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 action is in response to the communication filed on 11/14/2024.
Claims 1-20 are examined.
Claims 1-6 and 8-16, 18-20 are rejected.
Claims 7 and 17 are objected.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 7 and 17 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.
Examiner notes that Reason for allowance will be described upon selection of claims.
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, 8-16 and 18-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable by U.S. Publication 2022/0284958 to Cohen et al. (hereinafter known as “Wong”) and U.S. Patent 11,113,429 to Halladay et al. (hereinafter known as "Halladay”).
As per claim 1 Cohen teaches, a storage device comprising:
arrays of storage particles for storing data;
a control device provided to output a trigger signal upon detecting a predetermined event to trigger destruction of the storage particles (Cohen Fig 1 para 28 teaches trigger event used to activate memory erasure such as reaching the end of a subscription (e.g., the threshold is a date) etc );
a destruction mechanism to cause the storage particles permanently damaged (Cohen Fig 1 para 30-31 teaches where trigger is the tamper response (e.g., powers the heater activation) to erase the data); and
a destruction control device, coupled to the destruction mechanism, provided to activate the destruction mechanism, upon detecting the trigger signal, wherein the destruction mechanism generates heating beyond a predetermined temperature, the heating breaks down one or more components in storage particles or flips randomly values of data bits stored in the storage particles so that data stored in the storage particles become unusable (Cohen Fig 1 para 33-35 teaches where trigger is the tamper response (e.g., powers the heater activation) to erase the data. Where erasure of data includes heating the PCM 120 may change the state of the phase change material in the PCM 120 (e.g., from amorphous to crystalline) which further changes the data held in the PCM 120 and changing the state of phase change material in one or more of the PCM 120 cells in a cluster further changing the state of the phase change material in the PCM 120 cells within a cluster of PCM 120 cells erases the data contained within the cluster).
Although Cohen teaches destruction of memory via heating mechanism, Halladay further teaches destruction of SSD drive via heat that portion of SSD to a destroyed or damaged state (abstract).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, having the teachings of Cohen-Halladay before him or her, to combine Cohen’s teaching of memory cells with heater to activate when a trigger event occurs (Cohen abstract) with Halladay’s teaching of permanently erasing contents of SSD (solid state drive) by rapidly heating mechanism (Halladay abstract). The suggestion/motivation for doing so would have been to reliably destroy data found on SSD device where physical access is not available (Halladay col 1 lines 45-60).
As per claim 2 combination of Cohen-Halladay teaches, the storage device according to claim 1, wherein the destruction control device includes one of a key switch, a timing control unit, a software control unit, or a remote control unit (Cohen Fig 1 para 32-33 teaches an anti-tamper device and the targeted memory and/or the memory containing the encryption key for the targeted memory).
As per claim 3 combination of Cohen-Halladay teaches, the storage device according to claim 2, wherein the destruction mechanism is a heating device including one or more heating wires disposed near surfaces of the storage particles (Cohen Fig 1 para 38 teaches memory system 100 includes wires 180 which is connected to external memory and erasing the memory of PCM 120 cells holding an encryption key based on the trigger event ).
As per claim 4 combination of Cohen-Halladay teaches, the storage device according to claim 3, wherein the heating device is coupled to a power module, the destruction control is caused to activate the heating device upon detecting the trigger signal (Cohen Fig 1 para 33-35 teaches photovoltaic cells with activation of the heaters and heating the PCM 120 by changing the state of the phase change material in the PCM 120 and heated to change the state of the phase change material in the PCM 120 based on the trigger event).
As per claim 5 combination of Cohen-Halladay teaches, the storage device according to claim 4, wherein the power module is external to the storage device and a power supply energizes the storage device (Cohen Fig 2 para 42-43 teaches electricity flow with heaters 224, 244, 264, and 284 are powered via a power source and thus able to heat the PCM cells 236, 256, and 276 when activated).
As per claim 6 combination of Cohen-Halladay teaches, the storage device according to claim 5, wherein the destruction control device includes a destruction control circuit, one end of the destruction control circuit is coupled to the power module, and the other end is coupled to the heating device, the destruction control circuit is configured to connect the heating device and the power module when a signal is detected, thereby starting the heating device (Cohen Fig 2 para 42 and 47 teaches the electrical current crossing through the heater such that the heaters 224, 244 are powered via a power source and thus able to heat the PCM cells 236, 256, and 276 when activated with the heaters set to achieve various temperatures upon being triggered to achieve goals related to memory erasure).
As per claim 8 combination of Cohen-Halladay teaches, the storage device according to claim 3, wherein the destruction mechanism includes heating wires embedded near or coupled to a number of selected components in the storage particles, these components are broken down when the heating wires are powered and heat up (Cohen Fig 1 para 42-44 teaches electrical current flows from top electrode through the heater to the bottom electrode and in direction crossing through the heater such that the heaters 224, 244, 264, and 284 are powered via a power source and thus able to heat the PCM cells 236, 256, and 276 when activated).
As per claim 9 combination of Cohen-Halladay teaches, the storage device according to claim 3, wherein the destruction mechanism includes heating wires embedded near or coupled to a number of connection wires between/among certain elements in the storage particles, the connection wires are melted down when the heating wires are powered and heat up (Cohen Fig 1 para 40 teaches memory system with top electrodes 238, 258, and 278 and bottom electrodes 234, 254, and 274 to the memory elements, memory system 200 further includes electrodes 222, 226 .. n to the heaters. and the memory system 200 further includes vias 232, 252, and 272 connecting bottom electrodes 234, 254, and 274 to the substrate 210).
As per claim 10 combination of Cohen-Halladay teaches, the storage device according to claim 3, wherein the destruction mechanism includes one or more circuits coupled to a number of certain elements in the storage particles, the one or more circuits couple excessive power to the elements to cause permanent damage thereto (Cohen Fig 1 para 28-29 teaches facilitate heat transfer between the heaters 140 and the PCM 120 and material 130 is electrically insulating to keep the heaters 140 and the PCM 120 circuits separated).
As per claim 11 combination of Cohen-Halladay teaches, the storage device according to claim 10, wherein the one or more circuits are part of the storage particles (Cohen Fig 7 para 35, 69-70 teaches, PCM 120 cells with an array of eight bits of PCM 120 including an array of memory cells, memory chip, a subsection of a memory chip (e.g., a dedicated storage memory section, a section specifically for saving an encryption key, an encoder/decoder, et cetera), a cache, a hard drive).
Claim 12,
Claim 12 is rejected in accordance with claim 1.
As per claim 13 combination of Cohen-Halladay teaches, the method according to claim 12, wherein the destruction mechanism is a heating device including one or more heating wires disposed near surfaces of the storage particles, the method further comprising:
heating up the storage particles by the heating wires to a point that the data stored in the particles are randomly flipped, namely from “1” to “0” or “0” to “1” (Cohen Fig 1 para 32 teaches where heating the PCM 120 changes the state of the phase change material in the PCM 120 (e.g., from amorphous to crystalline). Changing the state of the phase change material in the PCM 120 changes the data held in the PCM 120. Examiner interprets where changing states covers claimed limitation of random flipping of particles from 1 to 0 or 0 to 1).
Claim 14,
Claim 14 is rejected in accordance with claim 4.
Claim 15,
Claim 15 is rejected in accordance with claim 5.
Claim 16,
Claim 16 is rejected in accordance with claim 6.
Claim 18,
Claim 18 is rejected in accordance with claim 8.
Claim 19,
Claim 19 is rejected in accordance with claim 9.
Claim 20,
Claim 20 is rejected in accordance with claim 10.
Prior Art
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Cohen et al US Publication 20220284958
Halladay et al US Patent 11113429
Cao et al US Publication 20220100910
Cohen et al US Patent 11437102
Algie et al US Publication 20180336363
Hoeffgen et al US Publication 20160133331
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to VIRAL S LAKHIA whose telephone number is (571)270-3363. The examiner can normally be reached on 8 am - 6 pm.
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, Lynn Feild can be reached on 571-272-2092. 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 the Patent Application Information Retrieval (PAIR) system. Status information for published applications may be obtained from either Private PAIR or Public PAIR. Status information for unpublished applications is available through Private PAIR only. For more information about the PAIR system, see http://pair-direct.uspto.gov. Should you have questions on access to the Private PAIR system, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative or access to the automated information system, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000.
/VIRAL S LAKHIA/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2431