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 .
Priority
Applicant’s claim for the benefit of a prior-filed application under 35 U.S.C. 119(e) or under 35 U.S.C. 120, 121, 365(c), or 386(c) is acknowledged.
Receipt is acknowledged of certified copies of papers required by 37 CFR 1.55.
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted on 14 July 2026 has been considered by the examiner.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 14 July 2026 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
With respect to Applicant’s arguments concerning the double patenting rejections, despite the fact that Applicant alleges that there is a difference in the process flow, Applicant has not pointed to a single element of the instant claims that is allegedly not taught, disclosed, or claimed by the ‘042 Patent. The arguments with respect to the “distinct structural and functional advantages” are simply not persuasive as they fail to address any specific limitation not disclosed and fail to show why the instant application is not an obvious variation of the ‘042 Patent.
Applicant’s arguments with respect to the various rejections under 112(a) and 112(b) are not persuasive, as the amended claims possess the same fatal defect – a “quantum direct communicator” followed by functional language is a placeholder name for an actual piece of hardware that performs the actual function, so it invokes 112(f) and is subject to the same rejections when the supporting structure is not disclosed. The “quantum direct communicator” further fails in this regard as the application makes no mention of a “quantum direct communicator”.
Applicant’s arguments with respect to the rejections of the claims under 102 have been consider but are moot in light of the new rejections under 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103
Claim Interpretation
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(f):
(f) Element in Claim for a Combination. – An element in a claim for a combination may be expressed as a means or step for performing a specified function without the recital of structure, material, or acts in support thereof, and such claim shall be construed to cover the corresponding structure, material, or acts described in the specification and equivalents thereof.
The following is a quotation of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph:
An element in a claim for a combination may be expressed as a means or step for performing a specified function without the recital of structure, material, or acts in support thereof, and such claim shall be construed to cover the corresponding structure, material, or acts described in the specification and equivalents thereof.
The claims in this application are given their broadest reasonable interpretation using the plain meaning of the claim language in light of the specification as it would be understood by one of ordinary skill in the art. The broadest reasonable interpretation of a claim element (also commonly referred to as a claim limitation) is limited by the description in the specification when 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is invoked.
As explained in MPEP § 2181, subsection I, claim limitations that meet the following three-prong test will be interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph:
(A) the claim limitation uses the term “means” or “step” or a term used as a substitute for “means” that is a generic placeholder (also called a nonce term or a non-structural term having no specific structural meaning) for performing the claimed function;
(B) the term “means” or “step” or the generic placeholder is modified by functional language, typically, but not always linked by the transition word “for” (e.g., “means for”) or another linking word or phrase, such as “configured to” or “so that”; and
(C) the term “means” or “step” or the generic placeholder is not modified by sufficient structure, material, or acts for performing the claimed function.
Use of the word “means” (or “step”) in a claim with functional language creates a rebuttable presumption that the claim limitation is to be treated in accordance with 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph. The presumption that the claim limitation is interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is rebutted when the claim limitation recites sufficient structure, material, or acts to entirely perform the recited function.
Absence of the word “means” (or “step”) in a claim creates a rebuttable presumption that the claim limitation is not to be treated in accordance with 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph. The presumption that the claim limitation is not interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is rebutted when the claim limitation recites function without reciting sufficient structure, material or acts to entirely perform the recited function.
Claim limitations in this application that use the word “means” (or “step”) are being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, except as otherwise indicated in an Office action. Conversely, claim limitations in this application that do not use the word “means” (or “step”) are not being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, except as otherwise indicated in an Office action.
This application includes one or more claim limitations that do not use the word “means,” but are nonetheless being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, because the claim limitation(s) uses a generic placeholder that is coupled with functional language without reciting sufficient structure to perform the recited function and the generic placeholder is not preceded by a structural modifier. Such claim limitations are:
“a quantum direct communicator” of Claims 13, 15, 17, 19, 20, 21 and 22 (Corresponding structure: None)
Because these claim limitations are being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, they are being interpreted to cover the corresponding structure described in the specification as performing the claimed function, and equivalents thereof.
If applicant does not intend to have these limitations interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, applicant may: (1) amend the claim limitation(s) to avoid it/them being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph (e.g., by reciting sufficient structure to perform the claimed function); or (2) present a sufficient showing that the claim limitations recites sufficient structure to perform the claimed function so as to avoid them being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of 35 U.S.C. 112(a):
(a) IN GENERAL.—The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor or joint inventor of carrying out the invention.
The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112:
The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor of carrying out his invention.
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 13-14, 16, 18-19, and 21-24 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(a) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), first paragraph, as failing to comply with the written description requirement. The claims contains subject matter which was not described in the specification in such a way as to reasonably convey to one skilled in the relevant art that the inventor or a joint inventor, or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the inventors, at the time the application was filed, had possession of the claimed invention. The written description fails to provide adequate support for the claimed quantum direct communicator so as to disclose that Applicant had actual possession of such a device. Claims 13, 15, 17, 19, 20, 21 and 22 are rejected on this basis. Claims 14-18 and 23-24 are rejected as depending from a rejected claim and failing to correct the deficiencies thereof.
Claims 13-14, 16, 18-19, and 21-24 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(a) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), first paragraph, as failing to comply with the enablement requirement. The claims contains subject matter which was not described in the specification in such a way as to enable one skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and/or use the invention. The written description fails to provide an enabling disclosure for the claimed quantum direct communicator. Claims 13, 15, 17, 19, 20, 21 and 22 are rejected on this basis. Claims 14-18 and 23-24 are rejected as depending from a rejected claim and failing to correct the deficiencies thereof.
Claims 13-14, 16, 18-19, and 21-24 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 limitation “quantum direct communicator” invokes 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph. However, the written description fails to disclose the corresponding structure, material, or acts for performing the entire claimed function and to clearly link the structure, material, or acts to the function, as no corresponding structure is disclosed. Therefore, the claims are indefinite and is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, second paragraph.
Applicant may:
(a) Amend the claim so that the claim limitation will no longer be interpreted as a limitation under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph;
(b) Amend the written description of the specification such that it expressly recites what structure, material, or acts perform the entire claimed function, without introducing any new matter (35 U.S.C. 132(a)); or
(c) Amend the written description of the specification such that it clearly links the structure, material, or acts disclosed therein to the function recited in the claim, without introducing any new matter (35 U.S.C. 132(a)).
If applicant is of the opinion that the written description of the specification already implicitly or inherently discloses the corresponding structure, material, or acts and clearly links them to the function so that one of ordinary skill in the art would recognize what structure, material, or acts perform the claimed function, applicant should clarify the record by either:
(a) Amending the written description of the specification such that it expressly recites the corresponding structure, material, or acts for performing the claimed function and clearly links or associates the structure, material, or acts to the claimed function, without introducing any new matter (35 U.S.C. 132(a)); or
(b) Stating on the record what the corresponding structure, material, or acts, which are implicitly or inherently set forth in the written description of the specification, perform the claimed function. For more information, see 37 CFR 1.75(d) and MPEP §§ 608.01(o) and 2181.
Claims 13, 15, 17, 19, 20, 21 and 22 are rejected on this basis. Claims 14-18 and 23-24 are rejected as depending from a rejected claim and failing to correct the deficiencies thereof.
Double Patenting
The nonstatutory double patenting rejection is based on a judicially created doctrine grounded in public policy (a policy reflected in the statute) so as to prevent the unjustified or improper timewise extension of the “right to exclude” granted by a patent and to prevent possible harassment by multiple assignees. A nonstatutory double patenting rejection is appropriate where the conflicting claims are not identical, but at least one examined application claim is not patentably distinct from the reference claim(s) because the examined application claim is either anticipated by, or would have been obvious over, the reference claim(s). See, e.g., In re Berg, 140 F.3d 1428, 46 USPQ2d 1226 (Fed. Cir. 1998); In re Goodman, 11 F.3d 1046, 29 USPQ2d 2010 (Fed. Cir. 1993); In re Longi, 759 F.2d 887, 225 USPQ 645 (Fed. Cir. 1985); In re Van Ornum, 686 F.2d 937, 214 USPQ 761 (CCPA 1982); In re Vogel, 422 F.2d 438, 164 USPQ 619 (CCPA 1970); In re Thorington, 418 F.2d 528, 163 USPQ 644 (CCPA 1969).
A timely filed terminal disclaimer in compliance with 37 CFR 1.321(c) or 1.321(d) may be used to overcome an actual or provisional rejection based on nonstatutory double patenting provided the reference application or patent either is shown to be commonly owned with the examined application, or claims an invention made as a result of activities undertaken within the scope of a joint research agreement. See MPEP § 717.02 for applications subject to examination under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA as explained in MPEP § 2159. See MPEP § 2146 et seq. for applications not subject to examination under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA . A terminal disclaimer must be signed in compliance with 37 CFR 1.321(b).
The filing of a terminal disclaimer by itself is not a complete reply to a nonstatutory double patenting (NSDP) rejection. A complete reply requires that the terminal disclaimer be accompanied by a reply requesting reconsideration of the prior Office action. Even where the NSDP rejection is provisional the reply must be complete. See MPEP § 804, subsection I.B.1. For a reply to a non-final Office action, see 37 CFR 1.111(a). For a reply to final Office action, see 37 CFR 1.113(c). A request for reconsideration while not provided for in 37 CFR 1.113(c) may be filed after final for consideration. See MPEP §§ 706.07(e) and 714.13.
The USPTO Internet website contains terminal disclaimer forms which may be used. Please visit www.uspto.gov/patent/patents-forms. The actual filing date of the application in which the form is filed determines what form (e.g., PTO/SB/25, PTO/SB/26, PTO/AIA /25, or PTO/AIA /26) should be used. A web-based eTerminal Disclaimer may be filled out completely online using web-screens. An eTerminal Disclaimer that meets all requirements is auto-processed and approved immediately upon submission. For more information about eTerminal Disclaimers, refer to www.uspto.gov/patents/apply/applying-online/eterminal-disclaimer.
Claims 13-14, 16, 19 and 21-24 are rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claims 1-20 of U.S. Patent No. 12,457,042. Although the claims at issue are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other because the claims of the instant application are a rearrangement of the subject matter of the claims of the ‘042 Patent and on this basis the claims of the ‘042 Patent are an obvious variation of the claims of the instant application.
As to claim 13, the ‘042 Patent discloses a communication method for quantum direct communication, applied to a sender of a quantum direct communication system, comprising (Clam 1: A quantum secure direct communication method based on a one-way transmission, applied to a transmitting terminal in a quantum communication system, the quantum secure direct communication method comprising):
encrypting a transmitted message using an encryption algorithm to obtain a ciphertext corresponding to the transmitted message (Claim 1: encrypting the code word by using an encryption key negotiated with a receiving terminal, and obtaining a ciphertext message corresponding to the encrypted code word);
precoding the ciphertext to obtain a transmitted codeword corresponding to the transmitted message (Claim 1: performing error-correction and anti-loss encoding on a to-be-transmitted message, and obtaining a code word corresponding to the to-be-transmitted message and Claim 2: before the encoding the ciphertext message onto the quantum state, further comprising: performing mask processing on the ciphertext message by using a local random number, and obtaining a to-be-transmitted code word corresponding to the ciphertext message, the local random number and the ciphertext message having the same length);
encoding the transmitted codeword into a quantum state through a quantum direct communicator of the sender according to a quantum communication protocol (Clam 1: and encoding the ciphertext message onto a quantum state) ; and
sending the quantum state to a receiver of the quantum direct communication system (Clam 1: and transmitting quantum state information obtained to the receiving terminal through a quantum channel).
Claim 23 recites an electronic device commensurate in scope to the method of claim 13 and is thus rejected under a substantially similar rationale.
Claim 24 recites non-transitory computer-readable storage medium commensurate in scope to the method of claim 13 and is thus rejected under a substantially similar rationale.
As to claim 14, the ‘042 Patent discloses the communication method according to claim 13, wherein the encryption algorithm comprises a symmetric cipher, an asymmetric cipher and/or a post-quantum cipher (Claim 1: encrypting the code word by using an encryption key negotiated with a receiving terminal, and obtaining a ciphertext message corresponding to the encrypted code word (a symmetric cypher)).
As to claim 16, the ‘042 Patent discloses the communication method according to claim 13, wherein the precoding comprises forward error-correcting coding, spread spectrum coding and/or secure coding (Claim 1: performing error-correction and anti-loss encoding on a to-be-transmitted message, and obtaining a code word corresponding to the to-be-transmitted message and Claim 10: wherein the performing the error-correction and anti-loss encoding on the to-be-transmitted message and obtaining the code word corresponding to the to-be-transmitted message comprises: performing error-correction encoding processing with a preset error correction algorithm on the to-be-transmitted message; performing spread spectrum processing on the to-be-transmitted message after the error-correction encoding processing, and obtaining the code word corresponding to the to-be-transmitted message).
As to claim 19, the ‘042 Patent discloses a communication method for a quantum secure direct communication, applied to a receiver of a quantum direct communication system, comprising (Claim 11: A quantum secure direct communication method based on a one-way transmission, applied to a receiving terminal in a quantum communication system, the quantum secure direct communication method comprising):
measuring a quantum state sent from a sender using a quantum direct communicator of the receiver to obtain a transmitted codeword corresponding to a ciphertext, the transmitted codeword being obtained by the sender precoding the ciphertext, the ciphertext being obtained by the sender encrypting a transmitted message by using an encryption algorithm (Claim 11: receiving quantum state information transmitted by a transmitting terminal through a quantum channel, the quantum state information being obtained by encoding ciphertext information encoded onto a quantum state after the ciphertext information is obtained by performing the error-correction and anti-loss encoding and the encryption on the to-be-transmitted message by the transmitting terminal, wherein encoding the ciphertext message onto the quantum state comprises: randomly selecting, by the transmitting terminal, a base vector for each character in the ciphertext message, and encoding the character to convert the character into the quantum state information; decoding the quantum state information to obtain a decoding result);;
decoding and/or decrypting the transmitted codeword according to a rule corresponding to the precoding to obtain the ciphertext (Claim 11: performing decryption processing on the decoding result by using an encryption key negotiated with the transmitting terminal, and obtaining a decrypted message corresponding to the decoding result); and
performing decryption using a decryption algorithm corresponding to the encryption algorithm to obtain the transmitted message (Claim 11: performing decryption processing on the decoding result by using an encryption key negotiated with the transmitting terminal, and obtaining a decrypted message corresponding to the decoding result).
As to claim 21, the ‘042 Patent discloses a quantum direct communication system, comprising a sender and a receiver, wherein the sender comprises:
an encryptor configured to encrypt a transmitted message using an encryption algorithm to obtain a ciphertext corresponding to the transmitted message (Claim 15: an encryption module, configured to encrypt the code word with an encryption key negotiated with a receiving terminal and obtain a ciphertext message corresponding to the encrypted code word);
a precoder configured to precode the ciphertext to obtain a transmitted codeword corresponding to the transmitted message Claim 1: performing error-correction and anti-loss encoding on a to-be-transmitted message, and obtaining a code word corresponding to the to-be-transmitted message and Claim 2: before the encoding the ciphertext message onto the quantum state, further comprising: performing mask processing on the ciphertext message by using a local random number, and obtaining a to-be-transmitted code word corresponding to the ciphertext message, the local random number and the ciphertext message having the same length);
and a first quantum direct communicator configured to encode the ciphertext into a quantum state according to a quantum communication protocol and send the quantum state to the receiver of the quantum direct communication system (Claim 15: a first encoding module, configured to perform error-correction and anti-loss encoding on a to-be-transmitted message and obtain a code word corresponding to the to-be-transmitted message); and
the receiver comprises: a second quantum direct communicator (Claim 16: quantum secure direct communication apparatus based on a one-way transmission, applied to a receiving terminal in a quantum communication system, the quantum secure direct communication apparatus) configured to measure a quantum state sent from a sender using a quantum direct communicator of the receiver to obtain a transmitted codeword corresponding to a ciphertext and decode and/or decrypt the transmitted codeword according to a rule corresponding to the precoding to obtain the ciphertext (Claim 11: receiving quantum state information transmitted by a transmitting terminal through a quantum channel, the quantum state information being obtained by encoding ciphertext information encoded onto a quantum state after the ciphertext information is obtained by performing the error-correction and anti-loss encoding and the encryption on the to-be-transmitted message by the transmitting terminal, wherein encoding the ciphertext message onto the quantum state comprises: randomly selecting, by the transmitting terminal, a base vector for each character in the ciphertext message, and encoding the character to convert the character into the quantum state information; decoding the quantum state information to obtain a decoding result), the transmitted codeword being obtained by the sender precoding the ciphertext, the ciphertext being obtained by the sender encrypting the transmitted message using an encryption algorithm (Claim 16: a receiving module, configured to receive quantum state information transmitted by a transmitting terminal through a quantum channel, wherein the quantum state information is obtained by encoding ciphertext information onto a quantum state after the ciphertext information is obtained by performing the error-correction and anti-loss encoding and an encryption on the to-be-transmitted message by the transmitting terminal, wherein encoding the ciphertext message onto the quantum state comprises: randomly selecting, by the transmitting terminal, a base vector for each character in the ciphertext message, and encoding the character to convert the character into the quantum state information; a decoding module, configured to decode the quantum state information to obtain a decoding result);
a decryptor configured to perform decryption using a decryption algorithm corresponding to the encryption algorithm to obtain the transmitted message (Claim 16: a decryption module, configured to perform decryption processing on the decoding result by using an encryption key negotiated with the transmitting terminal, and obtain a decrypted message corresponding to the decoding result; and a transcoding module, configured to perform transcoding processing corresponding to the error-correction and anti-loss encoding on the decrypted message, and obtain a transmission message corresponding to the decrypted message.).
Claim 22 recites a quantum direct communication system, incorporating the features of claims 13, a9 and 21 and is rejected under a substantially similar rationale.
Claim 18 is rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claims 1-20 of U.S. Patent No. 12,457,042 in view of U.S. Patent Application Publication No. 2024/0162992 by Iqbal et al.
As to claim 18, the ‘042 Patent discloses all recited elements of claim 13 from which claim 18 depends.
The claims of the ‘042 Patent does not expressly disclose wherein the quantum communication protocol comprises an entanglement protocol, a single photon protocol, a measurement device-independent protocol and/or a device-independent protocol.
Iqbal discloses wherein the quantum communication protocol comprises an entanglement protocol, a single photon protocol, a measurement device-independent protocol and/or a device-independent protocol (Iqbal: Page 11, Sec 115; “In the embodiments described above, a faint pulse source (FPS) is used to generate the pulses of the quantum beam. In other examples, alternative sources for these pulse may be used, such as true single photon sources, or entanglement pair sources (for use in entanglement protocols such as BB92 or E91). These examples of alternative sources are not exhaustive”).
The ‘042 Patent and Iqbal are analogous art because they are from the common area of quantum communication.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the arts to combine the protocol selection of Iqbal with the ‘042 Patent. The rationale would have been to allow for a variety of pulse sources (Iqbal: Page 11, Sec 115).
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
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 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.
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.
The factual inquiries for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized as follows:
1. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art.
2. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue.
3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art.
4. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness.
Claims 13-14, 16, 18-19, and 21-24 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as anticipated by or, in the alternative, under 35 U.S.C. 103 as obvious over Chinese Patent Application Publication No. CN114244507A by Long et al. (Cited on Applicant’s IDS, Espacenet machine translation previously provided by Examiner. Section numbers refer to numbering in machine translation).
As to claims 13, 23 and 24, Long discloses a communication method/ device/ non-transitory computer-readable storage medium for quantum direct communication, applied to a sender of a quantum direct communication system, comprising (Long: [n0006]; “In a first aspect, this application provides a quantum direct communication method based on single-channel transmission, applied to the sender in a quantum communication system, the method comprising”):
encrypting a transmitted message using an encryption algorithm to obtain a ciphertext corresponding to the transmitted message (Long: [n008]; “The codeword is encrypted using the encryption key negotiated with the recipient to obtain the ciphertext message corresponding to the codeword”);
precoding the ciphertext to obtain a transmitted codeword corresponding to the transmitted message (Long: 65; “In contrast, Long discloses the following (see 0065 of the specification): the sender performs error-correction and anti-loss coding on a message to be transmitted to obtain a codeword corresponding to the message; then, an encryption key negotiated with the receiver is used to encrypt the codeword to obtain a ciphertext message corresponding to the codeword; furthermore, the ciphertext message is encoded into a quantum state, and the obtained quantum state information is sent to the receiver via a quantum channel.
Therefore, the process flow of the single-path quantum direct communication method disclosed by Long comprises: plaintext -* precoding -* encryption -* quantum encoding -* transmission of the quantum state” {quoting from Applicants Remarks as an admission that Long performs the recited steps, but not necessarily in the order claimed});
encoding the ciphertext into a quantum state through a quantum direct communicator of the sender (Long: [n0086]; “The aforementioned user terminals Alice100 and Bob200 can perform direct quantum communication.”) according to a quantum communication protocol (Long: [n009]; “The encrypted message is encoded into a quantum state, and the obtained quantum state information is sent to the receiver through a quantum channel”) and
sending the quantum state to a receiver of the quantum direct communication system (Long: [n009]; “The encrypted message is encoded into a quantum state, and the obtained quantum state information is sent to the receiver through a quantum channel”).
While Long discloses all of the recited elements, Long may not recite them in the same order as claimed.
This reordering of the claims elements is an obvious rearrangement, such that if claims 13, 23 and 24 are not anticipated by Long, they are nonetheless made obvious by Long with a simple rearrangement.
As to claim 14, Long further discloses wherein the encryption algorithm comprises a symmetric cipher, an asymmetric cipher and/or a post-quantum cipher (Long: [n0008]; “The codeword is encrypted using the encryption key negotiated with the recipient to obtain the ciphertext message corresponding to the codeword.” Description of a symmetric cipher).
As to claim 16, Long further discloses wherein the precoding comprises forward error-correcting lossless coding, spread spectrum coding and/or secure coding (Long: [n0007]; “Perform error-correcting and loss-resistant coding on the message to be transmitted to obtain the codeword corresponding to the message to be transmitted”. This occurs prior to the encrypting).
As to claim 18, Long further discloses wherein the quantum communication protocol comprises an entanglement protocol, a single photon protocol, a measurement device-independent protocol and/or a device-independent protocol (Long: Sec [n0096]; “Specifically, the sender can randomly select a basis vector to encode each character in the ciphertext message, converting it into quantum state information. The above encoding can be based on quantum communication protocols, which may
include: BB84 quantum key distribution protocol, six-state quantum key distribution protocol, COW quantum key distribution protocol, measurement device-independent quantum key distribution protocol, device-independent quantum key distribution protocol, etc.”).
As to claim 19, Long discloses a communication method for a quantum secure direct communication, applied to a receiver of a quantum direct communication system, comprising:
measuring a quantum state sent from a sender using a quantum direct communicator of the receiver to obtain a transmitted codeword corresponding to a ciphertext, the transmitted codeword being obtained by the sender precoding the ciphertext, the ciphertext being obtained by the sender encrypting a transmitted message by using an encryption algorithm; decoding and/or decrypting the transmitted codeword according to a rule corresponding to the precoding to obtain the ciphertext; (Long: 65; “In contrast, Long discloses the following (see 0065 of the specification): the sender performs error-correction and anti-loss coding on a message to be transmitted to obtain a codeword corresponding to the message; then, an encryption key negotiated with the receiver is used to encrypt the codeword to obtain a ciphertext message corresponding to the codeword; furthermore, the ciphertext message is encoded into a quantum state, and the obtained quantum state information is sent to the receiver via a quantum channel.
Therefore, the process flow of the single-path quantum direct communication method disclosed by Long comprises: plaintext -* precoding -* encryption -* quantum encoding -* transmission of the quantum state” {quoting from Applicants Remarks as an admission that Long performs the recited steps, but not necessarily in the order claimed}) (Long: [n0086]; “The aforementioned user terminals Alice100 and Bob200 can perform direct quantum communication.”) (Long: [n0040]; “The receiver receives quantum state information transmitted by the sender through a quantum channel; the quantum state information is information encoded into the quantum state by the sender after error correction and loss-resistant coding and encryption of the message to be transmitted.”); and
performing decryption using a decryption algorithm corresponding to the encryption algorithm to obtain the transmitted message (Long: [n0041] – [n0042]; “Decode the quantum state information to obtain the decoding result; The decoding result is decrypted using the encryption key negotiated with the recipient to obtain the decryption message corresponding to the decoding result;”).
As to claims 21 and 22, Long discloses a quantum direct communication system, comprising a sender and a receiver, wherein the sender comprises: an encryptor configured to encrypt a transmitted message using an encryption algorithm to obtain a ciphertext corresponding to the transmitted message; a precoder configured to precode the ciphertext to obtain a transmitted codeword corresponding to the transmitted message; and a first quantum direct communicator configured to encode the transmitted codeword into a quantum state according to a quantum communication protocol and send the quantum state to the receiver of the quantum direct communication system; and the receiver comprises: a second quantum direct communicator configured to measure a quantum state sent from a sender using a quantum direct communicator of the receiver to obtain a transmitted codeword corresponding to a ciphertext and decode and/or decrypt the transmitted codeword according to a rule corresponding to the precoding to obtain the ciphertext, the transmitted codeword being obtained by the sender precoding the ciphertext, the ciphertext being obtained by the sender encrypting the transmitted message using an encryption algorithm; a decryptor configured to perform decryption using a decryption algorithm corresponding to the encryption algorithm to obtain the transmitted message (Claim 21 incorporates the limitatons of claim 13 and claim 19 and is rejected under the rationales recite above and Long: 65; “In contrast, Long discloses the following (see 0065 of the specification): the sender performs error-correction and anti-loss coding on a message to be transmitted to obtain a codeword corresponding to the message; then, an encryption key negotiated with the receiver is used to encrypt the codeword to obtain a ciphertext message corresponding to the codeword; furthermore, the ciphertext message is encoded into a quantum state, and the obtained quantum state information is sent to the receiver via a quantum channel.
Therefore, the process flow of the single-path quantum direct communication method disclosed by Long comprises: plaintext -* precoding -* encryption -* quantum encoding -* transmission of the quantum state” {quoting from Applicants Remarks as an admission that Long performs the recited steps, but not necessarily in the order claimed}).
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 MICHAEL S MCNALLY whose telephone number is (571)270-1599. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday, 8:30 AM - 5:00 PM.
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, Jeffrey L Nickerson can be reached at (469)295-9235. 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.
MICHAEL S. MCNALLY
Primary Examiner
Art Unit 2432
/Michael S McNally/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2432
Prosecution Insights