CTNF 18/984,020 CTNF 91214 DETAILED ACTION Status of the Claims This office action is in response to Applicant's communications received on December 17, 2024. Claims 1-20 are pending, have been examined and currently stand rejected. Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status 07-03-aia AIA 15-10-aia The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA. 07-06 AIA 15-10-15 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 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. Drawings The drawings submitted on December 17, 2024 are acceptable. Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112 The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(b): (b) CONCLUSION.—The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention. 07-34-01 Claims 2 and 3 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA), second paragraph, as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor (or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the applicant), regards as the invention. Claim 2 recites, in part, “ wherein the program instructions, upon execution, further cause the first ECE to receive the extended ownership voucher from an external to the air-gapped environment . ” Claim 2 is unclear because the limitation is missing information (i.e., it is incomplete). That is, the claim fails to identify who/what the extended ownership voucher is received from. As best understood, claim 2 was intended to be substantially similar to dependent claims 9 and 16, which indicate that the extended ownership voucher is received from an Edge Orchestrator (EO). Accordingly, in order to further prosecution, claim 2 has been interpreted as reciting “ wherein the program instructions, upon execution, further cause the first ECE to receive the extended ownership voucher from an Edge Orchestrator (EO) external to the air-gapped environment. ” Further clarification is need. Claim 3 is also rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) based on its dependency to claim 2. Claim 3 recites the limitation, “the EO” as in “wherein an original ownership voucher is used to generate the extended ownership voucher, and wherein the original ownership voucher is configured to be stored in the EO .” The lack of antecedent basis also makes the claim unclear because it is unknown what an EO is, since the EO acronym was never introduced/defined in the claim(s). It appears that amending claim 2 in the manner suggested above would also resolve this issue. If claim 2 is not amended to introduce the EO, then claim 3 should be amended to introduce/define the EO (e.g., “stored in a Edge Orchestrator (EO)”). Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103 07-20-02-aia AIA This application currently names joint inventors. In considering patentability of the claims the examiner presumes that the subject matter of the various claims was commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the claimed invention(s) absent any evidence to the contrary. Applicant is advised of the obligation under 37 CFR 1.56 to point out the inventor and effective filing dates of each claim that was not commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the later invention in order for the examiner to consider the applicability of 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(C) for any potential 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) prior art against the later invention. 07-23-aia AIA The factual inquiries set forth in Graham v. John Deere Co. , 383 U.S. 1, 148 USPQ 459 (1966), that are applied for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized as follows: 1. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art. 2. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue. 3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art. 4. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness. 07-20-aia AIA 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. 07-21-aia AIA Claim s 1-3, 5-10, 12-17, 19 and 20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Mudivarthy et al. (US 2023/0325848 A1) (hereinafter “Mudivarthy”) in view of Terpstra et al. (US 2023/0229778 A1) (hereinafter “Terpstra”) . Regarding Claim 1: Mudivarthy discloses a FIDO device onboarding system comprising: a first Edge Compute Endpoint (ECE) that conforms to a Fast ID Online (FIDO) Device Onboard (FDO) standard, the first ECE comprising a processor and a memory coupled to the processor, the memory having program instructions stored thereon that, upon execution, cause the first ECE to ( See at least Mudivarthy [0018]; [0029-0032]; [0086]; [0089-0091]; Fig. 1; Fig. 12 items 1202 and 1204. Mudivarthy discloses a first Edge Compute Endpoint (ECE) (i.e., a device, e.g., device 102) that conforms to a Fast ID Online (FIDO) Device Onboard (FDO) standard (i.e., that conforms to a zero-touch onboarding), the first ECE comprising a processor (i.e., processor, e.g., processor 1202) and a memory (i.e., memory, e.g., memory 1204) coupled to the processor, the memory having program instructions stored thereon that, upon execution, cause the first ECE to. ) : assign the first ECE to be a local owner in an environment ( See at least Mudivarthy [0055-0057]; Fig. 8B step 804B; Fig. 9 step 906. Mudivarthy discloses assigning the first ECE to be a local owner in an environment (i.e., by installing the ownership voucher (OV) on the active RP). ) ; receive an extended ownership voucher associated with a second ECE, wherein the extended ownership voucher is signed ( See at least Mudivarthy [0039]; [0041]; Fig. 5 step 508; Fig. 11 step 1104. Mudivarthy discloses receiving an extended ownership voucher (i.e., ownership voucher) associated with a second ECE (i.e., a second hardware module, e.g., hardware module 104B, a standby RP, other types of hardware modules, etc.), wherein the extended ownership voucher is signed (i.e., signed onboarding information with multiple OVs). ) ; and using the extended ownership voucher, onboard the second ECE to the first ECE ( See at least Mudivarthy [0041]; [0055-0057]; [0062]; [0083]; Fig. 5 step 512; Fig. 8B step 810B; Fig. 9 step 914; Fig. 11 step 1110. Mudivarthy discloses using the extended ownership voucher (i.e., using the second OV, e.g., the OV for the standby RP), onboarding the second ECE to the first ECE (i.e., by installing the ownership voucher (OV) on the standby RP). ) . Mudivarthy discloses a need to securely establish ownership of a device with its owner. Mudivarthy [0024]. Mudivarthy also discloses the use of removable media (e.g., a USB drive) to establish ownership. Mudivarthy [0058]. As disclosed above, Mudivarthy also indicates that the extended ownership voucher (i.e., ownership voucher (OV)) is signed. Mudivarthy [0041]. However, Mudivarthy does not explicitly disclose: where the environment is an air-gapped environment; or wherein the extended ownership voucher is signed by a public key of the first ECE. Terpstra, on the other hand, teaches: where the environment is an air-gapped environment ( See at least Terpstra [0138-0140]. Terpstra teaches where the environment is an air-gapped environment (i.e., an environment that uses air-gapped devices). ) ; and wherein the extended ownership voucher is signed by a public key of the first ECE ( See at least Terpstra [0141]. Terpstra teaches wherein the extended ownership voucher (i.e., the ownership voucher sent to the retailer) is signed by a public key of the first ECE (i.e., signed by a public key (i.e., C.Public_Key) of the distributor). ) . It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to incorporate the teachings of Terpstra into Mudivarthy’s method of securely establishing ownership of a device. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to include such features in order to establish ownership of a device in an air-gapped environment (Terpstra [0140]). Additionally, the use of public key signatures on the ownership voucher(s) creates a chain of trust from the manufacturer to the owner (Terpstra [0141]). Regarding Claim 2: The combination of Mudivarthy and Terpstra discloses the FIDO device onboarding system of claim 1. Mudivarthy further discloses wherein the program instructions, upon execution, further cause the first ECE to receive the extended ownership voucher from an [Edge Orchestrator (EO)] external to the air-gapped environment ( See at least Mudivarthy [0030]; [0033]; [0039]. Mudivarthy discloses wherein the program instructions, upon execution, further cause the first ECE to receive the extended ownership voucher (i.e., the ownership voucher (OV) for the second hardware module, e.g., hardware module 104B, a standby RP) from an [Edge Orchestrator (EO)] external to the air-gapped environment (i.e., from a provisioning system (e.g., a ZTP server) that communicates via a network). ) . Regarding Claim 3: The combination of Mudivarthy and Terpstra discloses the FIDO device onboarding system of claim 2. Mudivarthy further discloses wherein the original ownership voucher is configured to be stored in the EO ( See at least Mudivarthy [0062]; [0077]; [0080]. Mudivarthy discloses wherein the original ownership voucher (i.e., the first OV, e.g., the OV for the active RP) is configured to be stored in the EO (i.e., provisioning system, e.g., a ZTP server, removable storage). ) . Mudivarthy does not explicitly disclose, but Terpstra further teaches, wherein an original ownership voucher is used to generate the extended ownership voucher ( See at least Terpstra [0053] “The chain of trust in the ownership voucher may comprise a sequence of digital signatures signed by different entities in a supply chain between a manufacturer of the at least one processing device and the owner of the at least one processing device” ; [0141-0142]; Fig. 17 item 1701. Terpstra teaches wherein an original ownership voucher (i.e., the ownership voucher from the manufacture) is used to generate the extended ownership voucher (i.e., is used to generate the ownership voucher sent to the retailer, for example by applying one or more signatures to the original/manufacture ownership voucher). ) . It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to incorporate the teachings of Terpstra into Mudivarthy’s method of securely establishing ownership of a device. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to include such features in order to create a chain of trust from the manufacturer to the owner using public key signatures on the ownership voucher(s) (Terpstra [0141]). Regarding Claim 5: The combination of Mudivarthy and Terpstra discloses the FIDO device onboarding system of claim 1. Mudivarthy further discloses wherein the program instructions, upon execution, further cause the first ECE to receive the extended ownership voucher using an out-of-band storage device ( See at least Mudivarthy [0030];[0058]; [0062]; [0074]; [0077]; [0080]. Mudivarthy discloses wherein the program instructions, upon execution, further cause the first ECE to receive the extended ownership voucher (i.e., receive the second ownership voucher) using an out-of-band storage device (i.e., using removeable media, e.g., a USB drive). ) . Regarding Claim 6: The combination of Mudivarthy and Terpstra discloses the FIDO device onboarding system of claim 1. Mudivarthy further discloses wherein the program instructions, upon execution, further cause the first ECE to assign the first ECE to be the local owner ( See at least Mudivarthy [0055-0057]; Fig. 8B step 804B; Fig. 9 step 906. Mudivarthy discloses causing the first ECE to assign the first ECE to be the local owner (i.e., by installing the ownership voucher (OV) on the active RP). ) : execute a rendezvous (RV) service to perform an initial registration of the second ECE ( See at least Mudivarthy [0018]; [0062]; [0074]; [0076]; Fig. 11 step 1102. Mudivarthy discloses executing a rendezvous (RV) service (i.e., a service that obtains serial numbers of hardware modules) to perform an initial registration of the second ECE (i.e., the second hardware module, e.g., hardware module 104B, the standby RP, other types of hardware modules, etc.). ) ; and execute an owner service to store the extended ownership voucher ( See at least Mudivarthy [0077]; [0080]; [0083]; Fig. 11. Mudivarthy discloses executing an owner service (i.e., a service that obtains and/or provides the second ownership voucher) to store (e.g., via installation) the extended ownership voucher (i.e., the second ownership voucher). ) . Regarding Claim 7: The combination of Mudivarthy and Terpstra discloses the FIDO device onboarding system of claim 1. Mudivarthy further discloses wherein the program instructions, upon execution, further cause the first ECE to form a cluster with the second ECE after the second ECE has been onboarded ( See at least Mudivarthy [0031-0032]; [0041]; [0081-0084]; [0086]; Fig. 11. Mudivarthy discloses wherein the program instructions, upon execution, further cause the first ECE (i.e., device, e.g., device 102) to form a cluster (i.e., form a system, e.g., by running, with or within, device 102) with the second ECE (i.e., with the second hardware module, e.g., hardware module 104B, standby RP, other types of hardware modules, etc.) after the second ECE has been onboarded. ) . Regarding Claim 8: Mudivarthy discloses a FIDO device onboarding method comprising: assigning, using a first Edge Compute Endpoint (ECE) that conforms to a Fast ID Online (FIDO) Device Onboard (FOO) standard, the first ECE to be a local owner in an environment ( See at least Mudivarthy [0018]; [0029-0032]; [0055-0057]; Fig. 8B step 804B; Fig. 9 step 906. Mudivarthy discloses assigning, using a first Edge Compute Endpoint (ECE) (i.e., a device, e.g., device 102) that conforms to a Fast ID Online (FIDO) Device Onboard (FDO) standard (i.e., that conforms to a zero-touch onboarding), the first ECE to be a local owner in an environment (i.e., by installing the ownership voucher (OV) on the active RP). ) ; receiving an extended ownership voucher associated with a second ECE, wherein the extended ownership voucher is signed ( See at least Mudivarthy [0039]; [0041]; Fig. 5 step 508; Fig. 11 step 1104. Mudivarthy discloses receiving an extended ownership voucher (i.e., ownership voucher) associated with a second ECE (i.e., a second hardware module, e.g., hardware module 104B, a standby RP, other types of hardware modules, etc.), wherein the extended ownership voucher is signed (i.e., signed onboarding information with multiple OVs). ) ; and using the extended ownership voucher, onboarding the second ECE to the first ECE ( See at least Mudivarthy [0041]; [0055-0057]; [0062]; [0083]; Fig. 5 step 512; Fig. 8B step 810B; Fig. 9 step 914; Fig. 11 step 1110. Mudivarthy discloses using the extended ownership voucher (i.e., using the second OV, e.g., the OV for the standby RP), onboarding the second ECE to the first ECE (i.e., by installing the ownership voucher (OV) on the standby RP). ) . Mudivarthy discloses a need to securely establish ownership of a device with its owner. Mudivarthy [0024]. Mudivarthy also discloses the use of removable media (e.g., a USB drive) to establish ownership. Mudivarthy [0058]. As disclosed above, Mudivarthy also indicates that the extended ownership voucher (i.e., ownership voucher (OV)) is signed. Mudivarthy [0041]. However, Mudivarthy does not explicitly disclose: where the environment is an air-gapped environment; or wherein the extended ownership voucher is signed by a public key of the first ECE. Terpstra, on the other hand, teaches: where the environment is an air-gapped environment ( See at least Terpstra [0138-0140]. Terpstra teaches where the environment is an air-gapped environment (i.e., an environment that uses air-gapped devices). ) ; and wherein the extended ownership voucher is signed by a public key of the first ECE ( See at least Terpstra [0141]. Terpstra teaches wherein the extended ownership voucher (i.e., the ownership voucher sent to the retailer) is signed by a public key of the first ECE (i.e., signed by a public key (i.e., C.Public_Key) of the distributor). ) . It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to incorporate the teachings of Terpstra into Mudivarthy’s method of securely establishing ownership of a device. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to include such features in order to establish ownership of a device in an air-gapped environment (Terpstra [0140]). Additionally, the use of public key signatures on the ownership voucher(s) creates a chain of trust from the manufacturer to the owner (Terpstra [0141]). Regarding Claim 9: The combination of Mudivarthy and Terpstra discloses the FIDO device onboarding method of claim 8. Mudivarthy further discloses receiving the extended ownership voucher from an Edge Orchestrator (EO) external to the air-gapped environment ( See at least Mudivarthy [0030]; [0033]; [0039]. Mudivarthy discloses receiving the extended ownership voucher (i.e., the ownership voucher (OV) for the second hardware module, e.g., hardware module 104B, a standby RP) from an Edge Orchestrator (EO) external to the air-gapped environment (i.e., from a provisioning system (e.g., a ZTP server) that communicates via a network). ) . Regarding Claim 10: The combination of Mudivarthy and Terpstra discloses the FIDO device onboarding method of claim 9. Mudivarthy further discloses wherein the original ownership voucher is stored in the EO ( See at least Mudivarthy [0062]; [0077]; [0080]. Mudivarthy discloses wherein the original ownership voucher (i.e., the first OV, e.g., the OV for the active RP) is stored in the EO (i.e., provisioning system, e.g., a ZTP server, removable storage). ) . Mudivarthy does not explicitly disclose, but Terpstra further teaches, generating, using an original ownership voucher, the extended ownership voucher ( See at least Terpstra [0053] “The chain of trust in the ownership voucher may comprise a sequence of digital signatures signed by different entities in a supply chain between a manufacturer of the at least one processing device and the owner of the at least one processing device” ; [0141-0142]; Fig. 17 item 1701. Terpstra teaches generating, using an original ownership voucher (i.e., using the ownership voucher from the manufacture), the extended ownership voucher (i.e., the ownership voucher sent to the retailer. Where the extended ownership voucher is generated, for example, by applying one or more signatures to the original/manufacture ownership voucher). ) . It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to incorporate the teachings of Terpstra into Mudivarthy’s method of securely establishing ownership of a device. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to include such features in order to create a chain of trust from the manufacturer to the owner using public key signatures on the ownership voucher(s) (Terpstra [0141]). Regarding Claim 12: The combination of Mudivarthy and Terpstra discloses the FIDO device onboarding method of claim 8. Mudivarthy further discloses receiving the extended ownership voucher using an out-of-band storage device ( See at least Mudivarthy [0030];[0058]; [0062]; [0074]; [0077]; [0080]. Mudivarthy discloses receiving the extended ownership voucher (i.e., receive the second ownership voucher) using an out-of-band storage device (i.e., using removeable media, e.g., a USB drive). ) . Regarding Claim 13: The combination of Mudivarthy and Terpstra discloses the FIDO device onboarding method of claim 8. Mudivarthy further discloses to assign the first ECE to be the local owner ( See at least Mudivarthy [0055-0057]; Fig. 8B step 804B; Fig. 9 step 906. Mudivarthy discloses causing the first ECE to assign the first ECE to be the local owner (i.e., by installing the ownership voucher (OV) on the active RP). ) : executing a rendezvous (RV) service to perform an initial registration of the second ECE ( See at least Mudivarthy [0018]; [0062]; [0074]; [0076]; Fig. 11 step 1102. Mudivarthy discloses executing a rendezvous (RV) service (i.e., a service that obtains serial numbers of hardware modules) to perform an initial registration of the second ECE (i.e., the second hardware module, e.g., hardware module 104B, the standby RP, other types of hardware modules, etc.). ) ; and executing an owner service to store the extended ownership voucher ( See at least Mudivarthy [0077]; [0080]; [0083]; Fig. 11. Mudivarthy discloses executing an owner service (i.e., a service that obtains and/or provides the second ownership voucher) to store (e.g., via installation) the extended ownership voucher (i.e., the second ownership voucher). ) . Regarding Claim 14: The combination of Mudivarthy and Terpstra discloses the FIDO device onboarding method of claim 8. Mudivarthy further discloses forming a cluster with the second ECE after the second ECE has been onboarded ( See at least Mudivarthy [0031-0032]; [0041]; [0081-0084]; [0086]; Fig. 11. Mudivarthy discloses forming a cluster (i.e., form a system, e.g., by running, with or within, device 102) with the second ECE (i.e., with the second hardware module, e.g., hardware module 104B, standby RP, other types of hardware modules, etc.) after the second ECE has been onboarded. ) . Regarding Claim 15: Mudivarthy discloses a computer program product comprising a non-transitory computer readable storage medium having program instructions stored thereon that, upon execution by an Information Handling System (IHS) ( See at least Mudivarthy [0089-0091]; [0096]; Fig. 12) , cause the IHS to: assign, using a first Edge Compute Endpoint (ECE) that conforms to a Fast ID Online (FIDO) Device Onboard (FOO) standard, the first ECE to be a local owner in an environment ( See at least Mudivarthy [0018]; [0029-0032]; [0055-0057]; Fig. 8B step 804B; Fig. 9 step 906. Mudivarthy discloses assigning, using a first Edge Compute Endpoint (ECE) (i.e., a device, e.g., device 102) that conforms to a Fast ID Online (FIDO) Device Onboard (FDO) standard (i.e., that conforms to a zero-touch onboarding), the first ECE to be a local owner in an environment (i.e., by installing the ownership voucher (OV) on the active RP). ) ; receive an extended ownership voucher associated with a second ECE, wherein the extended ownership voucher is signed ( See at least Mudivarthy [0039]; [0041]; Fig. 5 step 508; Fig. 11 step 1104. Mudivarthy discloses receiving an extended ownership voucher (i.e., ownership voucher) associated with a second ECE (i.e., a second hardware module, e.g., hardware module 104B, a standby RP, other types of hardware modules, etc.), wherein the extended ownership voucher is signed (i.e., signed onboarding information with multiple OVs). ) ; and using the extended ownership voucher, onboard the second ECE to the first ECE ( See at least Mudivarthy [0041]; [0055-0057]; [0062]; [0083]; Fig. 5 step 512; Fig. 8B step 810B; Fig. 9 step 914; Fig. 11 step 1110. Mudivarthy discloses using the extended ownership voucher (i.e., using the second OV, e.g., the OV for the standby RP), onboarding the second ECE to the first ECE (i.e., by installing the ownership voucher (OV) on the standby RP). ) . Mudivarthy discloses a need to securely establish ownership of a device with its owner. Mudivarthy [0024]. Mudivarthy also discloses the use of removable media (e.g., a USB drive) to establish ownership. Mudivarthy [0058]. As disclosed above, Mudivarthy also indicates that the extended ownership voucher (i.e., ownership voucher (OV)) is signed. Mudivarthy [0041]. However, Mudivarthy does not explicitly disclose: where the environment is an air-gapped environment; or wherein the extended ownership voucher is signed by a public key of the first ECE. Terpstra, on the other hand, teaches: where the environment is an air-gapped environment ( See at least Terpstra [0138-0140]. Terpstra teaches where the environment is an air-gapped environment (i.e., an environment that uses air-gapped devices). ) ; and wherein the extended ownership voucher is signed by a public key of the first ECE ( See at least Terpstra [0141]. Terpstra teaches wherein the extended ownership voucher (i.e., the ownership voucher sent to the retailer) is signed by a public key of the first ECE (i.e., signed by a public key (i.e., C.Public_Key) of the distributor). ) . It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to incorporate the teachings of Terpstra into Mudivarthy’s method of securely establishing ownership of a device. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to include such features in order to establish ownership of a device in an air-gapped environment (Terpstra [0140]). Additionally, the use of public key signatures on the ownership voucher(s) creates a chain of trust from the manufacturer to the owner (Terpstra [0141]). Regarding Claim 16: The combination of Mudivarthy and Terpstra discloses the computer program product of claim 15. Mudivarthy further discloses wherein the program instructions, upon execution, further cause the IHS to receive the extended ownership voucher from an Edge Orchestrator (EO) external to the air-gapped environment ( See at least Mudivarthy [0030]; [0033]; [0039]. Mudivarthy discloses wherein the program instructions, upon execution, further cause the IHS to receive the extended ownership voucher (i.e., the ownership voucher (OV) for the second hardware module, e.g., hardware module 104B, a standby RP) from an Edge Orchestrator (EO) external to the air-gapped environment (i.e., from a provisioning system (e.g., a ZTP server) that communicates via a network). ) . Regarding Claim 17: The combination of Mudivarthy and Terpstra discloses the computer program product of claim 16. Mudivarthy further discloses wherein the original ownership voucher is configured to be stored in the EO ( See at least Mudivarthy [0062]; [0077]; [0080]. Mudivarthy discloses wherein the original ownership voucher (i.e., the first OV, e.g., the OV for the active RP) is configured to be stored in the EO (i.e., provisioning system, e.g., a ZTP server, removable storage). ) . Mudivarthy does not explicitly disclose, but Terpstra further teaches, wherein an original ownership voucher is used to generate the extended ownership voucher ( See at least Terpstra [0053] “The chain of trust in the ownership voucher may comprise a sequence of digital signatures signed by different entities in a supply chain between a manufacturer of the at least one processing device and the owner of the at least one processing device” ; [0141-0142]; Fig. 17 item 1701. Terpstra teaches wherein an original ownership voucher (i.e., the ownership voucher from the manufacture) is used to generate the extended ownership voucher (i.e., is used to generate the ownership voucher sent to the retailer, for example by applying one or more signatures to the original/manufacture ownership voucher). ) . It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to incorporate the teachings of Terpstra into Mudivarthy’s method of securely establishing ownership of a device. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to include such features in order to create a chain of trust from the manufacturer to the owner using public key signatures on the ownership voucher(s) (Terpstra [0141]). Regarding Claim 19: The combination of Mudivarthy and Terpstra discloses the computer program product of claim 15. Mudivarthy further discloses wherein the program instructions, upon execution, further cause the IHS to receive the extended ownership voucher using an out-of-band storage device ( See at least Mudivarthy [0030];[0058]; [0062]; [0074]; [0077]; [0080]. Mudivarthy discloses wherein the program instructions, upon execution, further cause the IHS to receive the extended ownership voucher (i.e., receive the second ownership voucher) using an out-of-band storage device (i.e., using removeable media, e.g., a USB drive). ) Regarding Claim 20: The combination of Mudivarthy and Terpstra discloses the computer program product of claim 15. Mudivarthy further discloses wherein the program instructions, upon execution, further cause the IHS to assign the first ECE to be the local owner ( See at least Mudivarthy [0055-0057]; Fig. 8B step 804B; Fig. 9 step 906. Mudivarthy discloses causing the IHS to assign the first ECE to be the local owner (i.e., by installing the ownership voucher (OV) on the active RP). ) : execute a rendezvous (RV) service to perform an initial registration of the second ECE ( See at least Mudivarthy [0018]; [0062]; [0074]; [0076]; Fig. 11 step 1102. Mudivarthy discloses executing a rendezvous (RV) service (i.e., a service that obtains serial numbers of hardware modules) to perform an initial registration of the second ECE (i.e., the second hardware module, e.g., hardware module 104B, the standby RP, other types of hardware modules, etc.). ) ; and execute an owner service to store the extended ownership voucher ( See at least Mudivarthy [0077]; [0080]; [0083]; Fig. 11. Mudivarthy discloses executing an owner service (i.e., a service that obtains and/or provides the second ownership voucher) to store (e.g., via installation) the extended ownership voucher (i.e., the second ownership voucher). ) . 07-21-aia AIA Claim s 4, 11 and 18 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Mudivarthy in view of Terpstra, as applied above, and further in view of Zoualfaghari et al. (US 2024/0007354 A1) (hereinafter “Zoualfaghari”) . Regarding Claim 4: The combination of Mudivarthy and Terpstra discloses the FIDO device onboarding system of claim 1. Mudivarthy discloses wherein the program instructions, upon execution, further cause the first ECE to receive the extended ownership voucher from an EO ( See at least Mudivarthy [0039]; [0041]; [0077]; Fig. 5 step 508; Fig. 11 step 1104. Mudivarthy discloses wherein the program instructions, upon execution, further cause the first ECE (i.e., a device, e.g., device 102) to receive the extended ownership voucher (i.e., ownership voucher for the second hardware module, e.g., hardware module 104B, a standby RP, etc.) from an EO (i.e., from a provisioning system, e.g., a ZTP server). ) . Mudivarthy does not explicitly disclose where the extended ownership voucher is received prior to shipping the second ECE to the air-gapped environment. However, Zoualfaghari teaches that it was known in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, that a first endpoint (i.e., an integration service) could receive a certificate (i.e., voucher) for a second endpoint (i.e., edge device) prior to shipping the second endpoint (i.e., before the edge device is shipped) ( See at least Zoualfaghari [0024].) . In view of the teachings provided by Zoualfaghari, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to incorporate wherein the program instructions, upon execution, further cause the first ECE to receive the extended ownership voucher from an EO into Mudivarthy’s method of receiving an extended ownership voucher. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to include such features in order to store information for pre-assigned edge devices prior to the edge devices being shipped to the client or connected to the client’s network (Zoualfaghari [0024]). Regarding Claim 11: The combination of Mudivarthy and Terpstra discloses the FIDO device onboarding method of claim 8. Mudivarthy discloses receiving the extended ownership voucher from an EO ( See at least Mudivarthy [0039]; [0041]; [0077]; Fig. 5 step 508; Fig. 11 step 1104. Mudivarthy discloses receiving the extended ownership voucher (i.e., ownership voucher for the second hardware module, e.g., hardware module 104B, a standby RP, etc.) from an EO (i.e., from a provisioning system, e.g., a ZTP server). ) . Mudivarthy does not explicitly disclose where the extended ownership voucher is received prior to shipping the second ECE to the air-gapped environment. However, Zoualfaghari teaches that it was known in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, that a first endpoint (i.e., an integration service) could receive a certificate (i.e., voucher) for a second endpoint (i.e., edge device) prior to shipping the second endpoint (i.e., before the edge device is shipped) ( See at least Zoualfaghari [0024].) . In view of the teachings provided by Zoualfaghari, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to incorporate wherein the program instructions, upon execution, further cause the first ECE to receive the extended ownership voucher from an EO into Mudivarthy’s method of receiving an extended ownership voucher. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to include such features in order to store information for pre-assigned edge devices prior to the edge devices being shipped to the client or connected to the client’s network (Zoualfaghari [0024]). Regarding Claim 18: The combination of Mudivarthy and Terpstra discloses the computer program product of claim 15. Mudivarthy discloses wherein the program instructions, upon execution, further cause the IHS to receive the extended ownership voucher from an EO ( See at least Mudivarthy [0039]; [0041]; [0077]; Fig. 5 step 508; Fig. 11 step 1104. Mudivarthy discloses wherein the program instructions, upon execution, further cause the IHS (i.e., a device, e.g., device 102) to receive the extended ownership voucher (i.e., ownership voucher for the second hardware module, e.g., hardware module 104B, a standby RP, etc.) from an EO (i.e., from a provisioning system, e.g., a ZTP server). ) . Mudivarthy does not explicitly disclose where the extended ownership voucher is received prior to shipping the second ECE to the air-gapped environment. However, Zoualfaghari teaches that it was known in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, that a first endpoint (i.e., an integration service) could receive a certificate (i.e., voucher) for a second endpoint (i.e., edge device) prior to shipping the second endpoint (i.e., before the edge device is shipped) ( See at least Zoualfaghari [0024].) . In view of the teachings provided by Zoualfaghari, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to incorporate wherein the program instructions, upon execution, further cause the first ECE to receive the extended ownership voucher from an EO into Mudivarthy’s method of receiving an extended ownership voucher. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to include such features in order to store information for pre-assigned edge devices prior to the edge devices being shipped to the client or connected to the client’s network (Zoualfaghari [0024]) . Conclusion 07-96 AIA The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant’s disclosure is cited in the Notice of References Cited (PTO-892). The additional cited art further establishes the state of the art prior to the effective filling date of Applicant’s claimed invention . Shah et al. (US 2018/0316673 A1) discloses where ownership vouchers may be preloaded. Shah indicates that a Registrar may need to contact the vendor/manufacturer in advance, such as when the target network is "air-gapped" (a network security measure to ensure that a secure computer network is physically isolated from unsecured networks, such as the public Internet or an unsecured local area network). In such a case, the registrar/AAA may be preloaded (step "0") with authorized vendor device serial numbers. Shah [0048]. Cooper, et al. ("FIDO Device Onboard Specification 1.1" Fido Alliance. [https://fidoalliance.org/specs/FDO/FIDO-Device-Onboard-PS-v1.1-20220419/FIDO-Device-Onboard-PS-v1.1-20220419.pdf], April 19, 2022, 98 pages.) specifies the protocol interactions and message formats for the FIDO Device Onboard (FDO) protocols, version 1.1. FIDO Device Onboard is a device onboarding scheme from the FIDO Alliance, sometimes called "device provisioning". Cooper p. 4. Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to JASON FENSTERMACHER whose telephone number is (571)270-3511. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday 9:00 AM to 5:30 PM ET, Alternate Fridays Off. 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, Patrick McAtee can be reached at 571-272-7575. 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. /J.F./Examiner, Art Unit 3698 /PATRICK MCATEE/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3698 Application/Control Number: 18/984,020 Page 2 Art Unit: 3698 Application/Control Number: 18/984,020 Page 3 Art Unit: 3698 Application/Control Number: 18/984,020 Page 4 Art Unit: 3698 Application/Control Number: 18/984,020 Page 5 Art Unit: 3698 Application/Control Number: 18/984,020 Page 6 Art Unit: 3698 Application/Control Number: 18/984,020 Page 7 Art Unit: 3698 Application/Control Number: 18/984,020 Page 8 Art Unit: 3698 Application/Control Number: 18/984,020 Page 9 Art Unit: 3698 Application/Control Number: 18/984,020 Page 10 Art Unit: 3698 Application/Control Number: 18/984,020 Page 11 Art Unit: 3698 Application/Control Number: 18/984,020 Page 12 Art Unit: 3698 Application/Control Number: 18/984,020 Page 13 Art Unit: 3698 Application/Control Number: 18/984,020 Page 14 Art Unit: 3698 Application/Control Number: 18/984,020 Page 15 Art Unit: 3698 Application/Control Number: 18/984,020 Page 16 Art Unit: 3698 Application/Control Number: 18/984,020 Page 17 Art Unit: 3698 Application/Control Number: 18/984,020 Page 18 Art Unit: 3698 Application/Control Number: 18/984,020 Page 19 Art Unit: 3698 Application/Control Number: 18/984,020 Page 20 Art Unit: 3698 Application/Control Number: 18/984,020 Page 21 Art Unit: 3698 Application/Control Number: 18/984,020 Page 22 Art Unit: 3698 Application/Control Number: 18/984,020 Page 23 Art Unit: 3698 Application/Control Number: 18/984,020 Page 24 Art Unit: 3698
Prosecution Insights