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 .
Status of Claims
Claims 13-30 are pending.
Claim Objections
Claim 30 is objected to because of the following informalities:
Claim 30 recites “a plurality of subscriber identify modules”.
Appropriate correction is required.
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) 13, 15, 17-19, 21-22, 24, 30 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Rice (PGPUB 2011/0055891), and further in view of Applicant Admitted Prior Art (Instant Specification dated 9/20/2024, page 1), hereinafter AAPA, and Ziat (US 9,537,858).
Regarding Claim 13:
Rice teaches a method for increasing safety and adaptability of subscriber identity modules ([abstract] Security of a device, such as a mobile device, is maintained via a heartbeat signal; as long as the heartbeat signal is detected, the device is allowed to perform operations; in an example configuration, the heartbeat signal is a low-power consuming, low data rate, signal allowing for processing of the heartbeat signal to be accomplished, at least in part, via the SIM of the device), the method comprising:
each of the subscriber identity modules including a processor, a storage, and a location determining device which is adapted to determine a location of the respective subscriber identity module ([0034]-[0035], device comprising processing and memory portion, implemented in part or in total, on a subscriber identity module (SIM); [0037] processing portion 42, i.e. implemented on SIM, capable of determining the location of device 2 (comprising processing portion 42)),
wherein each of the subscriber identity modules is configured to identify a respective user of the respective mobile device to a mobile network operator to which the subscriber identity module is connected ([0059] SIM includes International Mobile Subscriber Identity (IMSI) which is unique identifier of a subscriber),
wherein each of the subscriber identity modules makes at least a part of the plurality of functions available in a restricted manner or not at all in dependence on the determined location of the respective subscriber identity module ([0035], [0037] processing portion 42, i.e. implemented on SIM, capable of determining the location of device 2 (comprising processing portion 42); the processing portion 42 is capable of determining the location of the device 2, determining if the device 2 has moved into or out of a designated area, allowing access to a file, allowing operation of the device, allowing access to a peripheral; [0022] restrictions and/or appropriate action can be undertaken depending upon the location of the device 2; for example, the device 2 can be located in a designated area, such a secure area (e.g., designated office or laboratory), in which access to designated files and/or applications is allowed; if the device 2 is moved out of the designated area, access to the designated files and/or applications is denied; thus, appropriate action is taken when the device is not located in the designated geographic region; therefore, the processing portion 42, i.e. SIM, restricts the SIM provided functions of “allowing” access to a file, operation of the device, and access to a peripheral in dependence of the determined location),
wherein the part of the plurality of functions made available in a restricted manner or not at all include a functional range of an encryption algorithm and/or wherein the function is the access to data and/or applications ([0035], [0037] processing portion 42, i.e. implemented on SIM, capable of determining the location of device 2 (comprising processing portion 42); the processing portion 42 is capable of determining the location of the device 2, determining if the device 2 has moved into or out of a designated area, allowing access to a file, allowing operation of the device, allowing access to a peripheral; [0022] restrictions and/or appropriate action can be undertaken depending upon the location of the device 2; for example, the device 2 can be located in a designated area, such a secure area (e.g., designated office or laboratory), in which access to designated files and/or applications is allowed; if the device 2 is moved out of the designated area, access to the designated files and/or applications is denied; thus, appropriate action is taken when the device is not located in the designated geographic region; therefore, the processing portion 42, i.e. SIM, restricts the SIM provided functions of “allowing” access to a file, operation of the device, and access to a peripheral in dependence of the determined location).
Rice does not explicitly teach providing a plurality of subscriber identity modules, each of the subscriber identity modules being configured for employment in a respective mobile device.
However, AAPA teaches the concept of providing a plurality of subscriber identity modules, each of the subscriber identity modules being configured for employment in a respective mobile device (Instant specification [0002]-[0005] “SIM cards are firmly installed in mobile units (eUICC; embedded Universal Integrated Circuit Card), or are supplied as separate units in different form factors from 1FF to 4FF”).
It would have been obvious to one or ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the plurality of SIMs teachings of AAPA with the SIM-based location restriction teachings of Rice. AAPA acknowledges that multiple SIM cards exist; Rice provides evidence of multiple mobile devices, e.g. [0048] “packet-based mobile devices”, but never explicitly states that each said mobile device is of the type comprising a SIM. It would therefore be obvious to combine the teachings of Rice with the multiple SIMs taught by the AAPA, in order to incorporate the location-based access control teachings of Rice into as many devices as possible, thereby resulting in an overall improvement to the network security environment.
Neither Rice nor AAPA explicitly teaches wherein the plurality of subscriber identity modules are configured to provide an identical plurality of functions.
However, Ziat teaches the concept wherein a plurality of subscriber identity modules are configured to provide an identical plurality of functions ([col 3 line 65-col 4 line 19] storing binary packages for the multiple applications associated with each of the eSIMs can result in considerable memory consumption within the eUICC; it is therefore desirable to reduce the size of the eSIMs so that less memory is consumed; such an approach can provide the benefit of, for example, more rapid loading of eSIMs onto the eUICC (e.g., when a new subscription is desired), and enabling more eSIMs to be stored within the eUICC; according to one embodiment, the RAM application, the RFM application, and the NA applications are standardized such that each eSIM utilizes standardized applications and associated standardized binary packages).
It would have been obvious to one or ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the standardized subscriber identity module teachings of Ziat with the SIM-based location restriction teachings of Rice in view of AAPA, in order to incorporate the benefits of standardization, including rapid manufacturing, improved efficiency, and, as recognized by Ziat (e.g. [col 3 line 65-col 4 line 19], reduced memory size for more rapid loading, in addition to improved compatibility through adherence to international standards.
Regarding Claim 15:
Rice in view of AAPA in further view of Ziat teaches the method according to claim 13. In addition, AAPA teaches wherein providing the plurality of subscriber identity modules includes providing the plurality of subscriber identity modules to a plurality of different countries (Instant specification [0002]-[0005] “Further is known that SIM cards are supplied to different countries…”).
The rationale to combine Rice and AAPA is the same as provided for claim 13 due to the overlapping subject matter between claims 13 and 15.
Regarding Claim 17:
Rice in view of AAPA in further view of Ziat teaches the method according to claim 13. In addition, AAPA teaches wherein providing the plurality of subscriber identity modules includes providing the plurality of subscriber identity modules for use in a plurality of different Mobile Network Operators (MNOs) (Instant specification [0002]-[0005] “In dependence on which country SIM cards are supplied to, there are different requirements for the functions which a SIM card may make available. These requirements are defined on the one hand by the local Mobile Network Operators (MNOs) (i.e. “plurality of different MNOs”) and on the other hand by government agencies. The functions can be, for example, different safety requirement profiles of encryption algorithms or crypto-algorithms.”).
The rationale to combine Rice and AAPA is the same as provided for claim 13 due to the overlapping subject matter between claims 13 and 17.
Regarding Claim 18:
Rice in view of AAPA in further view of Ziat teaches the method according to claim 13. In addition, AAPA teaches wherein providing the plurality of subscriber identity modules includes providing the plurality of subscriber identity modules to a plurality of different markets (Instant specification [0002]-[0005] “Further is known that SIM cards are supplied to different countries…”; EXAMINER’S NOTE: without further definition limiting the scope of “markets”, different countries can certainly be seen as different markets).
The rationale to combine Rice and AAPA is the same as provided for claim 13 due to the overlapping subject matter between claims 13 and 18.
Regarding Claim 19:
Rice in view of AAPA in further view of Ziat teaches the method according to claim 13. In addition, Rice teaches wherein the storage has a volatile storage area and a non-volatile storage area ([0038] the memory portion 44 can be volatile (such as RAM), non-volatile (such as ROM, flash memory, etc.), or a combination thereof).
Regarding Claim 21:
Rice in view of AAPA in further view of Ziat teaches the method according to claim 13. In addition, Rice teaches wherein the location determining device, for determining the location, is adapted to employ a position detection module, wherein the position detection module can be integrated into the mobile device and/or the subscriber identity module ([0034] the device 2 can include a portable device; examples of which include a portable navigation device (e.g., GPS compatible device, A-GPS compatible device, etc.); paragraph [0035], [0037] processing portion 42, i.e. implemented on SIM, capable of determining the location of device 2 (comprising processing portion 42)).
Regarding Claim 22:
Rice in view of AAPA in further view of Ziat teaches the method according to claim 21. In addition, Rice teaches wherein the position detection module is adapted to process GPS and/or GLONASS information ([0034] the device 2 can include a portable device; examples of which include a portable navigation device (e.g., GPS compatible device, A-GPS compatible device, etc.); [0029] the device can determine its location in accordance with any appropriate means; for example, the device can determine its location utilizing the Global Positioning System (GPS), time difference of arrival calculations, assisted GPS (A-GPS), or a combination thereof).
Regarding Claim 24:
Rice in view of AAPA in further view of Ziat teaches the method according to claim 13. In addition, Rice teaches wherein the subscriber identity module is a SIM card, an UICC and/or an eUICC ([0034]-[0035] device comprising processing and memory portion, implemented in part or in total, on a subscriber identity module (SIM); paragraph 77, various techniques described herein can be implemented in connection with hardware.
Regarding Claim 30:
Rice teaches a method comprising:
providing an application executable on at least one subscriber identity module ([0034]-[0035], device comprising processing and memory portion, implemented in part or in total, on a subscriber identity module (SIM); [0037] processing portion 42, i.e. implemented on SIM, capable of determining the location of device 2 (comprising processing portion 42)),
each of the subscriber identity modules being employed or configured to be employed in a respective mobile device ([0059] physical equipment or Mobile Equipment (ME), such as a mobile phone or a laptop computer (e.g., user device 22) that is used by mobile subscribers, with a Subscriber identity Module (SIM)), each of the subscriber identity modules including a processor, a storage, and a location determining device which is adapted to determine a location of the respective subscriber identity module ([0034]-[0035], device comprising processing and memory portion, implemented in part or in total, on a subscriber identity module (SIM); [0037] processing portion 42, i.e. implemented on SIM, capable of determining the location of device 2 (comprising processing portion 42)),
wherein each of the subscriber identity modules is configured to identify a respective a user of the respective mobile device to a mobile network operator to which the subscriber identity module is connected ([0059] SIM includes International Mobile Subscriber Identity (IMSI) which is unique identifier of a subscriber),
wherein the application is adapted to make available in dependence on the determined location at least a part of the functions of the subscriber identity module in a restricted manner or not at all ([0035], [0037] processing portion 42, i.e. implemented on SIM, capable of determining the location of device 2 (comprising processing portion 42); the processing portion 42 is capable of determining the location of the device 2, determining if the device 2 has moved into or out of a designated area, allowing access to a file, allowing operation of the device, allowing access to a peripheral; [0022] restrictions and/or appropriate action can be undertaken depending upon the location of the device 2; for example, the device 2 can be located in a designated area, such a secure area (e.g., designated office or laboratory), in which access to designated files and/or applications is allowed; if the device 2 is moved out of the designated area, access to the designated files and/or applications is denied; thus, appropriate action is taken when the device is not located in the designated geographic region; therefore, the processing portion 42, i.e. SIM, restricts the SIM provided functions of “allowing” access to a file, operation of the device, and access to a peripheral in dependence of the determined location), wherein the application is adapted to determine the location of the subscriber identity module while employing a location determining device ([0034]-[0035], device comprising processing and memory portion, implemented in part or in total, on a subscriber identity module (SIM); [0037] processing portion 42, i.e. implemented on SIM, capable of determining the location of device 2 (comprising processing portion 42)), and
wherein the part of the plurality of functions made available by the application in a restricted manner or not at all include a functional range of an encryption algorithm and/or wherein the function is the access to data and/or applications ([0035], [0037] processing portion 42, i.e. implemented on SIM, capable of determining the location of device 2 (comprising processing portion 42); the processing portion 42 is capable of determining the location of the device 2, determining if the device 2 has moved into or out of a designated area, allowing access to a file, allowing operation of the device, allowing access to a peripheral; [0022] restrictions and/or appropriate action can be undertaken depending upon the location of the device 2; for example, the device 2 can be located in a designated area, such a secure area (e.g., designated office or laboratory), in which access to designated files and/or applications is allowed; if the device 2 is moved out of the designated area, access to the designated files and/or applications is denied; thus, appropriate action is taken when the device is not located in the designated geographic region; therefore, the processing portion 42, i.e. SIM, restricts the SIM provided functions of “allowing” access to a file, operation of the device, and access to a peripheral in dependence of the determined location).
Rice does not explicitly teach the at least one subscriber identity module of a plurality of subscriber identify modules.
However, AAPA teaches the concept of at least one subscriber identity module of a plurality of subscriber identify modules (Instant specification [0002]-[0005] “SIM cards are firmly installed in mobile units (eUICC; embedded Universal Integrated Circuit Card), or are supplied as separate units in different form factors from 1FF to 4FF”).
It would have been obvious to one or ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the plurality of SIMs teachings of AAPA with the SIM-based location restriction teachings of Rice. AAPA acknowledges that multiple SIM cards exist; Rice provides evidence of multiple mobile devices, e.g. [0048] “packet-based mobile devices”, but never explicitly states that each said mobile device is of the type comprising a SIM. It would therefore be obvious to combine the teachings of Rice with the multiple SIMs taught by the AAPA, in order to incorporate the location-based access control teachings of Rice into as many devices as possible, thereby resulting in an overall improvement to the network security environment.
Neither Rice nor AAPA explicitly teaches wherein each of the plurality of subscriber identity modules are configured to provide an identical plurality of functions.
However, Ziat teaches the concept wherein a plurality of subscriber identity modules are configured to provide an identical plurality of functions ([col 3 line 65-col 4 line 19] storing binary packages for the multiple applications associated with each of the eSIMs can result in considerable memory consumption within the eUICC; it is therefore desirable to reduce the size of the eSIMs so that less memory is consumed; such an approach can provide the benefit of, for example, more rapid loading of eSIMs onto the eUICC (e.g., when a new subscription is desired), and enabling more eSIMs to be stored within the eUICC; according to one embodiment, the RAM application, the RFM application, and the NA applications are standardized such that each eSIM utilizes standardized applications and associated standardized binary packages).
It would have been obvious to one or ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the standardized subscriber identity module teachings of Ziat with the SIM-based location restriction teachings of Rice in view of AAPA, in order to incorporate the benefits of standardization, including rapid manufacturing, improved efficiency, and, as recognized by Ziat (e.g. [col 3 line 65-col 4 line 19], reduced memory size for more rapid loading, in addition to improved compatibility through adherence to international standards.
Claim(s) 14, 20, 28 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Rice in view of AAPA and Ziat, and further in view of Rahul et al (PGPUB 2009/0082001).
Regarding Claim 14:
Rice in view of AAPA and Ziat teaches the method according to claim 13.
Neither Rice nor AAPA nor Ziat explicitly teaches the method, further comprising manufacturing the plurality of subscriber identity modules.
However, Rahul teaches the concept of manufacturing a plurality of subscriber identity modules ([0010] MEs and/or the user identity modules (plural) in the UEs; [0083] user identity module is a SIM; [0031], [0109] user identity modules/SIMs are modified during manufacture).
It would have been obvious to one or ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the manufacturing SIMs teachings of Rahul with the SIM-based location restriction teachings of Rice in view of AAPA and Ziat. It is well-known within the arts that for an invention to be usable, it must somehow be manufactured or created; there is no invention to be utilized unless it is first manufactured. It would therefore have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to manufacture SIM cards for use in mobile devices, as without manufacturing them first, the SIM cards would have no utility.
Regarding Claim 20:
Rice in view of AAPA and Ziat teaches the method according to claim 13.
Neither Rice nor AAPA nor Ziat explicitly teaches wherein the location determining device is adapted to determine the location with the help of a mobile radio cell which the subscriber identity module is registered with.
However, Rahul teaches the concept wherein a location determining device is adapted to determine a location with help of a mobile radio cell which a subscriber identity module is registered with ([0111] positioning approach is cell identifying approach; [0005]-[0006] cell identifying approach commonly utilized in cell networks; each cell has globally unique identification code; mobile terminal communicates with base station identified by global cell identity with strongest signal; the mobile terminal location may be determined based on global cell identity).
It would have been obvious to one or ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the cell location determination teachings of Rahul with the SIM-based location restriction teachings of Rice in view of AAPA and Ziat, in order to provide location determination methods which incorporate assistance from a cellular network/base station, thereby allowing simple or limited devices to function using location based restrictions without needing to provide built-in technologies like GPS receivers which could increase cost or complexity.
Regarding Claim 28:
Rice in view of AAPA and Ziat teaches the method according to claim 13.
Neither Rice nor AAPA nor Ziat explicitly teaches wherein the subscriber identity module makes at least a part of the functions available in a restricted manner or not at all, in dependence on the mobile network operator to which the subscriber identity module is connected.
However, Rahul teaches the concept wherein a subscriber identity module makes at least a part of functions available in a restricted manner or not at all, in dependence on a mobile network operator to which the subscriber identity module is connected ([0111] positioning approach is cell identifying approach; [0005]-[0006] cell identifying approach commonly utilized in cell networks; each cell has globally unique identification code; mobile terminal communicates with base station identified by global cell identity with strongest signal; the mobile terminal location may be determined based on global cell identity; [0112] the GCIs of the cells covering the company are written into the location shield list of the SIM (if the SIM as shown in FIG. 5 is provided, the content of the location shield list is written into the ME as in solution I) and the function to be controlled is associated with the camera).
It would have been obvious to one or ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the cell location determination teachings of Rahul with the SIM-based location restriction teachings of Rice in view of AAPA and Ziat, in order to provide location determination methods which incorporate assistance from a cellular network/base station, thereby allowing simple or limited devices to function using location based restrictions without needing to provide built-in technologies like GPS receivers which could increase cost or complexity.
Claim(s) 16, 27, 29 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Rice in view of AAPA and Ziat, and further in view of Ronca (PGPUB 2015/0271156).
Regarding Claim 16:
Rice in view of AAPA and Ziat teaches the method according to claim 15. In addition, AAPA teaches wherein the plurality of different countries permit or require different functional ranges of an encryption algorithm (Instant specification [0002]-[0005] “In dependence on which country SIM cards are supplied to, there are different requirements for the functions which a SIM card may make available. These requirements are defined on the one hand by the local Mobile Network Operators (MNOs) and on the other hand by government agencies. The functions can be, for example, different safety requirement profiles of encryption algorithms or crypto-algorithms.”).
The rationale to combine Rice and AAPA is the same as provided for claim 15 due to the overlapping subject matter between claims 15 and 16.
Neither Rice nor AAPA nor Ziat explicitly teaches wherein the part of the plurality of functions made available in a restricted manner or not at all include a functional range of an encryption algorithm.
However, Ronca teaches the concept wherein part of a plurality of functions made available in a restricted manner or not at all include a functional range of an encryption algorithm ([abstract] a geo-fence cryptographic key material comprising a geo-fence description defining a geographic area and associated cryptographic key material is assigned to an entity for use in authenticated communications; the validity of the cryptographic material changes state based on whether the entity is inside or outside the geographic area; [0090]-[0091] policies determine key length of a cryptographic key generated at a subscriber tied to geo-fence region; the key management system 304 can access one or more policies to determine the appropriate key properties (e.g., key length, algorithm used to generate the key pair, and so forth), and the key management system 304 can initiate the appropriate key generation on the subscriber 302; thus, information such as the "what" and "how" are determined by the key management system 304 while the actual key generation is performed by the subscriber 302; the geo-fence to be associated with a GFKM is determined by a policy and/or set of policies and/or other such information and/or some other way (e.g., set by an administrator); in some embodiments, the policy and/or policies and/or other information may be known by, or available to, the subscriber 302; in these embodiments, the appropriate geo-fence may be determined by the subscriber 302 (e.g., operation 308); [0072] location of system within geo-fence determines validity of particular key).
It would have been obvious to one or ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the geo-fence key length teachings of Ronca with the SIM-based location restriction teachings of Rice in view of AAPA and Ziat, in order to include additional features subject to location based access restrictions, such as controlling the length of a key using a security policy within particular geographical regions, allowing subscribers and authentication servers to configure the required level of encryption security based on local requirements and preferences.
Regarding Claim 27:
Rice in view of AAPA and Ziat teaches the method according to claim 13.
Neither Rice nor AAPA nor Ziat explicitly teaches wherein the part of the plurality of functions made available in a restricted manner or not at all include the key length of a cryptographic algorithm, in particular a signature and/or hash algorithm.
However, Ronca teaches the concept wherein a part of a plurality of functions made available in a restricted manner or not at all include a key length of a cryptographic algorithm, in particular a signature and/or hash algorithm ([abstract] a geo-fence cryptographic key material comprising a geo-fence description defining a geographic area and associated cryptographic key material is assigned to an entity for use in authenticated communications; the validity of the cryptographic material changes state based on whether the entity is inside or outside the geographic area; [0090]-[0091] policies determine key length of a cryptographic key generated at a subscriber tied to geo-fence region; the key management system 304 can access one or more policies to determine the appropriate key properties (e.g., key length, algorithm used to generate the key pair, and so forth), and the key management system 304 can initiate the appropriate key generation on the subscriber 302; thus, information such as the "what" and "how" are determined by the key management system 304 while the actual key generation is performed by the subscriber 302; the geo-fence to be associated with a GFKM is determined by a policy and/or set of policies and/or other such information and/or some other way (e.g., set by an administrator); in some embodiments, the policy and/or policies and/or other information may be known by, or available to, the subscriber 302; in these embodiments, the appropriate geo-fence may be determined by the subscriber 302 (e.g., operation 308); [0072] location of system within geo-fence determines validity of particular key; [0042] cryptographic key material means a key pair; [0043] key pair means public/private key combination for use in verifying signatures).
It would have been obvious to one or ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the geo-fence key length teachings of Ronca with the SIM-based location restriction teachings of Rice in view of AAPA and Ziat, in order to include additional features subject to location based access restrictions, such as controlling the length of a key using a security policy within particular geographical regions, allowing subscribers and authentication servers to configure the required level of encryption security based on local requirements and preferences.
Regarding Claim 29:
Rice in view of AAPA and Ziat teaches the method according to claim 13.
Neither Rice nor AAPA nor Ziat explicitly teaches wherein the part of the functions made available by the subscriber identity module in the restricted manner or not at all includes a signature.
However, Ronca teaches the concept wherein part of functions made available by a module in a restricted manner or not at all includes a signature ([abstract] a geo-fence cryptographic key material comprising a geo-fence description defining a geographic area and associated cryptographic key material is assigned to an entity for use in authenticated communications; the validity of the cryptographic material changes state based on whether the entity is inside or outside the geographic area; [0042] cryptographic key material means a key pair; [0043] key pair means public/private key combination for use in verifying signatures).
It would have been obvious to one or ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the geo-fence key length teachings of Ronca with the SIM-based location restriction teachings of Rice in view of AAPA and Ziat, in order to include additional features subject to location based access restrictions, such as controlling the use of a key for signatures, using a security policy within particular geographical regions, allowing subscribers and authentication servers to configure the required access to signature security based on local requirements and preferences.
Claim(s) 23 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Rice in view of AAPA and Ziat, and further in view of Robinson (PGPUB 2007/0058814).
Regarding Claim 23:
Rice in view of AAPA and Ziat teaches the method according to claim 13.
Neither Rice nor AAPA nor Ziat teaches wherein the location comprises at least one information item as to the country the subscriber identity module is located in.
However, Robinson teaches the concept wherein a location comprises at least one information item as to a country a module is located in ([0045] GPS module provides geographic location information to key strength controlling agent; GPS coordinates mapped to table of GPS coordinates to determine country in which the device is located; if device is in restricted country or geographic area, the GPS location signals cause the key strength controlling agent to change automatically the effective key strength); and
Rice teaches wherein the module is the subscriber identity module ([0034]-[0035] device comprising processing and memory portion, implemented in part or in total, on a subscriber identity module (SIM)).
It would have been obvious to one or ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the country location data teachings of Robinson with the SIM-based location restriction teachings of Rice in view of AAPA and Ziat, in order to include additional features in compliance with export-control restrictions, thereby allowing a device to remain legally in compliance with international restrictions automatically, allowing device use in a wider array of locations and use contexts without a user inadvertently violating the law by forgetting to manually adjust or delete encryption applications and features upon transitioning from one affected region to another.
Claim(s) 25-26 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Rice in view of AAPA and Ziat, and further in view of Erskine et al (PGPUB 2005/0282559).
Regarding Claim 25:
Rice in view of AAPA and Ziat teaches the method according to claim 13.
Neither Rice nor AAPA nor Ziat teaches wherein the part of the plurality of functions made available in a restricted manner or not at all are made available in dependence on the determined location are stored in a whitelist.
However, Erskine teaches the concept wherein functions provided by a subscriber identity module in dependence on a determined location are stored in a whitelist in a storage of the subscriber identity module ([0159] disclosed system can employ a Subscriber Identity Module (SIM) module within the wireless phone to provide certain filters for outgoing calls from the respective wireless phone under supervision; parameters relevant to outgoing call restrictions can be downloaded or otherwise communicated to the SIM within the respective wireless phone from the User Profile Database 32 and can then be stored on and processed using the SIM when an outgoing call is dialed from the respective wireless phone; by way of example, and not limitation, location restrictions, never-accessible number restrictions, time of day restrictions and/or date restrictions specific to the user can be stored within the SIM of the respective wireless phone; in response to the dialing of an outgoing number, the restrictions applicable to the respective phone and stored within the SIM can be tested to determine whether the connection of the call would be contrary to any restrictions; the processing logic associated with this determination can be made by a processor within the SIM or within the wireless phone; additionally, the parameters defining the use restrictions (or permissive uses, i.e. “whitelist”) can be stored on a memory within the SIM or alternatively within portions of a memory shared with program code executed by a processor within the wireless handset).
It would have been obvious to one or ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the whitelist teachings of Erskine with the SIM-based location restriction teachings of Rice in view of AAPA and Ziat. Whitelists are a technique in the security arts which improve system security by providing access to only those applications which are known to be safe, thereby eliminating threats from software which has not been properly vetted for safety, with the tradeoff of limiting user convenience.
Regarding Claim 26:
Rice in view of AAPA and Ziat teaches the method according to claim 13.
Neither Rice nor AAPA nor Ziat explicitly teaches wherein the functions not available in dependence on the determined location are stored in a blacklist.
However, Erskine teaches the concept wherein functions not provided by not being made available by a subscriber identity module in dependence on a determined location are stored in a blacklist in a storage of the subscriber identity module ([0159] disclosed system can employ a Subscriber Identity Module (SIM) module within the wireless phone to provide certain filters for outgoing calls from the respective wireless phone under supervision; parameters relevant to outgoing call restrictions can be downloaded or otherwise communicated to the SIM within the respective wireless phone from the User Profile Database 32 and can then be stored on and processed using the SIM when an outgoing call is dialed from the respective wireless phone; by way of example, and not limitation, location restrictions, never-accessible number restrictions, time of day restrictions and/or date restrictions specific to the user can be stored within the SIM of the respective wireless phone; in response to the dialing of an outgoing number, the restrictions applicable to the respective phone and stored within the SIM can be tested to determine whether the connection of the call would be contrary to any restrictions; the processing logic associated with this determination can be made by a processor within the SIM or within the wireless phone; additionally, the parameters defining the use restrictions (i.e. “blacklist”) can be stored on a memory within the SIM or alternatively within portions of a memory shared with program code executed by a processor within the wireless handset).
It would have been obvious to one or ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the blacklist teachings of Erskine with the SIM-based location restriction teachings of Rice in view of AAPA and Ziat. Blacklists are a technique in the security arts which improve system security by preventing access to applications which are known to be unsafe or malicious, thereby providing a measure of safety to a user without limiting functionality unless necessary, thus improving the security environment.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 1/2/2026 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
Regarding the claim objections:
Applicant’s amendments have overcome the previous objections, which are therefore withdrawn. However, the amendments have raised new objections, which are presented above.
Regarding the rejection of claims under 35 USC 112:
Applicant’s amendments have overcome the previous rejections, which are therefore withdrawn.
Regarding the rejection of claims under 35 USC 103:
Applicant’s arguments consist of the mere assertion that the prior art of record fails to teach the subject matter added by amendment. However, a new ground(s) for rejection is provided above which does teach this new subject matter, as added by amendment.
Applicant’s arguments with regard to independent claim 30 are similar to those regarding claim 13 and are therefore responded to in a similar way.
Applicant further argues that the dependent claims are allowable due to depending on an allowable independent claim. However, as shown above, the independent claims are not allowable.
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 FORREST L CAREY whose telephone number is (571)270-7814. The examiner can normally be reached 9:00AM-5:30PM M-F.
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, William Korzuch can be reached at (571) 272-7589. 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.
/FORREST L CAREY/Examiner, Art Unit 2491
/WILLIAM R KORZUCH/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2491
Prosecution Insights