DETAILED ACTION
This Non Final Office Action is in response to Application filed on 09/13/2024. Claims 1-19 filed on 04/17/2024 are being considered on the merits.
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 .
Drawings
The drawings filed on 09/13/2024 are accepted.
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statements (IDS) submitted on 09/16/2024, 06/17/2025 10/31/2025 have been considered. The submission is in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly an initialed and dated copy of Applicant's IDS form 1449 filed 09/16/2024, 06/17/2025 10/31/2025 are attached to the instant Office action.
Specification
The abstract of the disclosure is objected to because of the following informalities: The abstract recite the abbreviation “CRP“. Examiner recommends further reciting what the abbreviation means in the abstract.
Appropriate correction is required.
Claim Objections
Claims 2-3, 6, 9 and 14-15 objected to because of the following informalities:
Claim 2 should read “The method of claim 1, further including steps of deleting C*, the derived set of N challenges, the sequential, addressable set of N responses other than the identified subset of f responses, and K.”
Claim 3 recites “A method of decrypting a file an encrypted file M* encrypted according to the method of claim 1…”. Emphasis in italic. The above phrase is not clear, examiner recommends applying commas to clarify the above phrase. Furthermore, the file and the encrypted File M*, C, w, N, C*, etc. have all been previously recited before in independent claim 1.
Claim 6 should read “selecting responses in the first ordered sequence having positions in the first ordered sequence that match positions in the random binary key of occurrences of a first binary symbol…”
Claim 9 recites “…receiving the first list of challenges to the challenge-response-pair (CRP) mechanism, and receiving the first ordered sequence of responses; comparing each of the selected responses to each of the responses in the first ordered sequence of responses and identifying matches; constructing a binary key by placing the first binary symbol at positions in the key equal to positions in the first ordered sequence of responses for which the response matches one of the selected responses, and placing the second binary symbol at the remaining positions, and decrypting the digital file using the key.”, emphasis in italic. Examiner recommends clarifications by amending the above limitations by reciting that the comparison is between the “received” responses and the “selected” response.
Claims 14-15 are method claims with a limitations that includes “if” condition.
Examiner submits that if the conditional limitation step is not reached, then the
remaining limitation steps do not have to be performed and will render the remaining
limitations not valid, therefore, it will not be required to show anticipation or obviousness
for all paths of the conditional limitation. Examiner suggests replacing “if” with “when”.
Appropriate correction is required.
Double Patenting
A rejection based on double patenting of the “same invention” type finds its support in the language of 35 U.S.C. 101 which states that “whoever invents or discovers any new and useful process... may obtain a patent therefor...” (Emphasis added). Thus, the term “same invention,” in this context, means an invention drawn to identical subject matter. See Miller v. Eagle Mfg. Co., 151 U.S. 186 (1894); In re Vogel, 422 F.2d 438, 164 USPQ 619 (CCPA 1970); In re Ockert, 245 F.2d 467, 114 USPQ 330 (CCPA 1957).
A statutory type (35 U.S.C. 101) double patenting rejection can be overcome by canceling or amending the claims that are directed to the same invention so they are no longer coextensive in scope. The filing of a terminal disclaimer cannot overcome a double patenting rejection based upon 35 U.S.C. 101.
Claim 1-19 provisionally rejected under 35 U.S.C. 101 as claiming the same invention as that of claim 1-19 of co-pending Application No. 18/638,593 (reference application). This is a provisional statutory double patenting rejection since the claims directed to the same invention have not in fact been patented.
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 6, 12 and 19 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.
The term “ sufficient” in claim 6 is a relative term which renders the claim indefinite. The term “ sufficient” is not defined by the claim, the specification does not provide a standard for ascertaining the requisite degree, and one of ordinary skill in the art would not be reasonably apprised of the scope of the invention.
Claim 12 recites “on the basis of BER below some threshold.”. It is not clear what the abbreviation BER means. The specification is devoid of what BER means. Examiner recommends amending by reciting the words of the above abbreviation in the claim and the specification. Similarly in clam 19 with respect to “SHAKE”.
Status of Prior Art
Claims 1-19 filed on 09/13/2024 would be allowable if rewritten or amended to overcome the objections and/or rejection(s) set forth in this Office action and any potential claim amendments do not raise new issues that would require an updated rejection of the aforementioned claims.
The prior art made of record and considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure:
Davies (US 20230336366 A1) discloses a physically unclonable function (PUF) module under the control of A target party who generates a public-private key pair him/herself. In this case, obtaining of a public key comprises: the target party performing the inputting of the challenge to the PUF module himself, in order to generate the response and derive the public private key pair locally.
Cambou (US 20210152347 A1) discloses a processing circuitry configured to respond to an authentication challenge which specifies an address (or range of addresses) in the PUF array and a set of operations to perform in order to generate a unique response to the authentication challenge. The processing circuitry is configured to generate authentication challenges and receive responses to those challenges. The responses and challenges may be saved as part of the security data. The processing circuitry may be further configured to send randomly selected challenges to embodiments of communication system having security circuitry. In certain embodiments described herein, transmitting the challenges to communication system allows communication systems to agree upon the challenge responses as shared encryption keys without required information which might compromise the secrecy of those keys to be transmitted, as described below. In some embodiments, challenge responses may be used to generate a string of key values which may be interleaved with a transmission such that the communication B can verify the integrity of a transmission from communication system A which includes otherwise unknown data.
Cambou (US 20200076624 A1) discloses challenge and response protocol, and After corrected responses are generated they are used as a private key which in turn is used as the input to the APKG which generates the corresponding cryptographic public key. The key pair may then be used to sign a transaction added to the blockchain and the cryptographic public key may be added to the ledger by the server.
Cambou (US 20230045288 A1) discloses a server applies a hashed password to a an array of PUF devices, and receives a response bitstream which is stored. The client later hashes the password a second predetermined number of times, which is less than the first predetermined number, and this second message digest is sent to the server. The server continues to hash the second message digest, generate PUF responses, and compare the result to the initially stored responses. The number of hashes necessary to achieve a match is the session key.
Adham (US 20190165956 A1) discloses a challenge address is received, where a security key is generated in response to the received challenge address. A first occurrence of the security key is generated under a first test condition. A second occurrence of the security key is generated under the first test condition.
Chandra (US 20160078252 A1) discloses a key generation circuitry receiving an address as a challenge input to a PUF circuitry and generates a key as a response output from the PUF circuitry.
In summary, the references made of record, fail to disclose the required claimed technical features recited by the independent claims limitations as a whole.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to BASSAM A NOAMAN whose telephone number is (571)272-2705. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 8:30 AM-5:00PM.
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, Eleni A. Shiferaw can be reached at (571) 272-3867. 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.
/BASSAM A NOAMAN/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2497