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 .
Claims 1-19 are pending.
Information Disclosure Statement
The IDS filed 3/21/2025 has been considered by the Examiner.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status.
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 1-19 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by OneM2M Technical Specification (hereinafter OneM2M).
As to claims 1, 8, and 13, OneM2M teaches a service providing capabilities through a set of application programming interfaces (APIs) to a plurality of applications, the service being provided as a middleware (Service Layer Each of these services provides functions and resources on the Security Service and Administration API) (OneM2M, §§5.2.1 and 5.3):
a. Authenticating, by a trusted enabling entity in the service, a device by performing an attestation check (Trust Enabling Functions “Trust Enabler Function (e.g. MEF (M2M Enrollment Function), MAF (M2M Authentication Function), MN-CSE (Middle Node Common Service Entity))” , Trust Enabling Architecture may require the presence of security functionalities within the Infrastructure Domain), a device (M2M equipment) by performing an attestation check (OneM2M, §6.2.6, Figure 6.2.2-2; MEF and MAF which perform mutual authentication/handshake operations.);
b. Receiving, by the trust enabling entity and from the device, a credential registration message (MEF Key Registration Request, (MEF Key Registration Procedure), (MEF Key Registration Request)) (OneM2M, §8.3.5.2.7 and Table 8.3.5.2.7‑1).
c. Determining, by the trust enabling entity and based on the credential registration message, one or more security policies comprising one or more rules for assigning devices to a network function in the service (MEF: SUID limiting usage; response returns RelativeKeyID, targetIDs, and SUID) (OneM2M, §8.3.5.2.7 steps 5–7 and Table 8.3.5.2.7-2);
d. Sending, by the trust enabling entity and to the device, a response comprising one or more parameters comprising a parameter associated with a security credential, where the parameter associated with the security credential is used by the device to attach to the network function in the service (MEF response: §8.3.5.2.7 step 10 and Table 8.3.5.2.7-2 (RelativeKeyID, SUID, targetIDs, expirationTime)).
As to claims 2, 9, and 14, OneM2M teaches the credential registration message comprised an indication of one or more capabilities or security functionality of the device (end-to-end credential registration and provisioning) (OneM2M, §6.2.6).
As to claims 3 and 15, OneM2M teaches sending, by the trust enabling entity, on behalf of the device and to a third party, a message comprising an indication of a trustworthiness associated with the device (trust is established through trust enablers and the resultant trust determination is conveyed to the system) (OneM2M, §6.62 and §8.3.7.1).
As to claims 5, 11, and 17, OneM2M teaches at least one of the one or more rules of the one or more security policies has a dependency based on a location of the device (location is one parameter to determine trust in the network) (OneM2M, §F.2.1).
As to claims 7 and 19, OneM2M teaches sending, by the trust enabling entity to the network function, a message comprising an identifier and a credential associated with the device (Dynamic Authorization scheme includes exchanging identifiers and credentials (tokens) attached to the device) (OneM2M, §7.3.2).
As to claims 4, 6, 10, 12, 16, and 18, they are rejected because they are dependent from a rejected base claim.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 4, 6, 10, 12, 16, and 18 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.
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 1-19 are rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claims 1-12 of US Patent No. 11,824,643 and claims 1-19 of US Patent No. 12,192,203. Although the claims at issue are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other because the limitations of the instant application are in a different order and the use of alternate synonyms for the limitations. The details of the differences are outlined below
18/965180
US Patent
11,824,643
US Patent 12,192,203
Difference
1. A method for a service providing service capabilities through a set of application programming interfaces (APIs) to a plurality of applications, the service being provided as a middleware, the method comprising: authenticating, by a trust enabling entity in the service, a device by performing an attestation check; receiving, by the trust enabling entity and from the device, a credential registration message; determining, by the trust enabling entity and based on the credential registration message, one or more security policies comprising one or more rules for assigning devices to a network function in the service; and sending, by the trust enabling entity and to the device, a response comprising one or more parameters comprising a parameter associated with a security credential, wherein the parameter associated with the security credential is used by the device to attach to the network function in the service.
A method for registering a device over a network to a trust enabling infrastructure (TEI) for enabling the device to securely attach to a network function in the network that provides one or more applications or services of an application or service provider to the device, the method comprising: receiving, by the TEI and from a device, a security connection establishment request, wherein service the TEI is configured with one or more policies comprising rules for assigning devices to network functions in the network that provide applications or services of one or more application or service providers to devices; authenticating, by the TEI, the device by performing an attestation check and establishing a secure connection with the device; receiving, by the TEI and from the device, a credential registration message comprising a device identifier; determining, by the TEI and based on the device identifier and one or more rules of the one or more policies, a network function in the network to which the device is to attach; sending, by the TEI and to the device, a response comprising an identifier of the network function in the network and a credential, wherein the identifier and credential facilitate the device attaching to the network function and accessing an application or service of an application or provider.
1. A method for a service providing service capabilities through a set of application programming interfaces (APIs) to a plurality of applications, the service being provided as a middleware, the method comprising: authenticating, by a trust enabling infrastructure (TEI) in the service, a device by performing an attestation check; receiving, by the TEI and from the device, a credential registration message; determining, by the TEI and based on the credential registration message, one or more security policies comprising one or more rules for assigning devices to a network function in the service; and sending, by the TEI and to the device, a response comprising an identifier of the network function and one or more parameters comprising a parameter associated with a security credential, wherein the identifier and the parameter associated with the security credential facilitate the device attaching to the network function.
The instant application uses term “trust enabling entity” while the patent uses “trust enabling infrastructure (TEI)” which are viewed as synonyms.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to WILLIAM S POWERS whose telephone number is (571)272-8573. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 7:30-17:30.
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, Jorge L Ortiz-Criado can be reached at (571) 272-7624. 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.
/WILLIAM S POWERS/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2496