CTNF 19/011,649 CTNF 95546 DETAILED ACTION The following claims are pending in this office action: 1-16 The following claims are independent: 1 and 10 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. Drawings The drawings filed on 01/07/2025 are accepted. Information Disclosure Statement The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted on 01/07/2025 has been considered. The submission is in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, an initialed and dated copy of Applicant’s IDS form 1449 filed 01/07/2025 is attached to the instant Office action. Double Patenting 08-33 AIA 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 USPTO Internet website contains terminal disclaimer forms which may be used. Please visit www.uspto.gov/patent/patents-forms. The 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/process/file/efs/guidance/eTD-info-I.jsp. Claims 1, 4 and 10 are rejected on the ground of nonstatutory anticipation type double patenting as being unpatentable over claims 1-11 of Futagi (US Patent No. 12,229,432) (hereinafter “ Futagi ”). Although the claims at issue are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other because application claims 1-16 are effectively a broader genus and uses essentially the same language to the of claims 1-11 of Futagi. Claims 1-11 of Futagi recites a system that performs essentially the same functions as claims 1, 4 and 10 of the instant application. For example: Claim 1: Instant Application Patent No. 12,229,432 A memory system comprising: Claim 1: A memory system connectable to a host device, the memory system comprising: a memory; and Claim 1: a nonvolatile memory; a random number generator (RNG) circuit configured to generate a pseudo random number, wherein the RNG circuit is configured to, upon issuance of a command by a host: Claim 1: and a processor configured to: ... instruct the first circuit to ... generate a first pseudo random number using the sequence of random number bits, generate a first sequence of random number bits, Claim 1: a first circuit configured to generate a sequence of random number bits; generate a first pseudo random number based on the first sequence when a randomness of the first sequence is higher or equal to a predetermined randomness, Claim 1: calculate a first value indicating randomness of the sequence of random number bits, determine whether the first value exceeds a first threshold value ... and upon determining that the first value exceeds the first threshold value ... generate a first pseudo random number using the sequence of random number bits, and generate a second pseudo random number based on a second sequence of random number bits that is different from the first sequence when the randomness of the first sequence is lower than the predetermined randomness. Claim 1: upon determining that the first value does not exceed the second threshold value ... instruct the first circuit to generate another sequence of random number bits having the second length, generate a second pseudo random number using said another sequence of random number bits, Claim 4 Instant Application Patent No. 12,229,432 wherein the host is notified when the randomness of the first sequence is lower than the predetermined randomness. Claim 1: calculate a first value indicating randomness of the sequence of random number bits, determine whether the first value exceeds a first threshold value, upon determining that the first value does not exceed the first threshold value, notify the host device of an error, Claim 10 Instant Application Patent No. 12,229,432 A method comprising: Claim 8: A method for generating a random number by a memory system connectable to a host device, the method comprising: upon issuance of a command by a host, generating a first sequence of random number bits; Claim 1: instruct the first circuit to ... first circuit configured to generate a sequence of random number bits; when the randomness of the first sequence is higher or equal to the predetermined randomness, generating a first pseudo random number based on the first sequence; Claim 1: calculate a first value indicating randomness of the sequence of random number bits, determine whether the first value exceeds a first threshold value ... and upon determining that the first value exceeds the first threshold value ... generate a first pseudo random number using the sequence of random number bits, when the randomness of the first sequence is lower than the predetermined randomness, updating the first sequence to a second sequence of random number bits, and generating a second pseudo random number based on the second sequence; and Claim 1: upon determining that the first value does not exceed the second threshold value ... instruct the first circuit to generate another sequence of random number bits having the second length, generate a second pseudo random number using said another sequence of random number bits, writing or reading data to or from a memory using the generated pseudo random number. Claim 1: write data to the nonvolatile memory using the first pseudo random number Claims 2-3, 5-6 and 8-9 are rejected on the ground of nonstatutory obviousness type double patenting as being unpatentable over Futagi in view of Potlapally et al. (US Pub. 2014/0245425) (hereinafter “ Potlapally ”). As per claim 2, Futagi teaches claim 1. Futagi does not clearly teach wherein the predetermined randomness is changeable based on at least one of the randomness of the first sequence and a randomness of the second sequence. However, Potlapally teaches wherein the predetermined randomness is changeable based on at least one of the randomness of the first sequence and a randomness of the second sequence. ([Potlapally, para. 0073 “the service-provided data may be added to a primary entropy pool ... a pool of random bits [predetermined randomness] to be used by local entropy extraction components for random-number-related operations ... Depending on the nature of the local sources of entropy available, the combination of the server-provided random data [first sequence – see for example, para. 0022] with the locally-generated random data [second sequence] may enhance [change/is changeable] the quality of the primary entropy pol substantially [based on the first sequence and second sequence] ... For example, some hosts may typically rely on hardware interrupt sequences. ... to populate their local primary entropy pools ... the hardware interrupt sequences that are natively or locally available at a given host ... may reduce the statistical independence of the random data that can be provided [change randomness based on the randomness of the first sequence] ... The combination of random data from even one high-quality entropy source of the service [based on at least a randomness of the second sequence]”) It would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention for one of ordinary skill in the art to have modified the elements disclosed by Futagi with the teachings of Potlapally to include wherein the predetermined randomness is changeable based on at least one of the randomness of the first sequence and a randomness of the second sequence. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to make this modification because the combination may also have the security benefit that the final data received by the consumer is different from that provided by the service, and in the unlikely event that a malicious attacker successfully penetrates the random data service, the attacker would still not be able to determine the random data used by the consumer. (Potlapally, para. 0073) As per claim 3, Futagi teaches claim 1. Futagi also teaches wherein the first and second sequences have first and second lengths, respectively. ([Kokubo, para. 0051] “in the case in which n-bit physical random numbers are received m times, the physical random numbers obtained through these m receptions are put together and stored as physical random numbers of mxn bits in the latch or the like”; as described above, the length of the first sequence is n and the length of the second sequence, having the steps repeated, is 2n) Futagi does not clearly teach at least one of the first length, the second length, and the predetermined randomness is changeable. However, Potlapally teaches at least one of the first length, the second length, and the predetermined randomness is changeable. ([Potlapally, para. 0027] “an indication of desired statistical qualities of the random data needed or requested by a particular consumer may be available to the service, and such indications may be used to select [change] the producers and/or the specific entropy sources to use ... random numbers of "high", "medium" or "low" quality [the predetermined randomness is changeable”; [para. 0040] “service delivery parameters for random data collections to be provided to a customer ... delivery parameters may govern [change] how much random data is to be provided in one transfer ... the length of a bit string [first and second length as there are from a plurality of collections] to be provided”) It would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention for one of ordinary skill in the art to have modified the elements disclosed by Futagi with the teachings of Potlapally to include at least one of the first length, the second length, and the predetermined randomness is changeable. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to make this modification because such a flexible approach may reduce client billing costs for random data. (Potlapally, para. 0030) As per claim 5, Futagi teaches claim 4. Futagi does not clearly teach wherein the predetermined randomness is changeable based on at least one of the randomness of the first sequence and a randomness of the second sequence. However, Potlapally teaches wherein the predetermined randomness is changeable based on at least one of the randomness of the first sequence and a randomness of the second sequence. ([Potlapally, para. 0073 “the service-provided data may be added to a primary entropy pool ... a pool of random bits [predetermined randomness] to be used by local entropy extraction components for random-number-related operations ... Depending on the nature of the local sources of entropy available, the combination of the server-provided random data [first sequence – see for example, para. 0022] with the locally-generated random data [second sequence] may enhance [change/is changeable] the quality of the primary entropy pol substantially [based on the first sequence and second sequence] ... For example, some hosts may typically rely on hardware interrupt sequences. ... to populate their local primary entropy pools ... the hardware interrupt sequences that are natively or locally available at a given host ... may reduce the statistical independence of the random data that can be provided [change randomness based on the randomness of the first sequence] ... The combination of random data from even one high-quality entropy source of the service [based on at least a randomness of the second sequence]”) It would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention for one of ordinary skill in the art to have modified the elements disclosed by Futagi with the teachings of Potlapally to include wherein the predetermined randomness is changeable based on at least one of the randomness of the first sequence and a randomness of the second sequence. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to make this modification because the combination may also have the security benefit that the final data received by the consumer is different from that provided by the service, and in the unlikely event that a malicious attacker successfully penetrates the random data service, the attacker would still not be able to determine the random data used by the consumer. (Potlapally, para. 0073) As per claim 6, Futagi in view of Potlapally teaches claim 5. Futagi also teaches wherein data that is written to the memory is encrypted using the pseudo random number generated by the RNG circuit. ([Fugtagi, claim 4] “after the first pseudo random number is generated, encrypt data to be written to the nonvolatile memory using the first pseudo random number”) As per claim 8, Futagi in view of Potlapally teaches claim 6. Futagi also teaches wherein the memory includes a nonvolatile memory. ([Fugtagi, claim 1] “memory system comprising: a nonvolatile memory”) As per claim 9, Futagi in view of Potlapally teaches claim 6. Futagi also teaches wherein the second sequence is longer than the first sequence. ([Fugtagi, claim 1] “a sequence of random number bits having a first length ... the second length being greater than the first length, instruct the first circuit to generate another sequence of random number bits having the second length”) Claim 7 is rejected on the ground of nonstatutory obviousness type double patenting as being unpatentable over Futagi in view of Potlapally and further in view of Kokubo et al. (US Pub. 2015/0149519) (hereinafter “ Kokubo ”). As per claim 7, Futagi in view of Potlapally teaches claim 6. Futagi in view of Potlapally does not clearly teach wherein the RNG circuit includes a deterministic random bit generator configured to generate the first and second sequences in conformity with security standards of NIST SP 800-90. However, Kokubo teaches wherein the RNG circuit includes a deterministic random bit generator configured to generate the first and second sequences in conformity with security standards of NIST SP 800-90. ([Kokubo, para. 0031] “the health test circuit 12 performs a test process for checking the randomness of a predetermined number of bits of the physical random numbers ... In respect of a physical random number generator complying with SP800-90B defined by the National Institute of Standards and Technology in the United States, specific health tests are required to be performed ... the case of the results of the test process by the health test circuit 12 indicating satisfactory randomness, the control circuit 13 supplies the predetermined number of physical random numbers stored in the register 11 to the entropy compressing apparatus 14”) It would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention for one of ordinary skill in the art to have modified the elements disclosed by Futagi in view of Potlapally with the teachings of Kokubo to include wherein the RNG circuit includes a deterministic random bit generator configured to generate the first and second sequences in conformity with security standards of NIST SP 800-90. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to make this modification because in the United States specific health tests on randomly generated numbers are required to be performed to check the randomness of the numbers generated. (Kokubo, para. 0031) Claim 11-16 are rejected on the ground of nonstatutory obviousness type double patenting as being unpatentable over Futagi in view of Kokubo . As per claim 11, Futagi teaches claim 10. Futagi does not clearly teach updating the second sequence to a third sequence of random number bits when a randomness of the second sequence is lower than the predetermined randomness. However, Kokubo teaches updating the second sequence to a third sequence of random number bits when a randomness of the second sequence is lower than the predetermined randomness. ([Kokubo, para. 0052] “If the check result indicates NO, [continuing from Futagi above, when the randomness of the second sequence is lower than the predetermined randomness] the procedure goes back to step S2 to repeat the subsequent steps”; [para. 0051] “the entropy-estimation-based control circuit 16 receives an estimated minimum entropy Me [randomness of third bits in third sequence]” [para. 0052] “the entropy-estimation-based control circuit 16 adds nxMe to the variable SUM [updating second sequence as SUM on the third iteration is the second sequence] ... the entropy-estimation-based control circuit 16 checks whether the value of the variable SUM is greater than ExL ... If the check result indicates YES, the entropy-estimation-based control circuit 16 sends an input completion signal”; [para. 0077] “upon receiving a control signal indicative of input completion ... the LFSR control circuit 41 causes ... data [the third sequence] ... to be output as entropy-compressed physical random numbers”) It would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention for one of ordinary skill in the art to have modified the elements disclosed by Futagi with the teachings of Kokubo to include updating the second sequence to a third sequence of random number bits when a randomness of the second sequence is lower than the predetermined randomness. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to make this modification because such a process provides an advantage regarding the processing speed of the apparatus. (Kokubo, para. 0079 and para. 0082) As per claim 12, Futagi in view of Kokubo teaches claim 11. Futagi also teaches teach notifying the host when the randomness of the first sequence is lower than the predetermined randomness. ([Futagi, claim 1] “calculate a first value indicating randomness of the sequence of random number bits, determine whether the first value exceeds a first threshold value, upon determining that the first value does not exceed the first threshold value, notify the host device of an error”) As per claim 13, Futagi in view of Kokubo teaches claim 12. Futagi also teaches encrypting data to be written to the memory using the generated pseudo random number. ([Fugtagi, claim 4] “after the first pseudo random number is generated, encrypt data to be written to the nonvolatile memory using the first pseudo random number”) As per claim 14, Futagi in view of Kokubo teaches claim 12. Futagi does not clearly teach deterministically generating the first or second sequence in conformity with security standards of NIST SP 800-90. However, Kokubo teaches deterministically generating the first or second sequence in conformity with security standards of NIST SP 800-90. ([Kokubo, para. 0031] “the health test circuit 12 performs a test process for checking the randomness of a predetermined number of bits of the physical random numbers ... In respect of a physical random number generator complying with SP800-90B defined by the National Institute of Standards and Technology in the United States, specific health tests are required to be performed ... the case of the results of the test process by the health test circuit 12 indicating satisfactory randomness, the control circuit 13 supplies the predetermined number of physical random numbers stored in the register 11 to the entropy compressing apparatus 14”) It would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention for one of ordinary skill in the art to have modified the elements disclosed by Futagi with the teachings of Kokubo to include deterministically generating the first or second sequence in conformity with security standards of NIST SP 800-90. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to make this modification because in the United States specific health tests on randomly generated numbers are required to be performed to check the randomness of the numbers generated. (Kokubo, para. 0031) As per claim 15, Futagi in view of Kokubo teaches claim 12. Futagi also teaches wherein the memory includes a nonvolatile memory. ([Fugtagi, claim 1] “memory system comprising: a nonvolatile memory”) As per claim 16, Futagi in view of Kokubo teaches claim 15. Futagi also teaches wherein the second sequence is longer than the first sequence. ([Fugtagi, claim 1] “a sequence of random number bits having a first length ... the second length being greater than the first length, instruct the first circuit to generate another sequence of random number bits having the second length”) Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102 07-07-aia AIA 07-07 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 – 07-08-aia AIA (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. 07-15 AIA Claim 1 is rejected under 35 USC § 102( a)(1) and alternatively 35 USC § 102(a)(2 ) as being anticipated by Kokubo . As per claim 1, Kokubo teaches a memory system comprising: ([Kokubo, para. 0085; Fig. 11] “FIG. 11 is a drawing illustrating an example of the configuration of an encryption [memory as the system includes memory – see figure] system”) a memory; and ([Kokubo, Fig. 11] the system includes memory ROM 62 and RAM 63) a random number generator (RNG) circuit configured to generate a pseudo random number, wherein the RNG circuit is configured to, upon issuance of a command by a host: ([Kokubo, para. 0003] “Random numbers are largely classified into pseudo random numbers and physical random numbers ... according to the method of generation ... Pseudo random numbers are a part of a numerical sequence generated by deterministic calculation”; [para. 0029] “FIG. 1 is a drawing illustrating an example of the configuration of a physical random number generator apparatus [RNG circuit]”; [para. 0086] “The CPU 64 operates based on data and programs stored in the ROM 62 and the RAM 63, so that a random number generation process and an encryption key generation process are performed [generate a pseudo random number] under to the control of the CPU 64 [upon issuance of a command by a host] ... The encryption arithmetic apparatus 61 performs a key generation algorithm, so that the common key encryption circuit 71 and the public key encryption circuit 72 generate a ... key ... based on the supplied physical random number [generate a pseudo random number]”) generate a first sequence of random number bits, ([Kokubo, para. 0044] “The generation of a 1-bit physical random number by the physical random number generation circuit 10 is repeated n times, so that n bits of physical random numbers are stored in the register 11 [generate a first sequence of random number bits]”) generate a first pseudo random number based on the first sequence ([Kokubo, para. 0086] “The encryption arithmetic apparatus 61 performs a key generation algorithm, so that the common key encryption circuit 71 and the public key encryption circuit 72 generate a ... key [generate a first pseudo random number] ... based on the supplied physical random number [based on the first sequence]”) when a randomness of the first sequence is higher or equal to a predetermined randomness, ([para. 0051] “the entropy-estimation-based control circuit 16 receives an estimated minimum entropy Me [randomness of a bit of the first sequence]” [para. 0052] “the entropy-estimation-based control circuit 16 adds nxMe [a randomness of the first sequence] to the variable SUM ... the entropy-estimation-based control circuit 16 checks whether the value of the variable SUM [a randomness of the first sequence as SUM starts at 0] is greater than ExL [a predetermined randomness – see para. 0049] ... If the check result indicates YES, the entropy-estimation-based control circuit 16 sends an input completion signal”; [para. 0077] “upon receiving a control signal indicative of input completion ... the LFSR control circuit 41 causes ... data [the first sequence] ... to be output as entropy-compressed physical random numbers”; [para. 0086] “entropy-compressed physical random numbers ... supplied to the encryption arithmetic apparatus .... generate a ... key”) and generate a second pseudo random number based on a second sequence of random number bits that is different from the first sequence when the randomness of the first sequence is lower than the predetermined randomness. ([Para. 0052] “If the check result indicates NO, [when the randomness of the first sequence is lower than the predetermined randomness] the procedure goes back to step S2 to repeat the subsequent steps”; [para. 0051] “the entropy-estimation-based control circuit 16 receives an estimated minimum entropy Me [randomness of second bit]” [para. 0052] “the entropy-estimation-based control circuit 16 adds nxMe to the variable SUM [a randomness of the second sequence as the new nxMe is different from the first time around] ... the entropy-estimation-based control circuit 16 checks whether the value of the variable SUM [a randomness of the second sequence] is greater than ExL [a predetermined randomness – see para. 0049] ... If the check result indicates YES, the entropy-estimation-based control circuit 16 sends an input completion signal”; [para. 0077] “upon receiving a control signal indicative of input completion ... the LFSR control circuit 41 causes ... data [the second sequence] ... to be output as entropy-compressed physical random numbers”; [para. 0086] “entropy-compressed physical random numbers ... supplied to the encryption arithmetic apparatus .... generate a ... key [a second pseudo random number]”) Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103 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 2-3 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kokubo as applied to claim 1 above in view of Potlapally . As per claim 2, Kokubo teaches claim 1. Kokubo does not clearly teach wherein the predetermined randomness is changeable based on at least one of the randomness of the first sequence and a randomness of the second sequence. However, Potlapally teaches wherein the predetermined randomness is changeable based on at least one of the randomness of the first sequence and a randomness of the second sequence. ([Potlapally, para. 0073 “the service-provided data may be added to a primary entropy pool ... a pool of random bits [predetermined randomness] to be used by local entropy extraction components for random-number-related operations ... Depending on the nature of the local sources of entropy available, the combination of the server-provided random data [first sequence – see for example, para. 0022] with the locally-generated random data [second sequence] may enhance [change/is changeable] the quality of the primary entropy pol substantially [based on the first sequence and second sequence] ... For example, some hosts may typically rely on hardware interrupt sequences. ... to populate their local primary entropy pools ... the hardware interrupt sequences that are natively or locally available at a given host ... may reduce the statistical independence of the random data that can be provided [change randomness based on the randomness of the first sequence] ... The combination of random data from even one high-quality entropy source of the service [based on at least a randomness of the second sequence]”) It would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention for one of ordinary skill in the art to have modified the elements disclosed by Kokubo with the teachings of Potlapally to include wherein the predetermined randomness is changeable based on at least one of the randomness of the first sequence and a randomness of the second sequence. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to make this modification because the combination may also have the security benefit that the final data received by the consumer is different from that provided by the service, and in the unlikely event that a malicious attacker successfully penetrates the random data service, the attacker would still not be able to determine the random data used by the consumer. (Potlapally, para. 0073) As per claim 3, Kokubo teaches claim 1. Kokubo also teaches wherein the first and second sequences have first and second lengths, respectively. ([Kokubo, para. 0051] “in the case in which n-bit physical random numbers are received m times, the physical random numbers obtained through these m receptions are put together and stored as physical random numbers of mxn bits in the latch or the like”; as described above, the length of the first sequence is n and the length of the second sequence, having the steps repeated, is 2n) Kokubo does not clearly teach at least one of the first length, the second length, and the predetermined randomness is changeable. However, Potlapally teaches at least one of the first length, the second length, and the predetermined randomness is changeable. ([Potlapally, para. 0027] “an indication of desired statistical qualities of the random data needed or requested by a particular consumer may be available to the service, and such indications may be used to select [change] the producers and/or the specific entropy sources to use ... random numbers of "high", "medium" or "low" quality [the predetermined randomness is changeable”; [para. 0040] “service delivery parameters for random data collections to be provided to a customer ... delivery parameters may govern [change] how much random data is to be provided in one transfer ... the length of a bit string [first and second length as there are from a plurality of collections] to be provided”) It would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention for one of ordinary skill in the art to have modified the elements disclosed by Kokubo with the teachings of Potlapally to include at least one of the first length, the second length, and the predetermined randomness is changeable. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to make this modification because such a flexible approach may reduce client billing costs for random data. (Potlapally, para. 0030) 07-21-aia AIA Claim s 4 and 10-16 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kokubo (in the case of claim 4, as applied to claim 1 above) and in view of Best et al. (US Pub. 2015/0117646) (hereinafter “ Best ”) . As per claim 4, Kokubo teaches claim 1. Kokubo does not clearly teach wherein the host is notified when the randomness of the first sequence is lower than the predetermined randomness. However, Best teaches wherein the host is notified when the randomness of the first sequence is lower than the predetermined randomness. ([Best, para. 0040] “The user of the mobile communication device may also be notified of the entropy strength of the source data [randomness of the first sequence] ... whenever one or more threshold values are not met [lower than the predetermined randomness”) It would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention for one of ordinary skill in the art to have modified the elements disclosed by Kokubo with the teachings of Best to include wherein the host is notified when the randomness of the first sequence is lower than the predetermined randomness. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to make this modification because such a modification ensures that a sufficient amount of entropy data is readily available as to avoid communication delays. (Best, para. 0043) As per claim 10, Kokubo teaches a method comprising: ([Kokubo, para. 0002] “The disclosures herein relate to ... a method of generating a random number”) upon issuance of a command by a host, generating a first sequence of random number bits; ([Kokubo, para. 0044] “The generation of a 1-bit physical random number by the physical random number generation circuit 10 is repeated n times, so that n bits of physical random numbers are stored in the register 11 [generate a first sequence of random number bits]”; [para. 0086] “The CPU 64 operates based on data and programs stored in the ROM 62 and the RAM 63, so that a random number generation process ... [generate a first sequence of random number bits] under to the control of the CPU 64 [upon issuance of a command by a host]”) comparing a randomness of the first sequence with a predetermined randomness; ([Kokubo, para. 0051] “the entropy-estimation-based control circuit 16 receives an estimated minimum entropy Me [randomness of a bit of the first sequence]” [para. 0052] “the entropy-estimation-based control circuit 16 adds nxMe [a randomness of the first sequence] to the variable SUM ... the entropy-estimation-based control circuit 16 checks whether the value of the variable SUM [a randomness of the first sequence as SUM starts at 0] is greater than ExL [a predetermined randomness – see para. 0049]) when the randomness of the first sequence is higher or equal to the predetermined randomness, generating a first pseudo random number based on the first sequence; ([Kokubo, para. 0052] “If the check result indicates YES, the entropy-estimation-based control circuit 16 sends an input completion signal”; [para. 0077] “upon receiving a control signal indicative of input completion ... the LFSR control circuit 41 causes ... data [the first sequence] ... to be output as entropy-compressed physical random numbers”; [para. 0086] “entropy-compressed physical random numbers ... supplied to the encryption arithmetic apparatus .... generate a ... key [generating a first pseudo random number]”) when the randomness of the first sequence is lower than the predetermined randomness, ([Kokubo, para. 0052] “If the check result indicates NO, [when the randomness of the first sequence is lower than the predetermined randomness] the procedure goes back to step S2 to repeat the subsequent steps”) updating the first sequence to a second sequence of random number bits, and generating a second pseudo random number based on the second sequence; and ([para. 0051] “the entropy-estimation-based control circuit 16 receives an estimated minimum entropy Me [randomness of second bit]” [para. 0052] “the entropy-estimation-based control circuit 16 adds nxMe to the variable SUM [updating the first sequence as SUM was the first sequence] ... the entropy-estimation-based control circuit 16 checks whether the value of the variable SUM is greater than ExL ... If the check result indicates YES, the entropy-estimation-based control circuit 16 sends an input completion signal”; [para. 0077] “upon receiving a control signal indicative of input completion ... the LFSR control circuit 41 causes ... data [the second sequence] ... to be output as entropy-compressed physical random numbers”; [para. 0086] “entropy-compressed physical random numbers ... supplied to the encryption arithmetic apparatus .... generate a ... key [a second pseudo random number]”) Kokubo does not clearly teach writing or reading data to or from a memory using the generated pseudo random number. However, Best teaches writing or reading data to or from a memory using the generated pseudo random number. ([Best para. 0042] “the entropy data may be immediately retrieved from the entropy data cache to be applied to a cipher algorithm [using the pseudo random number] for encrypting information that is to be transmitted [writing data to] over a network to a receiving device [to a memory – see para. 0020: “Memory 200 ... to store ... communications received”]) It would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention for one of ordinary skill in the art to have modified the elements disclosed by Kokubo with the teachings of Best to include writing or reading data to or from a memory using the generated pseudo random number. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to make this modification because such a modification provides the benefit of allowing for highly secure cryptographic operations for communication. (Best, para. 0034) As per claim 11, Kokubo in view of Best teaches claim 10. Kokubo also teaches updating the second sequence to a third sequence of random number bits when a randomness of the second sequence is lower than the predetermined randomness. ([Kokubo, para. 0052] “If the check result indicates NO, [continuing from above, when the randomness of the second sequence is lower than the predetermined randomness] the procedure goes back to step S2 to repeat the subsequent steps”; [para. 0051] “the entropy-estimation-based control circuit 16 receives an estimated minimum entropy Me [randomness of third bits in third sequence]” [para. 0052] “the entropy-estimation-based control circuit 16 adds nxMe to the variable SUM [updating second sequence as SUM on the third iteration is the second sequence] ... the entropy-estimation-based control circuit 16 checks whether the value of the variable SUM is greater than ExL ... If the check result indicates YES, the entropy-estimation-based control circuit 16 sends an input completion signal”; [para. 0077] “upon receiving a control signal indicative of input completion ... the LFSR control circuit 41 causes ... data [the third sequence] ... to be output as entropy-compressed physical random numbers”) As per claim 12, Kokubo in view of Best teaches claim 11. Kokubo does not clearly teach notifying the host when the randomness of the first sequence is lower than the predetermined randomness. However, Best teaches notifying the host when the randomness of the first sequence is lower than the predetermined randomness. ([Best, para. 0040] “The user of the mobile communication device may also be notified of the entropy strength of the source data [randomness of the first sequence] ... whenever one or more threshold values are not met [lower than the predetermined randomness”) It would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention for one of ordinary skill in the art to combine the teachings of Kokubo and Best for the same reasons as disclosed above. As per claim 13, Kokubo in view of Best teaches claim 12. Kokubo does not clearly teach encrypting data to be written to the memory using the generated pseudo random number. However, Best teaches encrypting data to be written to the memory using the generated pseudo random number. ([Best para. 0042] “the entropy data may be immediately retrieved from the entropy data cache to be applied to a cipher algorithm [using the pseudo random number] for encrypting information that is to be transmitted [writing data to] over a network to a receiving device [to a memory – see para. 0020: “Memory 200 ... to store ... communications received”]) It would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention for one of ordinary skill in the art to combine the teachings of Kokubo and Best for the same reasons as disclosed above. As per claim 14, Kokubo in view of Best teaches claim 12. Kokubo also teaches deterministically generating the first or second sequence in conformity with security standards of NIST SP 800-90. ([Kokubo, para. 0031] “the health test circuit 12 performs a test process for checking the randomness of a predetermined number of bits of the physical random numbers ... In respect of a physical random number generator complying with SP800-90B defined by the National Institute of Standards and Technology in the United States, specific health tests are required to be performed ... the case of the results of the test process by the health test circuit 12 indicating satisfactory randomness, the control circuit 13 supplies the predetermined number of physical random numbers stored in the register 11 to the entropy compressing apparatus 14”) As per claim 15, Kokubo in view of Best teaches claim 12. Kokubo also teaches wherein the memory includes a nonvolatile memory. ([Kokubo, para. 0057] “value of the variable ... stored in a nonvolatile memory device”; [para. 0086] “The CPU 64 operates based on data and programs stored in the ROM 62 and the RAM 63”) As per claim 16, Kokubo in view of Best teaches claim 15. Kokubo also teaches wherein the second sequence is longer than the first sequence. ([Kokubo, para. 0051] “in the case in which n-bit physical random numbers are received m times, the physical random numbers obtained through these m receptions are put together and stored as physical random numbers of mxn bits in the latch or the like”; as described above, the length of the first sequence is n and the length of the second sequence, having the steps repeated, is 2n, which is longer than n) 07-22-aia AIA Claim s 5-9 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kokubo in view of Best as applied to claim 4 above, and further in view of Potlapally . As per claim 5, Kokubo in view of Best teaches claim 4. Kokubo in view of Best does not clearly teach wherein the predetermined randomness is changeable based on at least one of the randomness of the first sequence and a randomness of the second sequence. However, Potlapally teaches wherein the predetermined randomness is changeable based on at least one of the randomness of the first sequence and a randomness of the second sequence. ([Potlapally, para. 0073 “the service-provided data may be added to a primary entropy pool ... a pool of random bits [predetermined randomness] to be used by local entropy extraction components for random-number-related operations ... Depending on the nature of the local sources of entropy available, the combination of the server-provided random data [first sequence – see for example, para. 0022] with the locally-generated random data [second sequence] may enhance [change/is changeable] the quality of the primary entropy pol substantially [based on the first sequence and second sequence] ... For example, some hosts may typically rely on hardware interrupt sequences. ... to populate their local primary entropy pools ... the hardware interrupt sequences that are natively or locally available at a given host ... may reduce the statistical independence of the random data that can be provided [change randomness based on the randomness of the first sequence] ... The combination of random data from even one high-quality entropy source of the service [based on at least a randomness of the second sequence]”) It would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention for one of ordinary skill in the art to have modified the elements disclosed by Kokubo in view of Best with the teachings of Potlapally to include wherein the predetermined randomness is changeable based on at least one of the randomness of the first sequence and a randomness of the second sequence. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to make this modification because the combination may also have the security benefit that the final data received by the consumer is different from that provided by the service, and in the unlikely event that a malicious attacker successfully penetrates the random data service, the attacker would still not be able to determine the random data used by the consumer. (Potlapally, para. 0073) As per claim 6, Kokubo in view of Best and further in view of Potlapally teaches claim 5. Kokubo in view of Potlapally does not clearly teach wherein data that is written to the memory is encrypted using the pseudo random number generated by the RNG circuit. However, Best teaches wherein data that is written to the memory is encrypted using the pseudo random number generated by the RNG circuit. ([Best para. 0042] “the entropy data may be immediately retrieved from the entropy data cache to be applied to a cipher algorithm [using the pseudo random number] for encrypting information that is to be transmitted [writing data to] over a network to a receiving device [to a memory – see para. 0020: “Memory 200 ... to store ... communications received”]) It would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention for one of ordinary skill in the art to have modified the elements disclosed by Kokubo in view of Potapally with the teachings of Best to include wherein data that is written to the memory is encrypted using the pseudo random number generated by the RNG circuit. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to make this modification because such a modification provides the benefit of allowing for highly secure cryptographic operations for communication. (Best, para. 0034) As per claim 7, Kokubo in view of Best and Potapally teaches claim 6. Kokubo also teaches wherein the RNG circuit includes a deterministic random bit generator configured to generate the first and second sequences in conformity with security standards of NIST SP 800-90. [Kokubo, para. 0031] “the health test circuit 12 performs a test process for checking the randomness of a predetermined number of bits of the physical random numbers ... In respect of a physical random number generator complying with SP800-90B defined by the National Institute of Standards and Technology in the United States, specific health tests are required to be performed ... the case of the results of the test process by the health test circuit 12 indicating satisfactory randomness, the control circuit 13 supplies the predetermined number of physical random numbers stored in the register 11 to the entropy compressing apparatus 14”) As per claim 8, Kokubo in view of Best and Potapally teaches claim 6. Kokubo also teaches wherein the memory includes a nonvolatile memory. ([Kokubo, para. 0057] “value of the variable ... stored in a nonvolatile memory device”; [para. 0086] “The CPU 64 operates based on data and programs stored in the ROM 62 and the RAM 63”) As per claim 9, Kokubo in view of Best and Potapally teaches claim 8. Kokubo also teaches wherein the second sequence is longer than the first sequence. ([Kokubo, para. 0051] “in the case in which n-bit physical random numbers are received m times, the physical random numbers obtained through these m receptions are put together and stored as physical random numbers of mxn bits in the latch or the like”; as described above, the length of the first sequence is n and the length of the second sequence, having the steps repeated, is 2n, which is longer than n) Conclusion 07-96 AIA The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure : Simon (US Pub. 2022/0382519) discloses generating random numbers with variable levels of entropy using bits extracted from the register by combining bits and reiterating the steps. Murdoch et al. (US Pub. 2021/0306151) discloses a DID owner that selects a random sequence of bits that produces a selected level of entropy. A high level of entropy requires a larger number of generated words. Once the desired level of entropy has been specified, a random sequence of bits is generated. Dolgunov et al. (US Pub. 2009/0110188) discloses a configurable random number generator. The RNG circuit generates a first random number sequence having a first measure of randomness and modifies the configuration of the RNG circuit, causing the RNG circuit to generate a second random number sequence having a second measure of randomness, indicating a degree of randomness that is no less than the first measure. Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ZHE LIU whose telephone number is (571) 272-3634. The examiner can normally be reached on Monday - Friday: 8:30 AM to 5:30 PM. Examiner interviews are available via telephone, in-person, and video conferencing using a USPTO supplied web-based collaboration tool. To schedule an interview, applicant is encouraged to use the USPTO Automated Interview Request (AIR) at http://www.uspto.gov/interviewpractice. If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Carl Colin can be reached on (571) 272-3862. 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. /ZHE LIU/Examiner, Art Unit 2493 Application/Control Number: 19/011,649 Page 2 Art Unit: 2493 Application/Control Number: 19/011,649 Page 3 Art Unit: 2493 Application/Control Number: 19/011,649 Page 4 Art Unit: 2493 Application/Control Number: 19/011,649 Page 5 Art Unit: 2493 Application/Control Number: 19/011,649 Page 6 Art Unit: 2493 Application/Control Number: 19/011,649 Page 7 Art Unit: 2493 Application/Control Number: 19/011,649 Page 8 Art Unit: 2493 Application/Control Number: 19/011,649 Page 9 Art Unit: 2493 Application/Control Number: 19/011,649 Page 10 Art Unit: 2493 Application/Control Number: 19/011,649 Page 11 Art Unit: 2493 Application/Control Number: 19/011,649 Page 12 Art Unit: 2493 Application/Control Number: 19/011,649 Page 13 Art Unit: 2493 Application/Control Number: 19/011,649 Page 14 Art Unit: 2493 Application/Control Number: 19/011,649 Page 15 Art Unit: 2493 Application/Control Number: 19/011,649 Page 16 Art Unit: 2493 Application/Control Number: 19/011,649 Page 17 Art Unit: 2493 Application/Control Number: 19/011,649 Page 18 Art Unit: 2493 Application/Control Number: 19/011,649 Page 19 Art Unit: 2493 Application/Control Number: 19/011,649 Page 20 Art Unit: 2493 Application/Control Number: 19/011,649 Page 21 Art Unit: 2493 Application/Control Number: 19/011,649 Page 22 Art Unit: 2493 Application/Control Number: 19/011,649 Page 23 Art Unit: 2493 Application/Control Number: 19/011,649 Page 24 Art Unit: 2493
Prosecution Insights