CTNF 19/013,075 CTNF 88063 DETAILED ACTION The present Office Action is in response to an application filed on 01/08/2025 wherein claims 1-9 are pending and ready for examination. 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. Priority Applicant’s claim for the benefit of a prior-filed provisional application under 35 U.S.C. 119(e) or under 35 U.S.C. 120, 121, 365(c), or 386(c) is acknowledged. Receipt is acknowledged of certified copies of papers required by 37 CFR 1.55. Information Disclosure Statement The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted on 01/08/2025 is being considered by the examiner. Claim Objections 07-29-01 AIA Claim s 6 and 9 objected to because of the following informalities: Claim 6, line 2 should read “ storing the parameter ”; and Claim 9, line 3 should read “ storing the parameter ” . Appropriate correction is required. 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. 07-12-aia AIA (a)(2) the claimed invention was described in a patent issued under section 151, or in an application for patent published or deemed published under section 122(b), in which the patent or application, as the case may be, names another inventor and was effectively filed before the effective filing date of the claimed invention. 07-15 AIA Claim s 1-2, 4-5 and 7-8 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102( a)(1)/(a)(2 ) as being anticipated by Ohori et al. (US 20180174493 A1) , hereinafter Ohori . Regarding claim 1 , Ohori discloses a private key recovery device comprising: at least one memory configured to store instructions (RAM 102 is volatile semiconductor memory for temporarily storing therein programs to be executed by the CPU 101 and data to be used by the CPU 101 for its computation; HDD 103 is a non-volatile memory device to store therein software programs, such as an operating system (OS), middleware, and application software, and various types of data – see [0053], FIG. 4) ; and at least one processor configured to execute the instructions (CPU 101 is a processor including a computing circuit for carrying out program instructions. The CPU 101 loads at least part of a program and data stored in the HDD 103 into the RAM 102 to execute the program – see [0052]; FIG. 4) to: use a parameter (“ciphertext c”; a template represented by Expression (1) is registered in a database – see [0059]; Expression (1): {c=g(p)+B,h(p)}) , being data obtained by taking a sum of first biometric information (“B”) and an encoded key (“g(p)”) obtained by encoding a private key using an encoding scheme having an error correction capability (in Expression (1), c is a ciphertext; g is an encoding function for error-correction encoding; p is confidential information in a plaintext; B is a biometric code acquired at the time of encoding; and h is a hash function; the ciphertext c is generated by error-correction encoding the confidential information p using the encoding function g and then adding the biometric code B to the error-correction encoded result – see [0059]) , and second biometric information (“biometric code B*” – see [0060]) , to generate data in which data based on the encoded key and a difference obtained by subtracting the second biometric information from the first biometric information is decoded using the encoding scheme (the calculation represented by Expression (2) is performed at the time of decoding; in Expression (2), p* is a decoded result; g -1 is a decoding function used for error-correction decoding, corresponding to the encoding function g; and B* is a biometric code acquired at the time of decoding; the decoded result p* is generated by subtracting the biometric code B* from the ciphertext c included in the template and then error-correction decoding the subtraction result using the decoding function g -1 – see [0060]; see also [0061-63]; examiner’s note: as shown in expression (2) “generated data” p* = g -1 (c – B*) = g -1 (g(p) + B – B*) and thus, this data is generated by decoding data that is based on “encoded key” g(p) and the difference between “first biometric information” B and “second biometric information” B* ). Regarding claim 2 , Ohori discloses all the claimed subject matter recited in claim 1 above. Furthermore, Ohori discloses the private key recovery device, wherein the at least one processor is configured to execute the instructions to: acquire the parameter (“ciphertext c”; a template represented by Expression (1) is registered in a database; in Expression (1), c is a ciphertext; g is an encoding function for error-correction encoding; p is confidential information in a plaintext; B is a biometric code acquired at the time of encoding; and h is a hash function; the template includes the ciphertext c and a hash value h(p); the ciphertext c is generated by error-correction encoding the confidential information p using the encoding function g and then adding the biometric code B to the error-correction encoded result; Expression (1): {c=g(p)+B,h(p)} – see [0059]) acquire the second biometric information (biometric code B* acquired at the time of decoding – see [0060-61]) ; and generate data in which a difference obtained by subtracting the second biometric information from the parameter is decoded using the encoding scheme (the calculation represented by Expression (2) is performed at the time of decoding; in Expression (2), p* is a decoded result; g -1 is a decoding function used for error-correction decoding, corresponding to the encoding function g; and B* is a biometric code acquired at the time of decoding; the decoded result p* is generated by subtracting the biometric code B* from the ciphertext c included in the template and then error-correction decoding the subtraction result using the decoding function g -1 – see [0060]; see also [0061-63]; examiner’s note: as shown in expression (2) “generated data” p* = g -1 (c – B*) = g -1 (g(p) + B – B*) and thus, this data is generated by decoding the difference between ciphertext c and “second biometric information” B* ). Regarding claim 4 , all limitations correspond to the method performed by the device of claim 1. Therefore, claim 4 is being rejected on the same basis as claim 1. Regarding claim 5 , all limitations correspond to the method performed by the device of claim 2. Therefore, claim 5 is being rejected on the same basis as claim 2. Regarding claim 7 , all limitations correspond to the non-transitory storage medium storing a program that causes a computer to execute method of claim 4 (which is performed by the device of claim 1). Therefore, claim 7 is being rejected on the same basis as claim 4 (and claim 1). Furthermore, Ohori discloses a non-transitory storage medium storing a program (storage medium 113 and the HDD 103 are sometimes referred to as computer-readable storage media – [0055], FIG. 4). Regarding claim 8 , all limitations correspond to the non-transitory storage medium storing a program that causes a computer to execute method of claim 5 (which is performed by the device of claim 2). Therefore, claim 8 is being rejected on the same basis as claim 5 (and claim 2) . 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. 07-22-aia AIA Claim s 3, 6 and 9 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Ohori et al. (US 20180174493 A1) , as applied to claim 2 above, and further in view of Zhang et al. (US 20210075787 A1) , hereinafter Zhang , and Tuyls et al. (US 20120179952 A1) , hereinafter Tuyls . Regarding claim 3 , Ohori discloses all the claimed subject matter recited in claim 2 above. Furthermore, Ohori discloses the private key recovery device, wherein the at least one processor is configured to execute the instructions to: store the parameter (“ciphertext c”; a template represented by Expression (1) is registered in a database – see [0059]); delete the stored parameter according to an instruction from a user; and generate the data using the stored parameter (“ciphertext c”; a template represented by Expression (1) is registered in a database; in Expression (1), c is a ciphertext; g is an encoding function for error-correction encoding; p is confidential information in a plaintext; B is a biometric code acquired at the time of encoding; and h is a hash function; the template includes the ciphertext c and a hash value h(p); the ciphertext c is generated by error-correction encoding the confidential information p using the encoding function g and then adding the biometric code B to the error-correction encoded result; Expression (1): {c=g(p)+B,h(p)} – see [0059]; the calculation represented by Expression (2) is performed at the time of decoding; in Expression (2), p* is a decoded result; g -1 is a decoding function used for error-correction decoding, corresponding to the encoding function g; and B* is a biometric code acquired at the time of decoding; the decoded result p* is generated by subtracting the biometric code B* from the ciphertext c included in the template and then error-correction decoding the subtraction result using the decoding function g -1 – see [0060]; see also [0061-63]; examiner’s note: as shown in expression (2) “generated data” p* = g -1 (c – B*) = g -1 (g(p) + B – B*) ). Ohori does not disclose deleting the stored parameter according to an instruction from a user. However, Zhang discloses a privacy-preserving voiceprint authentication apparatus and method wherein embodiments satisfy the revocability criteria to evaluate the privacy preserving ability of a biometric authentication (see abstract, [0001] and [0028]) including deleting [[revoking]] the stored parameter according to an instruction from a user (a user can easily revoke the old synthesized voiceprint template and register a new one – see [0030]; examiner’s note: since the parameter (ciphertext c in Ohori) is generated based on first biometric information (biometric code B in Ohori), when the user is able to revoke their biometrics as discussed by Zhang, the associated parameter is effectively revoked as it becomes useless ). Zhang does not explicitly disclose deleting the parameter. However, Tuyls discloses systems for generating an identifying response pattern comprising a memory used as a physically unclonable function (see abstract) including deleting the parameter (since the PUF may not give the exact same result when the same challenge is evaluated twice, a so-called Helper Data algorithm, also known as a Fuzzy Extractor, may be used to ensure that the key will be the same, each time it is derived – see [0013]; helper data in memory 130 need not contain any information on the response pattern or enrollment string, it is considered safer to remove the helper data when it is not needed anymore – see [0170]; examiner’s note: in Tuyls, the helper data (parameter) is deleted because is no longer needed, thus preventing security breaches ). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the device in Ohori to revoke the stored parameter according to an instruction from a user, as taught by Zhang ; and, deleting the parameter, as taught by Tuyls . One would have been motivated to make such a combination to enable users to revoke their biometrics and associated parameters in case they become compromised in order to preserve privacy and security, as recognized by Zhang (see [0028] and [0030]); and, to prevent attackers from obtaining cryptographic information, thus improving security, as recognized by Tuyls (see [0170]). Regarding claim 6 , all limitations correspond to the method performed by the device of claim 3. Therefore, claim 6 is being rejected on the same basis as claim 3. Regarding claim 9 , all limitations correspond to the non-transitory storage medium storing a program that causes a computer to execute method of claim 6 (which is performed by the device of claim 3). Therefore, claim 9 is being rejected on the same basis as claim 6 (and claim 3) . Conclusion 07-96 AIA The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure : Patent Documents Fukuda (US 20220171835 A1) Hamann et al. (US 20190215164 A1) Lepeshenkov (US 9485098 B1) Noguchi et al. (US 20180262331 A1) Stanwood et al. (US 20170185761 A1) Sugarev (US 20220150066 A1) Non-Patent Documents Adamovic et al. (2017) - Fuzzy commitment scheme for generation of cryptographic keys based on iris biometrics Al-Saggaf et al. (2008) - A fuzzy commitment scheme Chang et al. (2022, November) - On security of fuzzy commitment scheme for biometric authentication Juels et al. (1999, November) - A fuzzy commitment scheme Sapkal et al. (2016, March) - Biometric template protection with fuzzy vault and fuzzy commitment Wang et al. (2021) - A secure biometric key generation mechanism via deep learning and its application Zhou et al. (2011, October) - Quantifying privacy and security of biometric fuzzy commitment Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to DORIANNE ALVARADO DAVID whose telephone number is (571)272-4228. The examiner can normally be reached 9:00am-5:00pm ET. 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, Philip Chea can be reached at (571) 272-3951. 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. /DORIANNE ALVARADO DAVID/Examiner, Art Unit 2499 /PHILIP J CHEA/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2499 Application/Control Number: 19/013,075 Page 2 Art Unit: 2499 Application/Control Number: 19/013,075 Page 3 Art Unit: 2499 Application/Control Number: 19/013,075 Page 4 Art Unit: 2499 Application/Control Number: 19/013,075 Page 5 Art Unit: 2499 Application/Control Number: 19/013,075 Page 6 Art Unit: 2499 Application/Control Number: 19/013,075 Page 7 Art Unit: 2499 Application/Control Number: 19/013,075 Page 8 Art Unit: 2499 Application/Control Number: 19/013,075 Page 9 Art Unit: 2499 Application/Control Number: 19/013,075 Page 10 Art Unit: 2499
Prosecution Insights