DETAILED ACTION
Notice of 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 .
The present office action is responsive to communications received on 10/21/2024. Preliminary Amendment filed on 10/21/2024 has been entered. Claims 21-50 are pending.
Priority
Receipt is acknowledged of papers submitted under 35 U.S.C. 119(a)-(d), which papers have been placed of record in the file.
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted on 10/21/2024 is in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statement is being considered by the examiner.
Specification
The disclosure is objected to because of the following informalities:
The abstract should be in narrative form and generally limited to a single paragraph on a separate sheet within the range of 50 to 150 words in length. See 608.01(b).
Appropriate correction is required.
Claim Objections
Claims 24 and 34 are objected to because of the following informalities:
Claims 24 and 34 should begin with a capital letter and end with a period. See 608.01(m).
Appropriate correction is required.
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.
Claims 21-46 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 101 because the claimed invention is directed to non-statutory subject matter. Claim 21-46 are not directed to a process, machine, manufacture, or composition of matter because they recites “a computer-readable medium”, which can be considered signal per se. The dependent claims inherit the deficiencies of the claim upon which they ultimate claim and are rejected as well. Note that dependent claims 47-50 contain statutory subject matter because they recite “A communication apparatus comprising at least one processor and at least one computer-readable medium …”
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 21-50 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor, or for pre-AIA the applicant regards as the invention.
The rejection(s) under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) is/are determined by the following reasons:
Claim 21, 24, 31, 34, 41-42, and 44-45 recite the limitation “the method” in “aborting the method if the result of this verification/check is negative”. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. It is not clear what method being aborted here. The dependent claims inherit the deficiencies of the claim upon which they ultimate claim and are rejected as well.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 21-50 are allowable over prior art.
The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter:
Wiechers (US 11256222 B2) teaches the receiving of a digital key and, in the event of positive verification of the digital key, the performing of an action in accordance with the digital key. The action may be the opening of a door for the delivery of packages. The digital key contains authorization information (e.g., LocklD, ActionlD) and verification information (e.g., cryptographic signature).
Bölderl-Ermel (US 12204305 B2) teaches that an edge device of an automation system (e.g., production or manufacturing system) transmits usage data to a cloud system. The edge device optionally signs and encrypts the usage data.
However, the prior art fails to teach for claim 21, 31 – alone or in a reasonable combination –
“verifying a first identifier which is associated with the sender (“receiver” for claim 41, 44) apparatus and a first encryption key using a valid first certificate, wherein the verifying is performed by checking, using the first certificate, whether the first encryption key matches with the first identifier,
…
checking whether an authorization for the control instruction is associated with ((“for receiving the operating data is assigned to” for claim 41, 44)) the first encryption key and the first identifier,”
in the context of the claimed invention as a whole.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
US 20160224048 A1, by Rooyakkers, discloses a secure industrial control system comprising an action originator, an action authenticator, and an industrial element/industrial control (e.g., power supply). The action authenticator signs/encrypts an action request, and the industrial element/industrial controller verifies a signed action request and/or decrypts an encrypted action request.
US 20200106743 A1, by Park, discloses the protection of an IoT system by inserting one or more security devices. A security device monitors and detects unauthorized control commands from unauthorized sources within the IoT system.
US 20180183769 A1, by Sung, discloses that a gateway receives a monitoring signal (i.e., a parameter) from a local controller, encrypts and signs the monitoring signal, and provides the digital signature to a server.
US 8418255 B2 by Oelsner, discloses a system for securely transmitting operating data of a printing machine to a management computer. The operating data are encrypted and provided with a checksum. Connection setup involves the identity of the remote station being screened by means of a digital signature.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to HAN YANG whose telephone number is (408)918-7638. The examiner can normally be reached on Monday to Friday, 9:00-5:00.
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, Carl Colin can be reached on 571-272-3862. 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.
/HAN YANG/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2493
Prosecution Insights