DETAILED ACTION
Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status
The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 6/23/2026 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive. Applicant argues that the public key certificate and attribute certificate should be interpreted based on X.509 standard. The applicant is advised to incorporate this language in the claims to further specify the bounds of the claims.
Also, according to X.509, attribute certificates do not identify a plurality of public key certificates.
In addition and for reference, Edwards et al [2020/0119929], describes a system where a static certificate references public key certificates from a responder, selects a public key and authenticates the public key which is used for encryptions as seen in Fig. 4, [0019][0027-0031]
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
The following is a quotation of the appropriate paragraphs of 35 U.S.C. 102 that form the basis for the rejections under this section made in this Office action:
A person shall be entitled to a patent unless –
(a)(1) the claimed invention was patented, described in a printed publication, or in public use, on sale, or otherwise available to the public before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claim(s) 1 – 2 and 5 – 20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Truskovsky (TRU), patent number: US 9 660 978.
As per claims 1 and 20, TRU teaches a system, comprising:
at least one memory; and
at least one processor that processes bits, the at least one processor configured to:
receive, by a relying party device from a subject device, an attribute certificate of a subject corresponding to the subject device, wherein the attribute certificate identifies a plurality of public key certificates, each of the plurality of public key certificates is part of a certificate chain, and each of the plurality of public key certificates comprises a public key of the subject (relying entity receiving a certificate corresponding to different cryptosystems and verifying using a certificate chain, col. 17, lines 13-34, x509 certificates, col. 3, line 50 – col. 4, line 5);
select, by the relying party device, a public key certificate of the plurality of public key certificates using the attribute certificate (hybrid verification, col. 16, lines 12- 27);
perform, by the relying party device, certificate chain validation of a certificate chain of the selected public key certificate (verifying certificate, col. 17, lines 12 – 60, Fig. 4, 416); and
in response to the certificate chain validation being successful, use, by the relying party device, a public key comprised in the selected public key certificate in a cryptographic operation (encrypting a message, col. 18, lines 53 - 63).
As per claim 2, TRU teaches wherein the at least one processor configured to receive, by the relying party device from the subject device, at least one of the plurality of public key certificates (receiving certificate, col. 17, lines 13-34).
As per claim 5, TRU teaches wherein the at least one processor configured to receive, by the relying party device from the subject device, the plurality of public key certificates and the attribute certificate simultaneously (embedded certificate, col. 2, lines 1 - 13).
As per claim 6, TRU teaches wherein the cryptographic operation comprises at least one of encrypting data, encrypting cryptographic material, verifying a signature, or establishing a cryptographic key (encrypting a message, col. 18, lines 53 - 63).
As per claim 7, TRU teaches wherein the at least one processor configured to validate, by the relying party device, the attribute certificate before selecting the public key certificate of the plurality of public key certificates using the attribute certificate (validation, Fig. 4, 416, col. 17, lines 13-34).
As per claims 8 and 15, TRU teaches wherein
the attribute certificate comprises at least one attribute of each of the plurality of public key certificates; and
selecting the public key certificate of the plurality of public key certificates using the
attribute certificate comprises selecting the public key certificate of the plurality of public key certificates using the at least one attribute of each of the plurality of public key certificates (Certificate validity, col. 3, line 50- col. 4, line 5, col. 19, line 46 - 63).
As per claims 9 and 16, TRU teaches wherein the at least one attribute of each of the plurality of public key certificates comprises one or more of:
a protocol of a public key in each of the plurality of public key certificates;
a key management or signature algorithm of the public key in each of the plurality of public key certificates;
a standard setting body that sets a standard or specification followed by the key management or signature algorithm of the public key in each of the plurality of public key certificates;
a version number or agreement number of each of the plurality of public key certificates;
a specification of the public key in each of the plurality of public key certificates;
a key length of the public key in each of the plurality of public key certificates;
an expiration date of each of the plurality of public key certificates;
a type of access allowed using the public key in each of the plurality of public key certificates; or
an application allowed using each of the plurality of public key certificates (Certificate validity, col. 3, line 50- col. 4, line 5, col. 19, line 46 - 63).
As per claims 10 and 17, TRU teaches wherein the at least one attribute of each of the plurality of public key certificates comprises an indication that a public key in each of the plurality of public key certificates is defined using a Post Quantum Cryptography (PQC) protocol or a classical protocol (Quantum vulnerable and quantum resistant systems, col. 19, lines 46 - 63).
As per claims 11 and 18, TRU teaches wherein the at least one processor is further configured to determine, by the relying party device, that the relying party device is configured for the PQC protocol, wherein the selected public key certificate is defined using the PQC protocol (Hybrid systems, col. 16, lines 12 - 27).
As per claims 12 and 19, TRU teaches wherein the at least one processor is further configured to determine, by the relying party device, that the relying party device is not configured for the PQC protocol, wherein the selected public key certificate is defined using the classical protocol (Hybrid systems, col. 16, lines 12 - 27).
As per claim 13, TRU teaches wherein each of the plurality of public key certificates is a single-key certificate (single signature, col. 14, line 59 – col. 15, line 7).
As per claim 14, TRU teaches a system, comprising:
at least one memory; and
at least one processor that processes quantum bits, the at least one processor configured to: send, by a subject device to a relying party device, an attribute certificate of a subject corresponding to the subject device, wherein the attribute certificate identifies a plurality of public key certificates of the subject, each of the plurality of certificates is part of a certificate chain, and each of the plurality of certificates comprises a public key of the subject (relying entity receiving a certificate corresponding to different cryptosystems and verifying using a certificate chain, col. 17, lines 13-34, x509 certificates, col. 3, line 50 – col. 4, line 5); and
send, by the subject device to the relying party device, a public key certificate of the plurality of public key certificates, wherein the public key certificate is selected by the relying party device, and wherein the relying party device performs certificate chain validation of a certificate chain of the selected public key certificate (verifying certificate at relying device, col. 17, lines 12 – 60, Fig. 4, 416).
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 103 which forms the basis for all obviousness rejections set forth in this Office action:
A patent for a claimed invention may not be obtained, notwithstanding that the claimed invention is not identically disclosed as set forth in section 102, if the differences between the claimed invention and the prior art are such that the claimed invention as a whole would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which the claimed invention pertains. Patentability shall not be negated by the manner in which the invention was made.
Claim(s) 3 – 4 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Truskovsky (TRU), patent number: US 9 660 978 in view of Condexia, publication number: US 2018/0159692.
As per claim 3, TRU teaches verifying device certificates.
TRU does not teach wherein the at least one processor configured to receive, by the relying party device from the subject device, the plurality of public key certificates, wherein the attribute certificate is received after the plurality of public key certificates are received.
In an analogous art, Condexia teaches wherein the at least one processor configured to receive, by the relying party device from the subject device, the plurality of public key certificates, wherein the attribute certificate is received after the plurality of public key certificates are received (periodically updating certificate revocation list, [0168])
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify TRU’s verification system to include dynamic reception of certificate information as described in Condexia’s network certificate system for the advantage of keeping the system security up to date.
As per claim 4, TRU teaches verifying device certificates.
TRU does not teach wherein the at least one processor configured to receive, by the relying party device from the subject device, the selected public key certificate, wherein the attribute certificate is received before the selected public key certificate is received.
In an analogous art, Condexia teaches wherein the at least one processor configured to receive, by the relying party device from the subject device, the selected public key certificate, wherein the attribute certificate is received before the selected public key certificate is received (authorized nodes having information on certificates of nodes on the network before communication is initiated, [0166][0168]).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art prior to the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify TRU’s verification system to include dynamic reception of certificate information as described in Condexia’s network certificate system for the advantage of keeping the system security up to date.
Conclusion
THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a).
A shortened statutory period for reply to this final action is set to expire THREE MONTHS from the mailing date of this action. In the event a first reply is filed within TWO MONTHS of the mailing date of this final action and the advisory action is not mailed until after the end of the THREE-MONTH shortened statutory period, then the shortened statutory period will expire on the date the advisory action is mailed, and any nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) pursuant to 37 CFR 1.136(a) will be calculated from the mailing date of the advisory action. In no event, however, will the statutory period for reply expire later than SIX MONTHS from the mailing date of this final action.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to OLUGBENGA O IDOWU whose telephone number is (571)270-1450. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 8am - 5pm.
Examiner interviews are available via telephone, in-person, and video conferencing using a USPTO supplied web-based collaboration tool. To schedule an interview, applicant is encouraged to use the USPTO Automated Interview Request (AIR) at http://www.uspto.gov/interviewpractice.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Jung Kim can be reached at 5712723804. 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.
/OLUGBENGA O IDOWU/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2494
Prosecution Insights