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 .
Response to Amendment
Applicant's submission filed on 6/23/2026 has been entered. Claims 1-9 are pending.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to claims 1-9 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.
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.
Claims 1-2 and 5-7 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Chung et al. (US 2019/0312892 hereinafter Chung) in view of AIBA et al. (US 2023/0006860 hereinafter AIBA).
Regarding claim 1, Chung discloses an intrusion detection device (FIG. 1-4, i.e. In-Vehicle Network security diagnostic sensor), comprising:
a processor coupled with memory, the processor configured to (FIG. 1-2):
transmit and receive a frame to and from an in-vehicle electronic device (FIG. 1-4, ¶ [0064]-[0068]; i.e. receiving and transmitting packets from the Electronic Control Units (ECU) via the Controller Area Network (CAN) communication bus);
acquire an attribute of the frame (FIG. 1-4, ¶ [0069]-[0077]; i.e. extracting the characteristics that uniquely identify the ECUs that transmit the packets and/or the information of the packets such as CAN_ID);
acquire communication control status information indicating a current one of a plurality of predefined communication control statuses of the in-vehicle electronic device transmitting the frame (FIG. 1-5, ¶ [0062]; [0069]-[0077]; i.e. obtaining/identifying driving state of the vehicle, a time interval, a frequency or a period with respect to the reception of packets, reception power which is measured at the CAN transceiver as the physical characteristic value of the CAN packets, etc.); and
detect an abnormality of the in-vehicle electronic device on the basis of the attribute and the communication control status by determining, from a combination of the acquired attribute and the communication control status information (FIG. 1-5, ¶ [0069]-[0077], [0083]-[0084]; i.e. detecting a sign of an abnormality based on the ECUs and the characteristics of the packets, driving state of the vehicle, the transmission state of the packets, etc.), whether transmission of the frame by the in-vehicle electronic device is permitted in the indicated communication control status.
Chung does not explicitly disclose whether transmission of the frame by the in-vehicle electronic device is permitted in the indicated communication control status.
However, AIBA discloses whether transmission of the frame by the in-vehicle electronic device is permitted in the indicated communication control status (¶ [0048]).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine Chung and AIBA in order to determine data that has become invalid due to an attack (AIBA, ¶ [0003]-[0006]).
Regarding claim 2, Chung in view of AIBA discloses the intrusion detection device according to claim 1, wherein the processor is further configured to: determine whether or not transmission of the frame is allowed on the basis of the attribute and the communication control status, and detect the abnormality is detected on the basis of that determination result (Chung, ¶ [0075]).
Regarding claim 5, Chung discloses an intrusion detection device, comprising:
a processor coupled with memory, the processor configured to (FIG. 1-2):
transmit and receive a frame to and from an in-vehicle electronic device (FIG. 1-4, ¶ [0064]-[0068]; i.e. receiving and transmitting packets from the Electronic Control Units (ECU) via the Controller Area Network (CAN) communication bus);
acquire an attribute of the frame (FIG. 1-4, ¶ [0069]-[0077]; i.e. extracting the characteristics that uniquely identify the ECUs that transmit the packets and/or the information of the packets such as CAN_ID);
acquire communication control status information indicating a current one of a plurality of predefined communication control statuses the in-vehicle electronic device transmitting the frame (FIG. 1-5, ¶ [0062]; [0069]-[0077]; i.e. obtaining/identifying driving state of the vehicle, a time interval, a frequency or a period with respect to the reception of packets, reception power which is measured at the CAN transceiver as the physical characteristic value of the CAN packets, etc.);
detect an abnormality of the in-vehicle electronic device by determining, from a combination of the acquired attribute and the communication control status information (FIG. 1-5, ¶ [0069]-[0077], [0083]-[0084]; i.e. detecting a sign of an abnormality based on the ECUs and the characteristics of the packets, driving state of the vehicle, the transmission state of the packets, etc.), whether transmission of the frame by the in-vehicle electronic device is permitted in the indicated communication control status; and
in response to detecting the abnormality of the in-vehicle electronic device, add the attribute and the communication control status information to abnormality information indicating the abnormality and transmit the abnormality information (FIG. 1-5, ¶ [0063], [0077], [0177]; i.e. generating and transmitting trouble code and a cybersecurity fzeeze-frame data to the ECU and/or the cyber dashboard).
Chung does not explicitly disclose whether transmission of the frame by the in-vehicle electronic device is permitted in the indicated communication control status.
However, AIBA discloses whether transmission of the frame by the in-vehicle electronic device is permitted in the indicated communication control status (¶ [0048]).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine Chung and AIBA in order to determine data that has become invalid due to an attack (AIBA, ¶ [0003]-[0006]).
Regarding claim 6, Chung discloses an intrusion detection method, comprising the steps of:
transmitting and receiving a frame to and from an in-vehicle electronic device (FIG. 1-4, ¶ [0064]-[0068]; i.e. receiving and transmitting packets from the Electronic Control Units (ECU) via the Controller Area Network (CAN) communication bus);
acquiring an attribute of the frame (FIG. 1-4, ¶ [0069]-[0077]; i.e. extracting the characteristics that uniquely identify the ECUs that transmit the packets and/or the information of the packets such as CAN_ID);
acquiring communication control status information indicating a current one of a plurality of predefined communication control statuses of the in-vehicle electronic device transmitting the frame (FIG. 1-5, ¶ [0062]; [0069]-[0077]; i.e. obtaining/identifying driving state of the vehicle, a time interval, a frequency or a period with respect to the reception of packets, reception power which is measured at the CAN transceiver as the physical characteristic value of the CAN packets, etc.); and
detecting an abnormality of the in-vehicle electronic device on the basis of the attribute and the communication control status by determining, from a combination of the acquired attribute and the communication control status information (FIG. 1-5, ¶ [0069]-[0077], [0083]-[0084]; i.e. detecting a sign of an abnormality based on the ECUs and the characteristics of the packets, driving state of the vehicle, the transmission state of the packets, etc.), whether transmission of the frame by the in-vehicle electronic device is permitted in the indicated communication control status.
Chung does not explicitly disclose whether transmission of the frame by the in-vehicle electronic device is permitted in the indicated communication control status.
However, AIBA discloses whether transmission of the frame by the in-vehicle electronic device is permitted in the indicated communication control status (¶ [0048]).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine Chung and AIBA in order to determine data that has become invalid due to an attack (AIBA, ¶ [0003]-[0006]).
Regarding claim 7, Chung in view of AIBA discloses the intrusion detection method according to claim 6, further comprising: a first step of determining whether or not the transmission of the frame is allowed on the basis of the attribute and the communication control status, wherein the step of detecting the abnormality detects the abnormality on the basis of a determination result of the first step (Chung, ¶ [0072]-[0075]).
Claims 3-4 and 8-9 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Chung et al. (US 2019/0312892 hereinafter Chung) in view of AIBA et al. (US 2023/0006860 hereinafter AIBA) and further in view of Sasaki et al. (US 2014/0047255 hereinafter Sasaki).
Regarding claim 3, Chung in view of AIBA discloses the intrusion detection device according to claim 1.
Chung in view of AIBA does not explicitly disclose wherein the processor is further configured to: determine whether or not one or more in-vehicle electronic devices belonging to the same group have the same communication control status, and detect the abnormality on the basis of that determination result.
However, Sasaki discloses wherein the processor is further configured to: determine whether or not one or more in-vehicle electronic devices belonging to the same group have the same communication control status, and detect the abnormality on the basis of that determination result (FIG. 7 & 10, ¶ [0083]-[0086], [0102]).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine Chung, AIBA and Sasaki in order to efficiently detect malfunction or abnormality in the vehicular network management (Sasaki, ¶ [0005]-[0012]).
Regarding claim 4, Chung in view of AIBA discloses the intrusion detection device according to claim 1, wherein the processor is further configured to: determine whether or not transmission of the frame is allowed on the basis of the attribute and the communication control status; detect the abnormality of the in-vehicle electronic device on the basis of either a determination result of whether the transmission of the frame is permitted or a determination result of whether the communication control statuses have the certain relationship (Chung, ¶ [0072]-[0075]; AIBA, ¶ [0048]).
Chung in view of AIBA does not explicitly disclose further comprising determine whether or not the communication control statuses of the in-vehicle electronic devices belonging to the same group have a certain relationship.
However, Sasaki discloses determine whether or not the communication control statuses of the in-vehicle electronic devices belonging to the same group have a certain relationship (FIG. 7 & 10, ¶ [0083]-[0086], [0102]).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine Chung, AIBA and Sasaki in order to efficiently detect malfunction or abnormality in the vehicular network management (Sasaki, ¶ [0005]-[0012]).
Regarding claim 8, Chung in view of AIBA discloses the intrusion detection method according to claim 6.
Chung in view of AIBA does not explicitly disclose determining whether or not the communication control statuses of the in-vehicle electronic devices belonging to the same group have a certain relationship, wherein the step of detecting the abnormality detects the abnormality on the basis of a determination result of the second step.
However, Sasaki discloses determining whether or not the communication control statuses of the in-vehicle electronic devices belonging to the same group have a certain relationship, wherein the step of detecting the abnormality detects the abnormality on the basis of a determination result of the second step (FIG. 7 & 10, ¶ [0083]-[0086], [0102]).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine Chung, AIBA and Sasaki in order to efficiently detect malfunction or abnormality in the vehicular network management (Sasaki, ¶ [0005]-[0012]).
Regarding claim 9, Chung in view of AIBA discloses the intrusion detection method according to claim 6, further comprising: a first step of determining whether or not the transmission of the frame is allowed on the basis of the attribute and the communication control status; and wherein the step of detecting the abnormality detects the abnormality on the basis of a determination result of the first step and a determination result of the second step (¶ [0072]-[0075]).
Chung in view of AIBA does not explicitly disclose further comprising determining whether or not the communication control statuses of the in-vehicle electronic devices belonging to the same group have a certain relationship.
However, Sasaki discloses determining whether or not the communication control statuses of the in-vehicle electronic devices belonging to the same group have a certain relationship (FIG. 7 & 10, ¶ [0083]-[0086], [0102]).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine Chung, AIBA and Sasaki in order to efficiently detect malfunction or abnormality in the vehicular network management (Sasaki, ¶ [0005]-[0012]).
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 CHI D NGUY whose telephone number is (571)270-7311. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 9-5 ET.
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.
/C.D.N/Examiner, Art Unit 2435
/AMIR MEHRMANESH/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2435
