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 .
DETAILED ACTION
This Office Action is in response to the application 18/944,151. Claims 1 and 14 are independent claims. Claims 1-13 have been examined and are pending.This Action is made non-FINAL.
Drawings
The drawings were received on 11/12/2024. These drawings are reviewed and accepted by the Examiner.
Priority
Acknowledgment is made of applicant’s claim for foreign priority under 35 U.S.C. 119 (a)-(d). The certified copy has been filed in parent Application No. 23209427.6, filed on Nov. 13, 2023.
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement (IDS), submitted on 11/27/2023 is being considered by the examiner.
Claim Objections
Claims 7 and 9 are objected to because of the following informalities:
Regarding claim 7, claim 7 recites the limitations “comparing the current value …;” and “determining the authentication …” To properly recites embodiment and corresponding functions performed by the recited embodiment of an apparatus/system claim and to avoid reciting both method and apparatus/system in a single claim, it’s suggested that the aforementioned limitations be further amended to “wherein the processing circuitry further configured to: compare the current value …; and determine the authentication …”; See MPEP §2173.05(p) and IPXL Holdings, 430 F.3d at 1384; See also In re Katz Interactive Call Processing Patent Litig., 639 F.3d 1303 (Fed. Cir. 2011) for details.
Regarding claim 9, similar to claim 7, it’s suggested that claim 9 be further amended to “wherein the processing circuitry is further configured to repeatedly determine of the current value of the plurality of L1 parameters; perform of authentication of the communication device; and updating of a database with a predefined repetition period.”
Claim Interpretation - 35 USC § 112
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 limitation(s) is/are: “a receiver configured to receive,” recited in claim 1.
Because this/these claim limitation(s) is/are being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, it/they is/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 this/these limitation(s) 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 limitation(s) recite(s) sufficient structure to perform the claimed function so as to avoid it/them being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph.
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.
Claims 1, 6-7, 11, and 14 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Pinchang Zhang et al. (“ Zhang, “ Utilizing Multi-Dimensional MmWave MIMO Channel Feature for Location Verification” , 2022, pages 1-17) in view of Run-Fa Liao et al. (“Liao,” Deep-Learning-Base physical Layer Authentication for Industrial Wireless Sensor Networks, 28 May 2019, pages 1-17) and further in view of Rabah Ouchikh (“Ouchikh ,” Sparse channel estimation algorithm for OTFS system, 2022, pages 2158-2170)
Regarding claim 1, Zhang teaches an apparatus for physical layer authentication (Zhang: abstract, we address the problem of authenticating transmitters in millimeter-wave (mmWave) multiple-input multiple-output (MIMO) communication systems, and propose a location verification scheme based on multi-dimensional mmWave MIMO channel features), the apparatus comprising:
a receiver configured to:
receive, over a wireless channel, a signal from a communication device for authentication purposes (Zhang: Section 2.1. Problem Formulation (page 3), describing "a three-entity model including a legitimate transmitter (Alice), a malicious attacker (Eve) and a legitimate base station (Bob), where... Bob is equipped with Nr antennas"; Section 2.3 Communication Model (page 5), "The baseband signal received by Bob at time t is written as..."). Zhang does not explicitly teach that signals are received "after a previous authentication."
However, in an analogous art, Liao teaches the two-stage authentication model where physical layer authentication is performed on signals received after a previous (upper layer) authentication (Liao: Section 3, System Model (page 6), "First of all, each node needs to be identified by the upper layer authentication to facilitate labeling the corresponding CSI. In the initialization phase, we trained our neural networks through the training data (i.e., CSIs) and corresponding labels. Then, we authenticated the legitimate and illegal sensor nodes with newly-estimated CSI in the authentication phase."; Section 4.1. DNN-Based Sensor Nodes’ Authentication (page 7), "In the initialization phase, the base station collects channel state information of each sensor node and performs the corresponding labeling according to the upper layer protocol authentication (e.g., EAP, AKA).").
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the teachings of Liao with the method and system of Zhang to include after a previous authentication. One would have been motivated to because:
Liao explicitly teaches that upper layer authentication (e.g., EAP, AKA protocols) must occur first to establish node identity before physical layer authentication can be performed, providing a practical framework for implementing physical layer authentication in real systems; Using physical layer authentication as a complement to (rather than replacement for) upper layer authentication leverages the strengths of both: upper layer provides strong initial identity verification while physical layer provides lightweight continuous verification; Liao teaches that this two-stage model enables lightweight authentication suitable for resource-constrained industrial wireless sensor networks (Liao: Section 1, Introduction (pages 1-3), "lightweight authentication is urgently needed to enhance the security of industrial wireless sensor networks (IWSNs) while ensuring low latency"); The combination yields predictable results with no unexpected synergy- simply applying the well-known layered security approach explicitly taught by Liao to Zhang's authentication system.
The combination of Zhang and Lao further teaches processing circuitry configured to:
determine, based on the received signal, current value of a plurality of physical-layer, L1, parameters of the wireless channel descriptive for a sparse channel (Zhang: Section 3.1 Estimation of MmWave Channels (page 5), "To exploit the fine-grained mmWave channel features, we estimate the channel parameters separately. We first estimate AAoA and EAoA, and then estimate the mmWave path gain"; Abstract: we first examine the mmWave MIMO channel features in terms of azimuth angle of arrival (AAoA), elevation angle of arrival (EAoA), and path gain, and then extract these fine-grained channel features through the maximum-likelihood (ML) estimation method. Based extract these fine-grained channel features through the maximum-likelihood (ML) estimation method"; Section 1. Introduction (Pages 1-3), discussing "limited scattering characteristics of the mmWave communication environments").
obtain, from a storage, value of the plurality of L1 parameters stored at the previous authentication (Zhang: Section 3.2. Location Validation (page 9), "The location validation is implemented by comparing the similarity between the current channel parameters and the previous ones with preset thresholds, based on a binary hypothesis test"; Section 2.1 Problem Formulation, "Bob measures and stores physical layer features information... with the help of signal estimation techniques"); and
perform authentication of the communication device based on the current value(s) of the plurality of L1 parameters and the value(s) of the plurality of L1 parameters stored (Zhang: Section 3.2. Location Validation (page 9), "The location validation is implemented by comparing the similarity between the current channel parameters and the previous ones with preset thresholds, based on a binary hypothesis test"; abstract, “Based on the extracted feature parameters, authentication validation is cast in the framework of hypothesis testing theory).
wherein
the signature vector having distance, azimuth angle, and elevation angle, each being determined from the plurality of L1 parameters (Zhang: Abstract: "mmWave MIMO channel features in terms of azimuth angle of arrival (AAoA), elevation angle of arrival (EAoA), and path gain"; Section 2.2 Channel Model (page 4), defining the channel model with AAoA (ϕl) and EAoA (θl) parameters). ZHANG teaches that path gain relates to distance through established path loss models; Section 5.5 Impact of Kα on the Authentication Performance (page 14), equation (67) showing "σ²α,l,XB = K(d₀/d_l,XB)^ς Ω" relating path gain variance to distance). The combination of AAoA, EAoA, and path gain (functionally related to distance) forms the signature vector for authentication); and
the performing of the authentication is based on one or more of the distance, the azimuth angle, and the elevation angle (Zhang: (Abstract: "propose a location verification scheme based on multi-dimensional mmWave MIMO channel features"; Section 6 Conclusions (page 16), "the proposed authentication scheme can benefit from using multi-dimensional mmWave channel features" including AAoA and EAoA).
Regarding Limitation wherein the plurality of L1 parameters define a signature vector within a sparse domain being any of a Doppler domain, a delay-Doppler domain, and a delay-Doppler-angle domain.
Zhang teaches sparse channel characteristics in mmWave MIMO and uses angular parameters for authentication but does not explicitly teach representing the signature vector in a Doppler domain, delay-Doppler domain, or delay-Doppler-angle domain.
However, in an analogous art, Ouchikh teaches representing channel parameters in the delay-Doppler domain (Ouchikh: Abstract: "channel estimation in the Delay-Doppler domain", "OTFS modulation... is one of the promising techniques designed in the 2D Delay-Doppler domain"; Section 2.2. Problem formulation (page 2161): "Benefiting from the fact that the channel is sparse in the Delay-Doppler domain, CE can be seen as a sparse recovery problem"; Abstract , describing "the unknown channel vector into an unknown sparse support vector, which corresponds to the locations of delay and Doppler taps").
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the teachings of Ouchikh with the method and system of Zhang and Liaoto include the plurality of L1 parameters define a signature vector within a sparse domain being any of a Doppler domain, a delay-Doppler domain, and a delay-Doppler-angle domain. One would have been motivated to make this combination because:
Ouchikh explicitly teaches that delay-Doppler domain representation provides inherent sparsity (Ouchikh: Section 1. introduction (pages 2158-2159): "the channel is sparse in the Delay-Doppler domain"), which reduces computational complexity for channel parameter estimation; Both references address wireless channel characterization in high-frequency/high-mobility systems where sparse representations are advantageous for reducing processing overhead; The combination would yield predictable results of applying known sparse domain representation techniques to authentication systems, as both sparse channel estimation and physical layer authentication exploit the same underlying channel parameters. Ouchikh teaches that sparse representation enables efficient parameter estimation with reduced pilot overhead (Ouchikh: Section 3 (page 2161). discussing reduced complexity through sparse recovery algorithms), which would improve the efficiency of Ouchikh's authentication system.
Regarding claim 6, the combination of the combination of Zhang, Liao, and Ouchikh teaches the apparatus according to claim 1. The combination of the combination of Zhang, Liao, and Ouchikh further teaches, wherein the plurality of L1 parameters comprise one or more of distance, azimuth angle, and/or elevation angle (Zhang: Abstract: "mmWave MIMO channel features in terms of azimuth angle of arrival (AAoA), elevation angle of arrival (EAoA), and path gain"; Section 3.1. Estimation of MmWave Channels (page 5), “We first estimate AAoA and EAoA”).
Regarding claim 7, the combination of Zhang, Liao, and Ouchikh teaches apparatus according to claim 1. The combination of Zhang, Liao, and Ouchikh further teaches wherein the performing of authentication of the communication device comprises:
comparing the current value of the plurality of L1 parameters with the stored value of the plurality of L1 parameters (Zhang: Section 3.2: "The location validation is implemented by comparing the similarity between the current channel parameters and the previous ones with preset thresholds"; Under BRI, comparing current channel parameters to previous (stored) channel parameters corresponds to "comparing the current value of the plurality of L1 parameters with the stored value of the plurality of L1 parameters");
determining the authentication of the communication device as successful, in case a predefined condition is fulfilled (Zhang: Section 3.2: When the difference between current and stored parameters is within the preset threshold, the device location is validated as legitimate; Under BRI, validating the device as legitimate when the comparison satisfies the threshold condition corresponds to "determining the authentication as successful in case a predefined condition is fulfilled," where the predefined condition is the difference being within the threshold); and
determining the authentication of the communication device as not successful, in case the predefined condition is not fulfilled (Zhang: Section 3.2: When the difference between current and stored parameters exceeds the preset threshold, the device is identified as an attacker; Under BRI, identifying the device as an attacker when the comparison does not satisfy the threshold condition corresponds to "determining the authentication as not successful in case the predefined condition is not fulfilled").
Regarding claim 11, the combination of Zhang, Liao, and Ouchikh teaches the apparatus according to claim 1. The combination of Zhang, Liao, and Ouchikh, further teaches, wherein the previous authentication is an authentication performed by an upper layer (Liao: Section 3, System Model (page 6), "First of all, each node needs to be identified by the upper layer authentication to facilitate labeling the corresponding CSI. In the initialization phase, we trained our neural networks through the training data (i.e., CSIs) and corresponding labels. Then, we authenticated the legitimate and illegal sensor nodes with newly-estimated CSI in the authentication phase."; Section 4.1. DNN-Based Sensor Nodes’ Authentication (page 7), "In the initialization phase, the base station collects channel state information of each sensor node and performs the corresponding labeling according to the upper layer protocol authentication (e.g., EAP, AKA)).
Regarding claim 14, claim 14 is directed to a method for physical layer authentication associated with the method claimed in claim 14; claim 14 is similar in scope to claim 1, and is therefore rejected under similar rationale.
Claim 2 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Pinchang Zhang et al. (“ Zhang, “ Utilizing Multi-Dimensional MmWave MIMO Channel Feature for Location Verification” , 2022, pages 1-17) in view of Run-Fa Liao et al. (“Liao,” Deep-Learning-Base physical Layer Authentication for Industrial Wireless Sensor Networks, 28 May 2019, pages 1-17), and Rabah Ouchikh (“Ouchikh ,” Sparse channel estimation algorithm for OTFS system, 2022, pages 2158-2170), and further in view of Pang et al. (“Pang,” US 11,877,153).
Regarding claim 2, the combination of Zhang, Liao, and Ouchikh teaches the apparatus according to claim 1. Zhang, Liao, and Ouchikh do not explicitly disclose, wherein the processing circuitry is further configured to update the value of the plurality of L1 parameters stored in the storage.
However, in an analogous art, Pang discloses wherein the processing circuitry is further configured to update the value of the plurality of L1 parameters stored in the storage (Pang: Col. 6, lines21-28, The communication node 2, 3 is also configured to set102, or update, a CSI reference, and to set 108, or update, the authentication threshold; Col. 4, lines 59-63, The CSI reference and the authentication threshold may be updated, suitably when an update time has lapsed, and the communication method 100 may include one or more steps for determining 126 whether the CSI reference and/or the authentication threshold should be updated; Col. 4, line 63 to Col. 5, line 3, Such an updating time should suitably be set in view of the industrial process in question, and stationary nodes in an environment with small or no mobility of radio frequency interfering equipment can be expected to have a longer time between such updates than nodes arranged in an environment that affects radio transmission and thus affects the CSI, such as the CIR);
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the teachings of Pang with the method and system of Zhang, Liao, and Ouchikh to include wherein the processing circuitry is further configured to update the value of the plurality of L1 parameters stored in the storage. One would have been motivated to update stored parameters ensures continued accurate authentication as channel conditioned change (Pang: Col. 4, line 63 to Col. 5, line 3).
Claim 3 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Pinchang Zhang et al. (“ Zhang, “ Utilizing Multi-Dimensional MmWave MIMO Channel Feature for Location Verification” , 2022, pages 1-17) in view of Run-Fa Liao et al. (“Liao,” Deep-Learning-Base physical Layer Authentication for Industrial Wireless Sensor Networks, 28 May 2019, pages 1-17) and Rabah Ouchikh (“Ouchikh ,” Sparse channel estimation algorithm for OTFS system, 2022, pages 2158-2170), and further in view of Jie Tang et al. (“Tang-2020,” “MmWave MIMO Physical layer Authentication by Using Channel Sparsity”, 2020, pages 1-4).
Regarding claim 3, the combination of Zhang, Liao, and Ouchikh teaches the apparatus according to claim 1. Zhang, Liao, and Ouchikh do not explicitly disclose, wherein the processing circuitry is configured to select, among L1 parameters, said plurality of parameters of the wireless channel that are descriptive for a sparse channel.
However, in an analogous art, Tang-2020 discloses wherein the processing circuitry is configured to select, among L1 parameters, said plurality of parameters of the wireless channel that are descriptive for a sparse channel (Tang: Abstract, By extracting the low-rank and sparse peak of virtual angle of arrival (AoA) and departure (AoD) information of mmWave MIMO virtual channel in the beamspace domain, we shows its validity and effectiveness to improve the authentication performance.).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the teachings of Tang-2020 with the method and system of Zhang, Liao, and Ouchikh to include wherein the processing circuitry is configured to select, among L1 parameters, said plurality of parameters of the wireless channel that are descriptive for a sparse channel. One would have been motivated to improve the physical layer authentication for mm Wave systems (Tang: abstract).
Claims 4-5 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Pinchang Zhang et al. (“ Zhang, “ Utilizing Multi-Dimensional MmWave MIMO Channel Feature for Location Verification” , 2022, pages 1-17) in view of Run-Fa Liao et al. (“Liao,” Deep-Learning-Base physical Layer Authentication for Industrial Wireless Sensor Networks, 28 May 2019, pages 1-17) and Rabah Ouchikh (“Ouchikh ,” Sparse channel estimation algorithm for OTFS system, 2022, pages 2158-2170), and further in view of Jie Tang et al. (“Tang-2022,” “Physical layer authentication for 5G/6G millimeter wave communications by using channel sparsity,” Jan 5th, 2022, pages 206-216).
Regarding claim 4, the combination of Zhang, Liao, and Ouchikh teaches the apparatus according to claim 1. Zhang, Liao, and Ouchikh do not explicitly disclose, wherein an L1 parameter of the wireless channel descriptive for a sparse channel is an L1 parameter of which a value range determined for said wireless channel is lower than a total value range of the L1 parameter.
However, in an analogous art, Tang-2022 discloses wherein an L1 parameter of the wireless channel descriptive for a sparse channel is an L1 parameter of which a value range determined for said wireless channel is lower than a total value range of the L1 parameter (Tang-2022: page 209, section 3.1 mmWave Channel model, where 𝜌 denotes the average path-loss, L denotes the number of paths. Due to the high path loss for the non-line-of-sight (NLOS) signals, Hk is usually dominated by a sparse multi-path components caused by the sparse scattering [1, 19], which is shown in Figure 1. Therefore, the value of L is usually about 3–5 in Hk [1]. Correspondingly, 𝛼k(l ) denotes the complex multi-path gain of the l -th sparse path, which follows i.i.d. zero mean complex Gaussian distribution as 𝛼k(l ) ∼ CN (0,𝜎2 ). k(l ), k(l ) ∈ [−𝜋∕2,𝜋∕2] denote the physical azimuth angle of departure or arrival (AoD/AoA) at the transmit and receive sides of the l-th sparse path, which are approximated as uniform distributed [23]).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the teachings of Tang-2022 with the method and system of Zhang, Liao, and Ouchikh to include “wherein an L1 parameter of the wireless channel descriptive for a sparse channel is an L1 parameter of which a value range determined for said wireless channel is lower than a total value range of the L1 parameter”. One would have been motivated to do so because Tang-2022 explicitly teaches that “sparse properties of mmWare channel can benefit the PLA designs and performance (Tang-2022).
Regarding claim 5, the combination of Zhang, Liao, Ouchikh, and Tang-2022 teaches the apparatus according to claim 4. Tang-2022 teaches that mmWave channels are "dominated by sparse multi-path component" where "the value of L is usually about 3" paths (Tang-2022, Section 3.1, p.209), establishing that sparse channel parameters have a value range significantly lower than the total possible range.
Zhang, Liao, Ouchikh, and Tang-2022 do not explicitly teach comparing a ratio of the value range to the total value range against a predefined threshold.
However, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to quantify the sparsity criterion as a ratio compared to a predefined threshold.
Expressing Tang-2022's qualitative sparsity criterion (value range < total range) as a quantitative ratio-threshold test (ratio < threshold) is a routine mathematical formulation. The selection of a specific threshold value is a design choice that would be optimized through routine experimentation based on desired system performance. See In re Aller, 220 F.2d 454 (CCPA 1955). There is no evidence that the ratio-threshold formulation produces unexpected results beyond the predictable quantification of Tang-2022's underlying teaching. One of ordinary skill would have been motivated because a quantitative ratio-threshold test enables automated parameter selection, provides tunability for different deployment scenarios, and is consistent with standard engineering practice for classification criteria in signal processing systems.
Claims 8 and 10 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Pinchang Zhang et al. (“ Zhang, “ Utilizing Multi-Dimensional MmWave MIMO Channel Feature for Location Verification” , 2022, pages 1-17) in view of Run-Fa Liao et al. (“Liao,” Deep-Learning-Base physical Layer Authentication for Industrial Wireless Sensor Networks, 28 May 2019, pages 1-17) and Rabah Ouchikh (“Ouchikh ,” Sparse channel estimation algorithm for OTFS system, 2022, pages 2158-2170), and further in view of Pang et al. (“Pang,” US 11,877,153).
Regarding claim 8, the combination of Zhang, Liao, and Ouchikh teaches the apparatus according to claim 1. Zhang, Liao, and Ouchikh do not explicitly disclose, wherein the processing circuitry is further configured to update the stored value based on the current value.
However, in an analogous art, Pang discloses wherein the processing circuitry is further configured to update the value of the plurality of L1 parameters stored in the storage (Pang: Col. 6, lines21-28, The communication node 2, 3 is also configured to set102, or update, a CSI reference, and to set 108, or update, the authentication threshold; Col. 4, lines 59-63, The CSI reference and the authentication threshold may be updated, suitably when an update time has lapsed, and the communication method 100 may include one or more steps for determining 126 whether the CSI reference and/or the authentication threshold should be updated; Col. 4, line 63 to Col. 5, line 3, Such an updating time should suitably be set in view of the industrial process in question, and stationary nodes in an environment with small or no mobility of radio frequency interfering equipment can be expected to have a longer time between such updates than nodes arranged in an environment that affects radio transmission and thus affects the CSI, such as the CIR);
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the teachings of Pang with the method and system of Zhang, Liao, and Ouchikh to include wherein the processing circuitry is further configured to update the stored value based on the current value. One would have been motivated to update stored parameters ensures continued accurate authentication as channel conditioned change (Pang: Col. 4, line 63 to Col. 5, line 3).
Pang teaches updating stored values but does not explicitly disclose that the update is conditioned on successful authentication.
One of ordinary skill in the art would have recognized that conditioning database updates on successful authentication is a fundamental security measure to prevent reference database poisoning attacks. If stored reference values were updated regardless of authentication outcome, an attacker (Eve) could gradually shift the stored reference toward attacker-controlled values by repeatedly transmitting signals with incrementally different channel parameters. By updating only upon successful authentication, the system ensures that only legitimate channel measurements - those verified as coming from the authentic device - are used to update the reference database. This is a predictable application of well-known security principles to the authentication system of Zhang as modified by Pang, yielding no unexpected result.
Regarding claim 10, the combination of Zhang, Liao, Ouchikh, and Pang teaches the apparatus according to claim 8. The combination of Zhang, Liao, Ouchikh, and Pang further teaches, wherein the stored value is updated when a difference between the current value of the plurality of L1 parameters and the stored value of the plurality of L1 parameters (Zhang: Section 3.2 (page 9): "The location validation is implemented by comparing the similarity between the current channel parameters and the previous ones with preset thresholds"; Pang: Col. 4, lines 59-60, the CSI reference... may be updated; Col. 4, lines 55-56, the process may include obtaining … the CSI reference based on a statistical analysis of the CSI of the received training sequences") is equal to or smaller than a predetermined threshold (Zhang: Section 3.2 (page 9): "comparing the similarity between the current channel parameters and the previous ones with preset thresholds, based on a binary hypothesis test"; Under BRI, Zhang's authentication succeeds when the difference/dissimilarity is below the preset threshold, meaning the device is authenticated when the difference is small enough to pass the threshold test; Pang: Col. 6, lines 21-28, Col. 4, line 63 to Col. 5, line 3, Such an updating time should suitably be set in view of the industrial process in question, and stationary nodes in an environment with small or no mobility of radio frequency interfering equipment can be expected to have a longer time between such updates than nodes arranged in an environment that affects radio transmission and thus affects the CSI. As combined in claim 8, the update (when authentication is successful (obvious). Per Zhang, authentication is successful when the difference between current and stored L1 parameter is within the predetermined threshold. Therefore, the stored value is updated precisely when the difference is equal to or smaller than the threshold, because that is the condition for authentication success which triggers the update).
Claim 9 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Pinchang Zhang et al. (“ Zhang, “ Utilizing Multi-Dimensional MmWave MIMO Channel Feature for Location Verification” , 2022, pages 1-17) in view of Run-Fa Liao et al. (“Liao,” Deep-Learning-Base physical Layer Authentication for Industrial Wireless Sensor Networks, 28 May 2019, pages 1-17) and Rabah Ouchikh (“Ouchikh ,” Sparse channel estimation algorithm for OTFS system, 2022, pages 2158-2170), and further in view of Sonlin Chen et al. (“Chen,” Physical-Layer Channel Authentication for 5G via Machine Learning Algorithm,” 2018, pages 1-10)
Regarding claim 9, the combination of Zhang, Liao, and Ouchikh teaches the apparatus according to claim 2. The combination of Zhang, Liao, and Ouchikh further teaches, wherein:
the determining of the current value of the plurality of L1 parameters (Zhang: Section 3.1: "We first estimate AAoA and EAoA, and then estimate the mmWave path gain"; Under BRI, estimating channel parameters from received signals corresponds to "determining the current value of the plurality of L1 parameters");
the performing of authentication of the communication device (Zhang: Section 3.2: "The location validation is implemented by comparing the similarity between the current channel parameters and the previous ones with preset thresholds"; Under BRI, comparing current parameters to stored reference and making a validation decision corresponds to "performing authentication"); and
the updating of a database (Pang: Column 7, lines 45-60; Column 8, lines 5-20: CSI reference is updated based on received channel estimates; Examiner's Position: Under BRI, updating the stored CSI reference corresponds to "updating of a database").
Zhang, Liao, and Ouchikh do not explicitly disclose “is repeatedly executed with a predefined repetition period”.
However, in an analogous art, Chen discloses “is repeatedly executed with a predefined repetition period” (Chen: Section 3: "Bob is assumed to obtain the Alice-Bob channel information for any frame index k > 1, and save it which extracted by the channel estimation. After a while, when Bob receives the next data frame, the k + 1th data frame, ... Bob compares ... are approaching, Bob considers the sender's identity as valid and stores it"; Section 3: "A binary hypothesis testing is performed to determine the identity authentication in the continuous data frames"; Under BRI, Chen teaches that for each data frame (k, k+1, k+2, ...), the receiver (1) extracts/estimates channel information, (2) compares current channel to stored reference to authenticate, and (3) stores valid channel information. This process is repeated for each successive frame. Since data frames in wireless communication systems such as 5G have a predefined time duration (e.g., 1ms subframe in LTE/5G), the repetition occurs at a "predefined repetition period" corresponding to the frame timing structure).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine the teachings of Chen with the method and system of Zhang, Liao, and Ouchikh to include “is repeatedly executed with a predefined repetition period.” One would have been motivated to make this combination because:
(1) Periodic/continuous authentication provides ongoing security verification throughout a communication session, detecting session hijacking attacks where an attacker takes over after initial authentication (Chen: Section 1, discussing the need for continuous authentication to detect spoofing attacks);
(2) Frame-based periodic authentication allows the system to track legitimate channel evolution while detecting sudden changes indicative of an attack;
(3) Both Zhang and Chen are in the same field of physical layer authentication using channel characteristics in wireless communication systems, making them analogous art;
(4) The combination yields predictable results - simply applying Chen's frame-by-frame continuous authentication timing to Zhang's L1 parameter-based authentication system, with no unexpected synergistic effect.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claim 13 is 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.
As recited above, Zhang discloses various aspect of utilizing multi-dimensional MmWave MIMO channel for location verification; Liao discloses deep-learning-base physical layer authentication for wireless sensor networks; Ouchikh discloses sparse channel estimation althorithm for OTFS system; and Chen discloses a machine learning algorithm for physical-layer channel authentication; However, neither Zhang, Liao, Ouchikh, Chen nor combination of the Zhang, Liao, Ouchikh and Chen discloses the channel response is modeled and calculated based on the formula recited in claim 13.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to CANH LE whose telephone number is (571)270-1380. The examiner can normally be reached on Monday to Friday 6:00AM to 3:30PM other Friday off.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Luu Pham, can be reached at telephone number 571-270-5002. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300.
Information regarding the status of an application may be obtained from Patent Center and the Private Patent Application Information Retrieval (PAIR) system. Status information for published applications may be obtained from Patent Center or Private PAIR. Status information for unpublished applications is available through Patent Center and Private PAIR for authorized users only. Should you have questions about access to the Private PAIR system, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free).
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) Form at https://www.uspto.gov/patents/uspto-automated- interview-request-air-form.
/Canh Le/
Examiner, Art Unit 2439
December 25th, 2025
/LUU T PHAM/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2439