DETAILED ACTION
This Office action is in response to a non-provisional utility patent application filed by Applicant on 11/22/2024.
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 .
Information Disclosure Statement PTO-1449
The Information Disclosure Statements submitted by applicant on 11/26/2024 and 4/25/2025 have been considered. The submission is in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR § 1.97. Form PTO-1449 signed and attached hereto.
Double Patenting
No conflicting application or issued patent was identified that would require a rejection under double patenting.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 101
The present application, as claimed, satisfies the requirements for patent-eligible subject matter under 35 U.S.C. 101.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
The following is a quotation of the appropriate paragraphs of 35 U.S.C. 102 that form the basis for the rejections under this section made in this Office action:
A person shall be entitled to a patent unless –
(a)(1) the claimed invention was patented, described in a printed publication, or in public use, on sale, or otherwise available to the public before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claims 1, 14–15 rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Gantman (US 2007/0294457 A1, published Dec. 20, 2007.).
Regarding claims 1 and 14, Gantman discloses: a hub device comprising: an upstream-facing port (UFP) receiving an access command provided by an electronic device (USB device that includes a USB interface to couple to a USB port of a computing device and capable of establishing a communications link to a storage drive. Gantman Figures 1–2 and ¶¶ 24 and 26.); a downstream-facing port (DFP) coupled to a peripheral device (another communications interface over which a second communications link connects with a storage device. Gantman Figures 1–2 and ¶ 25.); a control chip coupled between the UFP and the DFP and comprising: a first transceiver interface coupled to the UFP; a second transceiver interface coupled to the DFP (the USB device 202 connects a communications controller 204 and a processing circuit 210 between interfaces enabling communication received to/from external or remote devices over the communications interface 208. Gantman Figure 2 and ¶ 30); a control logic circuit coupled between the first and second transceiver interfaces and directing the electronic device to provide a user account and a user password in response to the UFP receiving the access command, wherein: the control logic circuit determines whether the user account and the user password are legal, in response to the user account and the user password being legal and the access command pointing the DFP, the control logic circuit determines whether the user account has the authority to access the DFP, in response to the user account not having the authority to access the DFP, the control logic circuit ignores the access command, in response to the user account having the authority to access the DFP, the control logic circuit transmits the access command to the DFP (in establishing a connection between the communicating device 104 and the storage device 112 using the intermediary UDB device 102, a user configures contact information is embedded in configuration storage device 212 enabling the establishment of a secure communications link to the storage device 112. Gantman Figures 1–2 and ¶¶ 30–31. The USB device is configured by a user employing a utility application, with multiple levels of security and access by using keys or passwords to access particular remote storage drives and/or folders on the storage device and allows the USB device to map the remote network storages devices to be accessible vis the UDB interface 206 as local devices. Gantman Figures 1–2 and ¶¶ 30–31. Determination of whether the access passwords and keys are “legal”, the USB device either accesses the protected drives and/or folder to make them available as local devices or fails.).
Regarding claim 15, Gantman discloses the limitations of claim 14, wherein: in response to the user account and the user password being legal and the access command pointing the DFP, the control logic circuit determines whether the user account has the authority to access the DFP, in response to the user account not having the authority to access the DFP, the control logic circuit ignores the access command, in response to the user account having the authority to access the DFP, the control logic circuit transmits the access command to the DFP (the USB device is configured by a user employing a utility application, with multiple levels of security and access by using keys or passwords to access particular remote storage drives and/or folders on the storage device and allows the USB device to map the remote network storages devices to be accessible vis the UDB interface 206 as local devices. Gantman Figures 1–2 and ¶¶ 30–31. Determination of whether the access passwords and keys are “legal”, the USB device either accesses the protected drives and/or folder to make them available as local devices or fails.).
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 4–6 rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Gantman in view of Kursun (US 2015/0035643 A1, published Feb. 5, 2015).
Regarding claim 4, Gantman discloses the limitations of claim 1. Gantman does not disclose: wherein the UFP comprises a wireless transceiver to receive the access command.
However, Kursun does disclose: wherein the UFP comprises a wireless transceiver to receive the access command (the intermediary security authentication proxy device communicates via wireless connections. Kursun ¶ 71.).
Therefore, it would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the intermediate interface authentication gateway device of Gantman with wireless connections based upon the teachings of Kursun. The motivation being to maintain a secure conduit but not be constrained by physical networking wires.
Regarding claim 5, Gantman in view of Kursun discloses the limitations of claim 4, further comprising: a power receptacle coupled to an adapter and receiving the power provided by the adapter (the USB device may be powered over the USB interface 206. Gantman ¶ 30.).
Regarding claim 6, Gantman discloses the limitations of claim 1. Gantman does not disclose: wherein the UFP is a local area network (LAN) connection port.
However, Kursun does disclose: wherein the UFP is a local area network (LAN) connection port (the intermediary security authentication proxy device communicates with a variety of network entities including LAN infrastructure. Kursun ¶ 173.).
Therefore, it would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the intermediate interface authentication gateway device of Gantman with a LAN connection based upon the teachings of Kursun. The motivation being to handle access and functionality of a variety of resources including those accessible or controlled via LAN infrastructure.
Claims 8–9, 19–20 rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Gantman in view of Burch (US 2007/0234408 A1, published Oct. 4, 2007).
Regarding claim 8, Gantman discloses the limitations of claim 1. Gantman does not disclose: wherein in response to the user account not having the authority to access the DFP, the control logic circuit directs the electronic device to modify the user account and the user password.
However, Burch does disclose: wherein in response to the user account not having the authority to access the DFP, the control logic circuit directs the electronic device to modify the user account and the user password (login authentication mechanism prompting user to re-try invalid credentials. Burch ¶ 62.).
Therefore, it would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the intermediate interface authentication gateway device of Gantman with prompting entry of new credentials following failure to authenticate provided credentials based upon the teachings of Burch. The motivation being to allow user to re-enter credentials that may have been entered erroneously. Burch ¶ 62.
Regarding claim 9, Gantman in view of Burch discloses the limitations of claim 8, wherein in response to the user account not having the authority to access the DFP, the control logic circuit generates an image signal to the electronic device so that the electronic device displays a dialog box for the user to modify the user account and the user password (using a displayed dialog box by an authentication mechanism to prompt users for credentials is well-known. Burch ¶ 62.).
Regarding claim 19, Gantman discloses the limitations of claim 15. Gantman does not disclose: wherein in response to the user account not having the authority to access the DFP, the control logic circuit generates an image signal to the electronic device so that the electronic device displays a dialog box for the user to modify the user account and the user password.
However, Burch does disclose: wherein in response to the user account not having the authority to access the DFP, the control logic circuit generates an image signal to the electronic device so that the electronic device displays a dialog box for the user to modify the user account and the user password (using a displayed dialog box by an authentication mechanism to prompt users for credentials is well-known. Burch ¶ 62.). Therefore, it would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the intermediate interface authentication gateway device of Gantman with prompting entry of new credentials following failure to authenticate provided credentials based upon the teachings of Burch. The motivation being to allow user to re-enter credentials that may have been entered erroneously. Burch ¶ 62.
Regarding claim 20, Gantman in view of Burch discloses the limitations of claim 19. Gantman in view of Burch does not disclose: wherein the UFP is a local area network (LAN) connection port (communicating with entities inside a second firewall. Burch ¶ 73.).
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 10–13 allowed.
Claims 2–3, 7, 16–18 objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, but would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to VANCE M LITTLE whose telephone number is (571) 270-0408. The examiner can normally be reached on Monday - Friday 9:30am - 5:30pm.
Examiner interviews are available via telephone, in-person, and video conferencing using a USPTO supplied web-based collaboration tool. To schedule an interview, applicant is encouraged to use the USPTO Automated Interview Request (AIR) at http://www.uspto.gov/interviewpractice.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Jung (Jay) Kim can be reached on (571) 272-3804. 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 https://ppair-my.uspto.gov/pair/PrivatePair. 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.
/VANCE M LITTLE/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2493