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 .
Specification
The title of the invention is not descriptive. A new title is required that is clearly indicative of the invention to which the claims are directed.
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 expiry" in line 4. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
Claim 1 recites the limitation "the first messages" in line 8. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
Claim 1 recites the limitation "the secure phase" in line 12. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
Claim 7 recites the limitation "the expiry" in line 5. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
Claim 1 is 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 applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the applicant), regards as the invention.
Claim 1 is unclear, the phrase “listening for a second message until the expiry of a waiting time” is unclear, as it is unknown who is listening for a second message.
Claim 1 is unclear, which recites, “sending, by the first device, a first message…”, then recites “listening, by the second device, for the first messages after receiving a first button press”, making this limitation unclear as the second device is listening for multiple first messages, yet only one first message was sent.
Claims 1, 7 (claim 7 is similar although written differently) is further unclear relating to the phrase, “if one or more first messages have been received from only one device”, if a first message is received, there can only be one “first” message, yet the limitation is possibly accepting multiple first messages from the same device.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(d):
(d) REFERENCE IN DEPENDENT FORMS.—Subject to subsection (e), a claim in dependent form shall contain a reference to a claim previously set forth and then specify a further limitation of the subject matter claimed. A claim in dependent form shall be construed to incorporate by reference all the limitations of the claim to which it refers.
The following is a quotation of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, fourth paragraph:
Subject to the following paragraph [i.e., the fifth paragraph of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112], a claim in dependent form shall contain a reference to a claim previously set forth and then specify a further limitation of the subject matter claimed. A claim in dependent form shall be construed to incorporate by reference all the limitations of the claim to which it refers.
Claim 10 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(d) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, 4th paragraph, as being of improper dependent form for failing to further limit the subject matter of the claim upon which it depends, or for failing to include all the limitations of the claim upon which it depends. Claim 10 is dependent on claim 5 and does not further limit claim 5. Applicant may cancel the claim(s), amend the claim(s) to place the claim(s) in proper dependent form, rewrite the claim(s) in independent form, or present a sufficient showing that the dependent claim(s) complies with the statutory requirements.
Claim 11 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(d) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, 4th paragraph, as being of improper dependent form for failing to further limit the subject matter of the claim upon which it depends, or for failing to include all the limitations of the claim upon which it depends. Claim 11 changes the embodiment of claim 5, but does not further limit claim 5. Applicant may cancel the claim(s), amend the claim(s) to place the claim(s) in proper dependent form, rewrite the claim(s) in independent form, or present a sufficient showing that the dependent claim(s) complies with the statutory requirements.
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, 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, 3-5 and 7-11 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Gollakota et al., (Secure In-Band Wireless Pairing; 2011, from IDS of 11/25/2024), hereinafter “Gollakota”, and further in view of Carlson et al., (US Publication No. 2006/0105794), hereinafter “Carlson”.
Regarding claims 1, 7 Gollakota discloses
sending, by the first device, a first message after receiving a first button press [Gollakota, section 5.2, see also section 1 and section 3.1];
listening for a second message until the expiry of a waiting time [Gollakota, section 5.2],
aborting, by the first device, the push-button protocol if no second messages have been received or if second messages have been received from more than one device,
listening, by the second device, for the first messages after receiving a first button press and until the expiry of a waiting time [Gollakota, section 5.2, see also section 1 and section 3.1],
sending, by the second device, a second message if a first message has been received [Gollakota, section 5.2, see also section 1 and section 3.1; Every time a TEA message is received, the registrar records the message payload, and immediately sends its own TEA message in response];
proceeding to the secure phase if one or more first messages have been received from only one device, and the wait time has ended [Gollakota, section 5.2], and
aborting, by the second device, the push-button protocol if no first messages have been received or if the first messages have been received from more than one device [Gollakota, section 5.2].
Gollakota does not specifically disclose, however Carlson teaches
wherein the waiting time is shortened by the detection of a subsequent button press on the first device [Carlson, paragraph 10, a press of the P2V button activates the P2V session and a second push of the P2V button or another designated button ends the session];
wherein the waiting time is shortened by the detection of a subsequent button press on the second device [Carlson, paragraph 10, a press of the P2V button activates the P2V session and a second push of the P2V button or another designated button ends the session].
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to include a second push of the button in order to provide security for the system when there is no longer a need to have the channel open. It would have been obvious to combine Carlson with Gollakota as both arts relate to a similar field.
Regarding claim 3, Gollakota-Carlson further discloses
where the first device sends first messages over more than one channel [Gollakota, section 5.2].
Regarding claim 4, Gollakota-Carlson further discloses
where the first device listens for first messages on more than one channel [Gollakota, section 5.2].
Regarding claims 5, 10-11, Gollakota-Carlson further discloses
where the first message is a Push Button Presence Announcement, the second message is a Push Button Presence Announcement Response [Gollakota, section 5.2] and the secure phase of the protocol starts with the PKIEX protocol from the Device Provisioning Protocol (DPP) [Gollakota, section 5.2, see also section 1 and section 3.1].
6. (Cancelled)
Regarding claim 8, Gollakota-Carlson further discloses
where the first device sends first messages over more than one channel [Gollakota, section 5.2].
Regarding claim 9, Gollakota-Carlson further discloses
where the second first device listens for first messages on more than one channel [Gollakota, section 5.2].
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to WILLIAM J GOODCHILD whose telephone number is (571)270-1589. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 8am-4:30pm.
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, Jeff Pwu can be reached at 571-272-6798. 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.
/William J. Goodchild/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2433