Prosecution Insights
Last updated: April 19, 2026
Application No. 18/947,546

IDENTITY AUTHENTICATION METHOD, PERSONAL SECURITY KERNEL NODE, DEVICE, AND MEDIUM

Non-Final OA §103§DP
Filed
Nov 14, 2024
Examiner
ANDERSON, MICHAEL D
Art Unit
2433
Tech Center
2400 — Computer Networks
Assignee
Tencent Technology (Shenzhen) Company Limited
OA Round
1 (Non-Final)
80%
Grant Probability
Favorable
1-2
OA Rounds
3y 6m
To Grant
96%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 80% — above average
80%
Career Allow Rate
559 granted / 700 resolved
+21.9% vs TC avg
Strong +16% interview lift
Without
With
+15.7%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
3y 6m
Avg Prosecution
33 currently pending
Career history
733
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
7.3%
-32.7% vs TC avg
§103
58.5%
+18.5% vs TC avg
§102
21.6%
-18.4% vs TC avg
§112
8.3%
-31.7% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 700 resolved cases

Office Action

§103 §DP
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 . Priority Receipt is acknowledged of certified copies of papers required by 37 CFR 1.55. Double Patenting The nonstatutory double patenting rejection is based on a judicially created doctrine grounded in public policy (a policy reflected in the statute) so as to prevent the unjustified or improper timewise extension of the “right to exclude” granted by a patent and to prevent possible harassment by multiple assignees. A nonstatutory double patenting rejection is appropriate where the conflicting claims are not identical, but at least one examined application claim is not patentably distinct from the reference claim(s) because the examined application claim is either anticipated by, or would have been obvious over, the reference claim(s). See, e.g., In re Berg, 140 F.3d 1428, 46 USPQ2d 1226 (Fed. Cir. 1998); In re Goodman, 11 F.3d 1046, 29 USPQ2d 2010 (Fed. Cir. 1993); In re Longi, 759 F.2d 887, 225 USPQ 645 (Fed. Cir. 1985); In re Van Ornum, 686 F.2d 937, 214 USPQ 761 (CCPA 1982); In re Vogel, 422 F.2d 438, 164 USPQ 619 (CCPA 1970); In re Thorington, 418 F.2d 528, 163 USPQ 644 (CCPA 1969). A timely filed terminal disclaimer in compliance with 37 CFR 1.321(c) or 1.321(d) may be used to overcome an actual or provisional rejection based on nonstatutory double patenting provided the reference application or patent either is shown to be commonly owned with the examined application, or claims an invention made as a result of activities undertaken within the scope of a joint research agreement. See MPEP § 717.02 for applications subject to examination under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA as explained in MPEP § 2159. See MPEP § 2146 et seq. for applications not subject to examination under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA . A terminal disclaimer must be signed in compliance with 37 CFR 1.321(b). The filing of a terminal disclaimer by itself is not a complete reply to a nonstatutory double patenting (NSDP) rejection. A complete reply requires that the terminal disclaimer be accompanied by a reply requesting reconsideration of the prior Office action. Even where the NSDP rejection is provisional the reply must be complete. See MPEP § 804, subsection I.B.1. For a reply to a non-final Office action, see 37 CFR 1.111(a). For a reply to final Office action, see 37 CFR 1.113(c). A request for reconsideration while not provided for in 37 CFR 1.113(c) may be filed after final for consideration. See MPEP §§ 706.07(e) and 714.13. The USPTO Internet website contains terminal disclaimer forms which may be used. Please visit www.uspto.gov/patent/patents-forms. The actual filing date of the application in which the form is filed determines what form (e.g., PTO/SB/25, PTO/SB/26, PTO/AIA /25, or PTO/AIA /26) should be used. A web-based eTerminal Disclaimer may be filled out completely online using web-screens. An eTerminal Disclaimer that meets all requirements is auto-processed and approved immediately upon submission. For more information about eTerminal Disclaimers, refer to www.uspto.gov/patents/apply/applying-online/eterminal-disclaimer. Claims 1-20 are rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claims 1-20 of U.S. Patent No.12184649. Although the claims at issue are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other. Allowable Subject Matter Claim 4 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. Claim 5 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. Claim 12 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. 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. 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 1-3, 6-8 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Pub.No.: US 2017/0054707 A1 to Leicher et al(hereafter referenced as Leicher in view of Pub.No.: US 2011/0239306 A1 to Avni et al(hereafter referenced as Avni) Regarding claim 1, Leicher discloses “a service-level user identity credential certifier node and a legal user identity credential certifier node”( a user registers an identity with an identity provider that is tightly bound to the user's specific platform, e.g., the TPM [par.0006, the method comprising: obtaining an identity authentication assurance level corresponding to a service provided by a relying party; determining, according to the identity authentication assurance level, a user identity credential used by a user for the service” (user registers(i.e. requests) an identity with an identity provider that is tightly bound to the user's specific platform, e.g., the TPM [par.006] also see the identity provider may compare the reported system state to previously generated reference values, and allowing only the legitimate user using a trustworthy platform to login and claim an identity [par.0007]); ‘in accordance with a determination that the user identity credential is a legal identity credential, transmitting the user identity credential to the legal user identity credential certifier node via the relying party node, wherein the legal user identity credential certifier node is configured to perform user identity credential authentication for the user for the service” (trusted authentication and access from a user platform comprises logging onto a service provider using a predetermined identity, an authentication challenge is received from the identity provider and in response to the authentication challenge, transmitting a ticket based on a trusted platform module (TPM) on a condition that the user platform accepted the authentication challenge.[par.0051]); in accordance with a determination that the user identity credential is a service-level user identity credential, transmitting the user identity credential to the service-level user identity credential certifier node via the relying party node” (clients in a proven integrity verified State may be given access to the Web service [par.0047]).“wherein the service-level user identity credential certifier node is configured to perform user identity credential authentication for the user for the service” (Evolved-Universal Terrestrial Radio Access Network (E-UTRAN) 405 includes a WTRU 410 and several evolved Node-Bs, (eNBs) 420 [par.0055]); and performing the service with the relying party node in response to reception of a receipt indicating that the user identity credential authentication succeeds from one of the legal user identity credential certifier node and the service-level user identity credential certifier node.” ( a user registers an identity with an identity provider that is tightly bound to the user's specific platform, e.g., the TPM [par.0006]), Leicher does not explicitly disclose “an identity authentication method, performed by a computer device acting as a personal security kernel node of an identity authentication system, the identity authentication system further comprising a relying party node.” However, Avni in an analogous art discloses “an identity authentication method, performed by a computer device acting as a personal security kernel node of an identity authentication system, the identity authentication system further comprising a relying party node.”(computing device with kernel mode of operation and a user mode of operation monitors the kernel mode of the computing device to detect user-initiated events Avni[ par.0001]). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was filed to modify Leicher’s trusted identity authentication system with Avni’s kernel mode for monitoring and detecting user initiated events in order to provide additional security. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to combined because Leicher teaches a trusted identity system, Avni discloses a kernel detection and monitoring system, and both are from the same field of endeavor. Regrading claim 2 in view of claim 1, the references combined disclose “wherein the identity authentication system further comprises a relying party qualification certifier node(a privacy certification authority (PCA) 130 Leicher[par.0016]), and the method further comprises: obtaining relying party qualification information(authentication and authorization protocol uses attestation identity keys (AIKS), generated by a trusted platform module (TPM) in a trusted computing environment, as identifying credentials Leicher [par.0005]); and transmitting the relying party qualification information to the relying party qualification certifier node(an authentication challenge is received from the identity provider and in response to the authentication challenge, transmitting a ticket based on a trusted platform module (TPM) on a condition that the user platform accepted the authentication challenge Leicher [par.0051]), wherein the relying party qualification certifier node performs relying party qualification authentication(authentication and authorization protocol uses attestation identity keys (AIKS), generated by a trusted platform module (TPM) in a trusted computing environment, as identifying credentials Leicher [par.0005]); and the obtaining an identity authentication assurance level corresponding to a service provided by a relying party comprises: obtaining, in response to receiving a reply indicating that the relying party qualification authentication succeeds from the relying party qualification certifier node, the identity authentication assurance level corresponding to the service provided by the relying party” (clients in a proven integrity verified State may be given access to the Web service Leicher [par.0047]). Regarding claim 3 in view of claim 1, the references combined disclose “wherein the determining, according to the identity authentication assurance level, a user identity credential used by a user for the service comprises: presenting candidate user identity credentials that match the identity authentication assurance level and the service provided by the relying party” (the identity provider may compare the reported system state to previously generated reference values, and allowing only the legitimate user using a trustworthy platform to login and claim an identity Leicher[par.0007]); and receiving a candidate user identity credential selected by the user, and determining the candidate user identity credential selected by the user as the user identity credential used by the user for the service” (identity provider may compare the reported system state to previously generated reference values, and allowing only the legitimate user using a trustworthy platform to login and claim an identity Leicher[par.0007]). Regarding claim 6 in view of claim 2, the references combined disclose “wherein the relying party qualification certifier node comprises a relying party identity authenticator node; the relying party qualification information comprises a relying party identity certificate and an identifier of a relying party identity authenticator node that issues the relying party identity certificate(Evolved-Universal Terrestrial Radio Access Network (E-UTRAN) 405 includes a WTRU 410 and several evolved Node-Bs, (eNBs) 420 Leicher [par.0055]) a user registers an identity with an identity provider that is tightly bound to the user's specific platform, e.g., the TPM Leicher [par.0006]); and the transmitting the relying party qualification information to the relying party qualification certifier node, so that the relying party qualification certifier node performs relying party qualification authentication comprises: transmitting the relying party identity certificate to the relying party identity authenticator node corresponding to the identifier of the relying party identity authenticator node, so that the relying party qualification certifier node performs relying party identity authentication” (an authentication challenge is received from the identity provider and in response to the authentication challenge, transmitting a ticket based on a trusted platform module (TPM) on a condition that the user platform accepted the authentication challenge Leicher [par.0051]). Regarding claim 7 in view of claim 2, the references combined disclose “wherein the relying party qualification certifier node comprises a security credential authenticator node; the relying party qualification information comprises a relying party security credential (client/user platform 110 includes Server 150 that generates credentials, or tickets, for service access in which Server 150 authenticates the user Server 150 validates the client/user platform 110, and itself, toward the identity provider 120 using trusted computing methods of platform attestation Leicher [par.0020]) and an identifier of a security credential authenticator node that issues the relying party security credential; and the transmitting the relying party qualification information to the relying party qualification certifier node, SO that the relying party qualification certifier node performs relying party qualification authentication comprises: transmitting the relying party security credential to the security credential authenticator node corresponding to the identifier of the security credential authenticator node, SO that the relying party qualification certifier node performs relying party security credential authentication” (an authentication challenge is received from the identity provider and in response to the authentication challenge, transmitting a ticket based on a trusted platform module (TPM) on a condition that the user platform accepted the authentication challenge Leicher[par.0051]). Regarding claim 8 in view of claim 1, the references combined disclose “wherein the determining, according to the identity authentication assurance level, a user identity credential used by a user for the service comprises: searching a correspondence table of identity authentication assurance levels, services, and user identity credentials, to determine user identity credentials that match the identity authentication assurance level and the service provided by the relying party(an authentication challenge is received from the identity provider and in response to the authentication challenge, transmitting a ticket based on a trusted platform module (TPM) on a condition that the user platform accepted the authentication challenge [par.0051]), presenting the determined user identity credentials as candidate user identity credentials to the user of the service; and determining one of the candidate user identity credentials selected by the user of the service as the user identity credential used by the user for the service” (identity provider may compare the reported system state to previously generated reference values, and allowing only the legitimate user using a trustworthy platform to login and claim an identity Leicher[par.0007]). Claims 9-11, and 14-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over of Pub.No.: US 2011/0239306 A1 to Avni et al(hereafter referenced as Avni) in view of Pub.No.: US 2017/0054707 A1 to Leicher et al(hereafter referenced as Leicher. Regarding claim 9, Avni discloses “A computer device acting as a personal security kernel node of an identity authentication system to perform an identity authentication method” (computing device with kernel mode of operation and a user mode of operation monitors the kernel mode of the computing device to detect user-initiated events Avni[ par.0001]). Anvi does not explicitly disclose “the identity authentication system further comprising a relying party node and a user identity credential certifier node, the computer device comprising: a memory, storing computer-readable instructions; and a processor, configured to execute the computer-readable instructions stored in the memory, to perform a plurality of operations including: obtaining an identity authentication assurance level corresponding to a service provided by a relying party; determining, according to the identity authentication assurance level, a user identity credential used by a user for the service ; in accordance with a determination that the user identity credential is a legal identity credential, transmitting the user identity credential to the legal user identity credential certifier node via the relying party node, wherein the legal user identity credential certifier node is configured to perform user identity credential authentication for the user for the service; in accordance with a determination that the user identity credential is a service-level user identity credential, transmitting the user identity credential to the service-level user identity credential certifier node via the relying party node, wherein the service-level user identity credential certifier node is configured to perform user identity credential authentication for the user for the service.” However, Leicher in an analogous art discloses “the identity authentication system further comprising a relying party node and a user identity credential certifier node” ( a user registers an identity with an identity provider that is tightly bound to the user's specific platform, e.g., the TPM [par.0006, the computer device comprising: a memory, storing computer-readable instructions; and a processor, configured to execute the computer-readable instructions stored in the memory, to perform a plurality of operations including: obtaining an identity authentication assurance level corresponding to a service provided by a relying party; determining, according to the identity authentication assurance level, a user identity credential used by a user for the service” (user registers(i.e. requests) an identity with an identity provider that is tightly bound to the user's specific platform, e.g., the TPM [par.006] also see the identity provider may compare the reported system state to previously generated reference values, and allowing only the legitimate user using a trustworthy platform to login and claim an identity [par.0007]); in accordance with a determination that the user identity credential is a legal identity credential, transmitting the user identity credential to the legal user identity credential certifier node via the relying party node, wherein the legal user identity credential certifier node is configured to perform user identity credential authentication for the user for the service; in accordance with a determination that the user identity credential is a service-level user identity credential” (clients in a proven integrity verified State may be given access to the Web service [par.0047]).“, transmitting the user identity credential to the service-level user identity credential certifier node via the relying party node, wherein the service-level user identity credential certifier node is configured to perform user identity credential authentication for the user for the service(Evolved-Universal Terrestrial Radio Access Network (E-UTRAN) 405 includes a WTRU 410 and several evolved Node-Bs, (eNBs) 420 [par.0055]); and performing the service with the relying party node in response to reception of a receipt indicating that the user identity credential authentication succeeds from one of the legal user identity credential certifier node and the service-level user identity credential certifier node” ( a user registers an identity with an identity provider that is tightly bound to the user's specific platform, e.g., the TPM [par.0006]). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was filed to modify Avni’s kernel mode for monitoring and detecting user initiated events with Leicher’s trusted identity authentication system with in order to provide additional security. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to combined because Leicher teaches a trusted identity system, Avni discloses a kernel detection and monitoring system, and both are from the same field of endeavor. Regarding claim 10 in view of claim 9, the references combined disclose “wherein the identity authentication system further comprises a relying party qualification certifier node, and the method further comprises: obtaining relying party qualification information; and transmitting the relying party qualification information to the relying party qualification certifier node, wherein the relying party qualification certifier node performs relying party qualification authentication (authentication and authorization protocol uses attestation identity keys (AIKS), generated by a trusted platform module (TPM) in a trusted computing environment, as identifying credentials Leicher [par.0005]); ; and the obtaining an identity authentication assurance level corresponding to a service provided by a relying party comprises: obtaining, in response to receiving a reply indicating that the relying party qualification authentication succeeds from the relying party qualification certifier node(authentication and authorization protocol uses attestation identity keys (AIKS), generated by a trusted platform module (TPM) in a trusted computing environment, as identifying credentials Leicher [par.0005]);, the identity authentication assurance level corresponding to the service provided by the relying party” (clients in a proven integrity verified State may be given access to the Web service [par.0047]). Regarding claim 11 in view of claim 9, the references combined disclose “wherein the determining, according to the identity authentication assurance level, a user identity credential used by a user for the service comprises: presenting candidate user identity credentials that match the identity authentication assurance level and the service provided by the relying party” (the identity provider may compare the reported system state to previously generated reference values, and allowing only the legitimate user using a trustworthy platform to login and claim an identity Leicher[par.0007]); “and receiving a candidate user identity credential selected by the user, and determining the candidate user identity credential selected by the user as the user identity credential used by the user for the service” ” (identity provider may compare the reported system state to previously generated reference values, and allowing only the legitimate user using a trustworthy platform to login and claim an identity Leicher[par.0007]). Regarding claim 14 in view of claim 10, the references combined disclose “wherein the relying party qualification certifier node comprises a relying party identity authenticator node; the relying party qualification information comprises a relying party identity certificate and an identifier of a relying party identity authenticator node that issues the relying party identity certificate” (Evolved-Universal Terrestrial Radio Access Network (E-UTRAN) 405 includes a WTRU 410 and several evolved Node-Bs, (eNBs) 420 [par.0055]) a user registers an identity with an identity provider that is tightly bound to the user's specific platform, e.g., the TPM [par.0006]); and the transmitting the relying party qualification information to the relying party qualification certifier node, so that the relying party qualification certifier node performs relying party qualification authentication comprises: transmitting the relying party identity certificate to the relying party identity authenticator node corresponding to the identifier of the relying party identity authenticator node, so that the relying party qualification certifier node performs relying party identity authentication” (an authentication challenge is received from the identity provider and in response to the authentication challenge, transmitting a ticket based on a trusted platform module (TPM) on a condition that the user platform accepted the authentication challenge.[par.0051]). Regarding claim 15 in view of claim 10, the references combined disclose “wherein the relying party qualification certifier node comprises a security credential authenticator node; the relying party qualification information comprises a relying party security credential and an identifier of a security credential authenticator node that issues the relying party security credential” (client/user platform 110 includes Server 150 that generates credentials, or tickets, for service access in which Server 150 authenticates the user Server 150 validates the client/user platform 110, and itself, toward the identity provider 120 using trusted computing methods of platform attestation Leicher [par.0020]); and the transmitting the relying party qualification information to the relying party qualification certifier node, SO that the relying party qualification certifier node performs relying party qualification authentication comprises: transmitting the relying party security credential to the security credential authenticator node corresponding to the identifier of the security credential authenticator node, so that the relying party qualification certifier node performs relying party security credential authentication” (an authentication challenge is received from the identity provider and in response to the authentication challenge, transmitting a ticket based on a trusted platform module (TPM) on a condition that the user platform accepted the authentication challenge Leicher[par.0051]). Regarding claim 16 in view of claim 9, the references combined disclose “computer device according to claim 9, wherein the determining, according to the identity authentication assurance level, a user identity credential used by a user for the service comprises: searching a correspondence table of identity authentication assurance levels, services, and user identity credentials, to determine user identity credentials that match the identity authentication assurance level and the service provided by the relying party” (the identity provider may compare the reported system state to previously generated reference values, and allowing only the legitimate user using a trustworthy platform to login and claim an identity Leicher[par.0007]). “presenting the determined user identity credentials as candidate user identity credentials to the user of the service; and determining one of the candidate user identity credentials selected by the user of the service as the user identity credential used by the user for the service” (the identity provider may compare the reported system state to previously generated reference values, and allowing only the legitimate user using a trustworthy platform to login and claim an identity Leicher[par.0007]). Regarding claim 17, Avni discloses “a non-transitory computer readable medium, storing computer-readable instructions, the computer-readable instructions, when executed by a processor of a computer device acting as a personal security kernel node of an identity authentication system that further comprises a relying party node and a user identity credential certifier node” (computing device with kernel mode of operation and a user mode of operation monitors the kernel mode of the computing device to detect user-initiated events Avni[ par.0001]). Avni does not explicitly disclose “causing the computer device to perform a plurality of operations including: obtaining an identity authentication assurance level corresponding to a service provided by a relying party; determining, according to the identity authentication assurance level, a user identity credential used by a user for the service; in accordance with a determination that the user identity credential is a legal identity credential, transmitting the user identity credential to the legal user identity credential certifier node via the relying party node, wherein the legal user identity credential certifier node is configured to perform user identity credential authentication for the user for the service; in accordance with a determination that the user identity credential is a service-level user identity credential, transmitting the user identity credential to the service-level user identity credential certifier node via the relying party node, wherein the service-level user identity credential certifier node is configured to perform user identity credential authentication for the user for the service; and performing the service with the relying party node in response to reception of a receipt indicating that the user identity credential authentication succeeds from one of the legal user identity credential certifier node and the service-level user identity credential certifier node. However, Leicher in an analogous art discloses “causing the computer device to perform a plurality of operations including: obtaining an identity authentication assurance level corresponding to a service provided by a relying party; determining, according to the identity authentication assurance level, a user identity credential used by a user for the service” (user registers(i.e. requests) an identity with an identity provider that is tightly bound to the user's specific platform, e.g., the TPM [par.006] also see the identity provider may compare the reported system state to previously generated reference values, and allowing only the legitimate user using a trustworthy platform to login and claim an identity [par.0007]); “in accordance with a determination that the user identity credential is a legal identity credential, transmitting the user identity credential to the legal user identity credential certifier node via the relying party node, wherein the legal user identity credential certifier node is configured to perform user identity credential authentication for the user for the service; in accordance with a determination that the user identity credential is a service-level user identity credential”(clients in a proven integrity verified State may be given access to the Web service [par.0047]), transmitting the user identity credential to the service-level user identity credential certifier node via the relying party node, wherein the service-level user identity credential certifier node is configured to perform user identity credential authentication for the user for the service(Evolved-Universal Terrestrial Radio Access Network (E-UTRAN) 405 includes a WTRU 410 and several evolved Node-Bs, (eNBs) 420 [par.0055]); and performing the service with the relying party node in response to reception of a receipt indicating that the user identity credential authentication succeeds from one of the legal user identity credential certifier node and the service-level user identity credential certifier node” ( a user registers an identity with an identity provider that is tightly bound to the user's specific platform, e.g., the TPM [par.0006]). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was filed to modify Avni’s kernel mode for monitoring and detecting user initiated events with Leicher’s trusted identity authentication system with in order to provide additional security. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to combined because Leicher teaches a trusted identity system, Avni discloses a kernel detection and monitoring system, and both are from the same field of endeavor. Regarding claim 18 in view of claim 17, the references combined disclose “wherein the identity authentication system further comprises a relying party qualification certifier node, and the plurality of operations further comprise: obtaining relying party qualification information; and transmitting the relying party qualification information to the relying party qualification certifier node” (an authentication challenge is received from the identity provider and in response to the authentication challenge, transmitting a ticket based on a trusted platform module (TPM) on a condition that the user platform accepted the authentication challenge.[par.0051]), wherein the relying party qualification certifier node performs relying party qualification authentication; and the obtaining an identity authentication assurance level corresponding to a service provided by a relying party comprises: obtaining, in response to receiving a reply indicating that the relying party qualification authentication succeeds from the relying party qualification certifier node, the identity authentication assurance level corresponding to the service provided by the relying Party” (clients in a proven integrity verified State may be given access to the Web service [par.0047]). Regarding claim 19 in view of claim 17, the references combined disclose “wherein the determining, according to the identity authentication assurance level, a user identity credential used by a user for the service comprises: presenting candidate user identity credentials that match the identity authentication assurance level and the service provided by the relying party” (the identity provider may compare the reported system state to previously generated reference values, and allowing only the legitimate user using a trustworthy platform to login and claim an identity Leicher[par.0007]); “and receiving a candidate user identity credential selected by the user, and determining the candidate user identity credential selected by the user as the user identity credential used by the user for the service” (identity provider may compare the reported system state to previously generated reference values, and allowing only the legitimate user using a trustworthy platform to login and claim an identity Leicher[par.0007]). Regarding claim 20 in view of claim 17, the references combined disclose “wherein the determining, according to the identity authentication assurance level, a user identity credential used by a user for the service comprises: searching a correspondence table of identity authentication assurance levels, services, and user identity credentials, to determine user identity credentials that match the identity authentication assurance level and the service provided by the relying party” (user registers(i.e. requests) an identity with an identity provider that is tightly bound to the user's specific platform, e.g., the TPM [par.006] also see the identity provider may compare the reported system state to previously generated reference values, and allowing only the legitimate user using a trustworthy platform to login and claim an identity [par.0007]); “presenting the determined user identity credentials as candidate user identity credentials to the user of the service; and determining one of the candidate user identity credentials selected by the user of the service as the user identity credential used by the user for the service” (identity provider may compare the reported system state to previously generated reference values, and allowing only the legitimate user using a trustworthy platform to login and claim an identity Leicher[par.0007]). Conclusion Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to MICHAEL D ANDERSON whose telephone number is (571)270-5159. The examiner can normally be reached Mon-Fri 9am-6pm. 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, Jeffrey Pwu can be reached at (571) 272-6798. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300. Information regarding the status of published or unpublished applications may be obtained from Patent Center. Unpublished application information in Patent Center is available to registered users. To file and manage patent submissions in Patent Center, visit: https://patentcenter.uspto.gov. Visit https://www.uspto.gov/patents/apply/patent-center for more information about Patent Center and https://www.uspto.gov/patents/docx for information about filing in DOCX format. For additional questions, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000. /MICHAEL D ANDERSON/Examiner, Art Unit 2433 /JEFFREY C PWU/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2433
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Nov 14, 2024
Application Filed
Mar 20, 2026
Non-Final Rejection — §103, §DP (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12603865
SYSTEMS AND METHODS FOR REMOTE ACCESS LATENCY REDUCTION
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 14, 2026
Patent 12581295
TECHNIQUES TO GENERATE WIRELESS LOCAL AREA ACCESS NETWORK FAST TRANSITION KEY MATERIAL BASED ON AUTHENTICATION TO A PRIVATE WIRELESS WIDE AREA ACCESS NETWORK
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 17, 2026
Patent 12579228
METHOD AND SYSTEM FOR INVESTIGATING RESILIENCY OF A SOFTWARE APPLICATION
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 17, 2026
Patent 12568367
ROUTING INDICATOR RETRIVAL FOR AKMA
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 03, 2026
Patent 12547679
ENFORCING EULA VERSION AWARE APPLICATION RESPONSE
2y 5m to grant Granted Feb 10, 2026
Study what changed to get past this examiner. Based on 5 most recent grants.

AI Strategy Recommendation

Get an AI-powered prosecution strategy using examiner precedents, rejection analysis, and claim mapping.
Powered by AI — typically takes 5-10 seconds

Prosecution Projections

1-2
Expected OA Rounds
80%
Grant Probability
96%
With Interview (+15.7%)
3y 6m
Median Time to Grant
Low
PTA Risk
Based on 700 resolved cases by this examiner. Grant probability derived from career allow rate.

Sign in with your work email

Enter your email to receive a magic link. No password needed.

Personal email addresses (Gmail, Yahoo, etc.) are not accepted.

Free tier: 3 strategy analyses per month