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 .
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments, see remarks, filed 06/30/2026, with respect to the rejection(s) of claim(s) claims 1, 3-17 under 102 have been fully considered and are persuasive. Therefore, the rejection has been withdrawn. However, upon further consideration, a new ground(s) of rejection is made in view of Lansford.
Specification
Applicant is reminded of the proper content of an abstract of the disclosure.
A patent abstract is a concise statement of the technical disclosure of the patent and should include that which is new in the art to which the invention pertains. The abstract should not refer to purported merits or speculative applications of the invention and should not compare the invention with the prior art.
If the patent is of a basic nature, the entire technical disclosure may be new in the art, and the abstract should be directed to the entire disclosure. If the patent is in the nature of an improvement in an old apparatus, process, product, or composition, the abstract should include the technical disclosure of the improvement. The abstract should also mention by way of example any preferred modifications or alternatives.
Where applicable, the abstract should include the following: (1) if a machine or apparatus, its organization and operation; (2) if an article, its method of making; (3) if a chemical compound, its identity and use; (4) if a mixture, its ingredients; (5) if a process, the steps.
Extensive mechanical and design details of an apparatus should not be included in the abstract. The abstract should be in narrative form and generally limited to a single paragraph within the range of 50 to 150 words in length.
See MPEP § 608.01(b) for guidelines for the preparation of patent abstracts.
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, 7, 9, 11-12, 14 and 16-17 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Sen et al., (US Publication No. 2017/0272182), hereinafter “Sen”, and further in view of Lansford, (US Publication No. 2003/0193991), hereinafter “Lansford”.
Regarding claims 1, 16-17, Sen discloses
transmitting, by the connected device, the present radio signal to an access point in a present wireless connection [Sen, Abstract, paragraphs 64-73].
Sen does not specifically disclose, however Lansford teaches
randomly adjusting, by a connected device, a present carrier frequency of a present radio signal within an acceptable tolerance range [Lansford, Abstract, paragraphs 20-24, figures 1A, 1B, 2], wherein randomly adjusting the present carrier frequency includes adjusting the present carrier frequency so that the present carrier frequency is randomly different from one or more past carrier frequencies of one or more past wireless connections of the connected device [Lansford, Abstract, paragraphs 20-24, figures 1A, 1B, 2].
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to include randomly adjusting a carrier frequency within an acceptable tolerance range to different frequencies each transmission (different than previous transmissions) in order to enhance the security of the communication sessions. It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art to combine Lansford’s random carrier frequency adjustments with Sen’s ability to adjust frequency as both arts relate to a similar concept.
Regarding claim 7, Sen-Lansford further discloses
intercepting the present radio signal transmitted to the access point in the present wireless connection [Sen, Abstract, paragraphs 20-28, 64-73]; generating a present radio frequency fingerprint based on the present radio signal [Sen, Abstract, paragraphs 20-28, 64-73]; and failing in a device identification of the connected device based on the present radio frequency fingerprint because the present radio frequency fingerprint mismatches with one or more past radio frequency fingerprints of the connected device [Sen, Abstract, paragraphs 20-28, 64-73].
Regarding claim 9, Sen-Lansford further discloses
in response to detecting that the access point fulfills a first predetermined condition, ceasing to randomly adjust, by the connected device, the present carrier frequency of the present radio signal within the acceptable tolerance range; and continuing to transmit, from the connected device to the access point, the present radio signal in the present wireless connection [Sen, Abstract, paragraphs 20-28, 64-73].
Regarding claim 11, Sen-Lansford further discloses
intercepting the present radio signal transmitted to the access point in the present wireless connection; generating a present radio frequency fingerprint based on the present radio signal; and succeeding in a device identification of the connected device based on the present radio frequency fingerprint because the present radio frequency fingerprint matches with one or more past radio frequency fingerprints of the connected device [Sen, Abstract, paragraphs 20-28, 64-73].
Regarding claim 12, Sen-Lansford further discloses
in response to detecting that the access point fulfills a second predetermined condition, continuing to randomly adjust, by the connected device, the present carrier frequency of the present radio signal within the acceptable tolerance range; and continuing to transmit, from the connected device to the access point, the present radio signal in the present wireless connection [Lansford, Abstract, paragraphs 20-24, figures 1A, 1B, 2].
Regarding claim 14, Sen-Lansford further discloses
intercepting the present radio signal transmitted to the access point in the present wireless connection; generating a present radio frequency fingerprint based on the present radio signal; and failing in a device identification of the connected device based on the present radio frequency fingerprint because the present radio frequency fingerprint mismatches with one or more past radio frequency fingerprints of the connected device [Sen, Abstract, paragraphs 20-28, 64-73].
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 3-6, 8, 10, 13, 15 are objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, but would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
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
Prosecution Insights