message corresponds to a second radio wave associated with a second set of bits(combined analog and digital implementation of RFID or a digital implementation of RFID) [page 3, paragraph 0038 | pages 6-7, paragraphs 0069-0072]; and the backscattering by the passive wireless device is associated with an amplitude shift keying modulation of the first set of bits with the second set of bits via selective reflection by the passive wireless device [page 3, paragraph 0038 | pages 6-7, paragraphs 0069-0072].
Claim 14: Diorio et al. discloses a reader device, comprising:
a processing system that includes processor circuitry and memory circuitry that stores code, the processing system configured to cause the reader device to:
receive a first message from a source device via a passive wireless device, the passive wireless device associated with a backscattering of the first message [page 5, paragraphs 0051 & 0055]; and
decrypt the first message in accordance with a physical layer (PHY) security key that secures communication between the passive wireless device and the reader device [page 5, paragraphs 0055-0056 | figure 11];
but does not explicitly disclose wherein the source device is a different device than the reader device.
However, Kawaguchi et al. discloses a similar invention [page 2, paragraph 0031] and further discloses wherein the source device is a different device than the reader device [page 3, paragraph 0044 | page 4, paragraph 0053].
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to further modify the disclosure of Diorio et al. with the additional features of Kawaguchi et al., in order to reduce costs while increasing performance of the RFID communication by replacing a single high cost reader with several low cost readers operating in unison, as suggested by Kawaguchi et al. [page 1, paragraphs 0002-0003].
Claim 15: Diorio et al. and Kawaguchi et al. disclose the reader device of claim 14, and Diorio et al. further discloses wherein the processing system is further configured to cause the reader device to: receive an indication of the PHY security key [page 3, paragraphs 0039-0040 | page 5, paragraphs 0055-0056].
Claim 16: Diorio et al. and Kawaguchi et al. disclose the reader device of claim 14, and Diorio et al. further discloses wherein the processing system is further configured to cause the reader device to: transmit, to the passive wireless device, a set of one or more reference signals, wherein the PHY security key is associated with a channel measurement of the set of one or more reference signals [page 3, paragraphs 0039-0040 | page 5, paragraphs 0055-0056].
Claim 17: Diorio et al. and Kawaguchi et al. disclose the reader device of claim 14, and Diorio et al. further discloses wherein, to receive the first message, the processing system is further configured to cause the reader device to: receive the first message in accordance with a second PHY security key that secures communication between the source device and the reader device [page 3, paragraphs 0039-0040 | page 5, paragraphs 0055-0056].
Claim 18: Diorio et al. and Kawaguchi et al. disclose the reader device of claim 14, and Diorio et al. further discloses wherein the processing system is further configured to cause the reader device to: transmit, to the passive wireless device, a second message in accordance with a second PHY security key that secures communication between the reader device and the passive wireless device, wherein the source device and the reader device are a same device, and wherein the first message is a backscattered version of the second message [page 5, paragraphs 0051 & 0055].
Claim 19: Diorio et al. discloses a source device, comprising:
a processing system that includes processor circuitry and memory circuitry that stores code, the processing system configured to cause the source device to:
encrypt a first message in accordance with a physical layer (PHY) security key that secures communication between the source device and a passive wireless device [page 5, paragraphs 0055-0056 | figure 11]; and
transmit the first message to a reader device via the passive wireless device, the passive wireless device associated with a backscattering of the first message [page 5, paragraphs 0051 & 0055];
but does not explicitly disclose wherein the source device is a different device than the reader device.
However, Kawaguchi et al. discloses a similar invention [page 2, paragraph 0031] and further discloses wherein the source device is a different device than the reader device [page 3, paragraph 0044 | page 4, paragraph 0053].
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to further modify the disclosure of Diorio et al. with the additional features of Kawaguchi et al., in order to reduce costs while increasing performance of the RFID communication by replacing a single high cost reader with several low cost readers operating in unison, as suggested by Kawaguchi et al. [page 1, paragraphs 0002-0003].
Claim 20: Diorio et al. and Kawaguchi et al. disclose the source device of claim 19, and Diorio et al. further discloses wherein the processing system is further configured to cause the source device to: transmit, to the passive wireless device, an indication of the PHY security key [page 3, paragraphs 0039-0040 | page 5, paragraphs 0055-0056].
Claim 22: Diorio et al. and Kawaguchi et al. disclose the source device of claim 19, and Diorio et al. further discloses wherein the processing system is further configured to cause the source device to: transmit, to the passive wireless device, a set of one or more reference signals, wherein the PHY security key is associated with a channel measurement of the set of one or more reference signals [page 3, paragraphs 0039-0040 | page 5, paragraphs 0055-0056].
Claim 24: Diorio et al. and Kawaguchi et al. disclose the source device of claim 19, and Diorio et al. further discloses wherein the processing system is further configured to cause the source device to: transmit, to one or both of the passive wireless device and the reader device, an indication of a second PHY security key that secures communication between the passive wireless device and the reader device [page 3, paragraphs 0039-0040 | page 5, paragraphs 0055-0056].
Claim 25: Diorio et al. and Kawaguchi et al. disclose the source device of claim 19, and Diorio et al. further discloses wherein, to transmit the first message, the processing system is further configured to cause the source device to: transmit the first message in accordance with a second PHY security key that secures communication between the source device and the reader device [page 5, paragraphs 0051 & 0055].
Claim 26: Diorio et al. and Kawaguchi et al. disclose the source device of claim 19, and Diorio et al. further discloses wherein the processing system is further configured to cause the source device to: receive, from the passive wireless device, a second message in accordance with a second PHY security key that secures communication between the passive wireless device and the reader device, wherein the source device and the reader device are a same device, and wherein the second message is a backscattered version of the first message [page 5, paragraphs 0051 & 0055].
Claim 27: Diorio et al. discloses a method for wireless communications at a passive wireless device, comprising:
receiving a first message in accordance with a first physical layer (PHY) security key that secures communication between a source device and the passive wireless device [page 5, paragraphs 0055-0056 | figure 11]; and
transmitting a second message via a backscattering of the first message and in accordance with a second PHY security key that secures communication between the passive wireless device and a reader device [page 5, paragraphs 0051 & 0055];
but does not explicitly disclose wherein the source device is a different device than the reader device.
However, Kawaguchi et al. discloses a similar invention [page 2, paragraph 0031] and further discloses wherein the source device is a different device than the reader device [page 3, paragraph 0044 | page 4, paragraph 0053].
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to further modify the disclosure of Diorio et al. with the additional features of Kawaguchi et al., in order to reduce costs while increasing performance of the RFID communication by replacing a single high cost reader with several low cost readers operating in unison, as suggested by Kawaguchi et al. [page 1, paragraphs 0002-0003].
Claim 28: Diorio et al. and Kawaguchi et al. disclose the method of claim 27, and Diorio et al. further discloses further comprising: receiving, from one or both of the source device and the reader device, an indication of the first PHY security key, the second PHY security key, or a combination thereof [page 3, paragraphs 0039-0040 | page 5, paragraphs 0055-0056].
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 3-8, 21, 23, 29 and 30 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.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 03/23/26 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
Applicant generally argues that the prior art does not disclose a first and second physical security key that secures communications between the devices, as claimed.
However, Examiner respectfully notes that the current claim language appears to simply require that the first and/or second messages are received/transmitted “in accordance” with the respective key; and that the keys just “secure communication”, without specifying exactly what the securing entails.
Put another way, the current claim language does not appear to necessarily require that the respective keys are used to actually secure the reception and/or transmission of the claimed messages, such as by encrypting the messages with the corresponding keys; which may or may not be what Applicant’s arguments are alluding to.
Meanwhile, the partial keys of Diorio et al. are describes to facilitate a secure two-way communication link [page 5, paragraphs 0055-0056].
Therefore, Examiner respectfully disagrees and submits that the prior art does in fact disclose the allegedly deficient features, as clarified above.
Applicant’s arguments with respect to the newly introduced limitation(s) of the claim(s) have been considered but are moot because the new ground of rejection does not rely on any reference applied in the prior rejection of record for any teaching or matter specifically challenged in the argument.
Conclusion
Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP § 706.07(a). 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 EDWARD ZEE whose telephone number is (571)270-1686. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 9AM-5PM EST.
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, Amir Mehrmanesh can be reached at (571) 270-3351. 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.
/EDWARD ZEE/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2435
Prosecution Insights