DETAILED ACTION
Applicant’s preliminary amendment filed 12/6/2024 has been fully considered.
Claims 1-6 have been examined.
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.
Claims 3 and 5-6 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 applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the applicant), regards as the invention.
Claim 3 recites the limitation "the sum". There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
Claim 5 recites “A secret noise generation method used for a secret noise generation system including a first terminal and one or more second terminals, the method comprising”, it is indefinite what includes “including a first terminal and one or more second terminals”, the method or the system.
This is not intended to be a complete list of such indefiniteness issues.
The dependent claims included in the statement of rejection but not specifically addressed in the body of the rejection have inherited the deficiencies of their parent claim and have not resolved the deficiencies. Therefore, they are rejected based on the same rationale as applied to their parent claims above.
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 1-6 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 101 because the claimed invention is directed to an abstract idea without significantly more. The claim(s) recite(s) calculating a value in response to receiving information.
This judicial exception is not integrated into a practical application because they are broad enough to cover making a calculation in the mind, other than the generic computer components.
Regarding Prong One, these transmitting and calculating steps, as drafted, is a process that under its broadest reasonable interpretation, covers performance of the limitation in the mind and/or a mathematical concept but for the recitation of generic computer components.
That is, other than reciting “a processor” or “a terminal”, nothing in the claim element precludes the step from practically being performed in the human mind. For example, but for the “by a processor” language, the claim encompasses users receiving values and making calculations as introduction to elementary cryptography classes are taught.
Regarding Prong Two, there are no additional element(s) or a combination of elements in the claim that apply, rely on, or use the judicial exception in a manner that imposes a meaningful limit on the judicial exception, such that it is more than a drafting effort designed to monopolize the exception. Mere instructions to apply an exception using generic components cannot provide an inventive concept. Additionally, the mere nominal recitation of a generic processor does not take the claim limitation out of the mental processes and/or mathematical concepts/calculations grouping. Thus, the claims recite a mental process and are not patent eligible.
The claims are directed to well-understood, routine, and conventional activity as evidenced by the “background of the invention” section and the cited references.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
The following is a quotation of the appropriate paragraphs of 35 U.S.C. 102 that form the basis for the rejections under this section made in this Office action:
A person shall be entitled to a patent unless –
(a)(1) the claimed invention was patented, described in a printed publication, or in public use, on sale, or otherwise available to the public before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
(a)(2) the claimed invention was described in a patent issued under section 151, or in an application for patent published or deemed published under section 122(b), in which the patent or application, as the case may be, names another inventor and was effectively filed before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claims 1-6 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Wright (20210359846).
Regarding claims 1 and 5, Wright teaches (A secret noise generation method used for ) A secret noise generation system comprising: a first terminal; and one or more second terminals, (fig.1, par.200-205, processing system and clients/worker nodes)
wherein the first terminal includes a first processor, and a first memory storing first program instructions that cause the first processor to transmit a first table having secret values as elements to each of the second terminals (par.205-210, transmit encrypted vectors to worker nodes), and
each of the second terminals includes a second processor, and a second memory storing second program instructions that cause the second processor to calculate a sum of n secret values selected from the first table as a secret noise by using secure computation that allows addition of secret values, where n is an integer not less than 2 (par.35-41, 138-146, 217-220, perform noise generation and homomorphic addition to values in vector).
Regarding claim 2, Wright teaches wherein the first program instructions cause the first processor to: create a second table having values according to a predetermined distribution as elements; and create the first table by shuffling the elements of the second table and then encrypting the shuffled elements of the second table (par.35-41, 135-148, 240-249, process a selected vector into a aggregated vector, shuffle, and encrypt values of vectors).
Regarding claim 3, Wright teaches wherein the second program instructions cause the second processor to use the secure computation to calculate the sum of n secret values selected uniformly at random from the first table as the secret noise (par.241-243, 338-342, determine sum of random vector values).
Regarding claim 4, Wright teaches wherein the secure computation is additive homomorphic encryption or secure computation based on additive secret sharing (par.35-41, 138-146, 217-220).
Regarding claim 6, Wright teaches A non-transitory computer-readable recording medium storing a program for causing a computer to perform the secret noise generation method of claim 5 (abstract, fig.1).
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure: the remaining references put forth on the PTO-892 form are directed to privacy and noise generation in a secure multiparty computation environment, Ghazi (20210243171, 20230327850), Boehler (20220247548), Raghuraman (12536161, 20250013634), Joye (20220247551), Pihur (20200279054).
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to David García Cervetti whose telephone number is (571)272-5861. 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, HADI S ARMOUCHE can be reached at (571)270-3618. 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.
/David Garcia Cervetti/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2409