DETAILED ACTION
713.09 Interviews Between Final Rejection and Notice of Appeal [R-08.2017]
Normally, one interview after final rejection is permitted in order to place the application in condition for allowance or to resolve issues prior to appeal. However, prior to the interview, the intended purpose and content of the interview should be presented briefly, preferably in writing. Such an interview may be granted if the examiner is convinced that disposal or clarification for appeal may be accomplished with only nominal further consideration. Interviews merely to restate arguments of record or to discuss new limitations which would require more than nominal reconsideration or new search should be denied. See MPEP § 714.13.
Interviews may be held after the expiration of the shortened statutory period and prior to the maximum permitted statutory period of 6 months without an extension of time. See MPEP § 706.07(f).
A second or further interview after a final rejection may be held if the examiner is convinced that it will expedite the issues for appeal or disposal of the application.
For interviews after notice of appeal, see MPEP § 1204.03.
Interview time will be revised to a limit of 1 hour per new application or RCE (utility)/CPA (design), when during prosecution, the examiner conducts an interview. When more than one interview is needed in an application supervisors will have the flexibility to approve additional time and ensure that the interviews are being used to advance prosecution.
Authorization for Internet Communications
The examiner encourages Applicant to submit an authorization to communicate with the examiner via the Internet by making the following statement (from MPEP 502.03):
“Recognizing that Internet communications are not secure, I hereby authorize the USPTO to communicate with the undersigned and practitioners in accordance with 37 CFR 1.33 and 37 CFR 1.34 concerning any subject matter of this application by video conferencing, instant messaging, or electronic mail. I understand that a copy of these communications will be made of record in the application file.”
Please note that the above statement can only be submitted via Central Fax (not Examiner's Fax), Regular postal mail, or EFS Web using PTO/SB/439.
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 Amendment
In response to the claims amendment, in view of the Remark, filed 07/08/2026, the claim objections have been withdrawn.
In response to the claims amendment, in view of the Remarks, the 112 rejection have been withdrawn.
In response to the claims amendment, in view of the Remarks, the 101 rejection have been withdrawn.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status.
The following is a quotation of the appropriate paragraphs of 35 U.S.C. 102 that form the basis for the rejections under this section made in this Office action:
A person shall be entitled to a patent unless –
(a)(1) the claimed invention was patented, described in a printed publication, or in public use, on sale, or otherwise available to the public before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claim(s) 1 – 7, 9, 11 – 15, 18 and 20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by the prior art of record, Lee et al., (US 2004/0242228 A1) (hereinafter “Lee”).
Lee discloses;
Regarding claim 1, a first electronic device [i.e., an access point (AP) (see ref. 120 of figure 1) and (see ref. 320 and 330 of figure 3), (page 1, para 0008)], comprising:
one or more interface circuits configured to communicate with a second electronic device [i.e., the AP1 320 communicating with wireless station (STA) 340 (see figure 3), (page 2, para 0014)] and an authentication computer [i.e., the AP1 320 communicating with a authentication, authorization, and accounting (AAA) server RADIUS (see ref. 310 of figure 3), (page 2, para 0014)];
a processor coupled to the interface circuit [i.e., access point (AP) (see figures 1 and 3) Note; the AP must comprises a processor to perform the operations]; and
memory, coupled to the processor, configured to store program instructions, wherein, when executed by the processor, the program instructions cause the first electronic device to perform operations [i.e., access point (AP) (see figures 1 and 3) Note; the AP must comprises a memory including instructions to perform the operations] comprising:
receiving, associated with the authentication computer, authentication information [i.e., AP_A receives the PMK from the AAA server (page 5, para 0080), (see figure 6) i.e., the AAA server 310 generates a pairwise master key (PMK) and transmit it to AP1 (page 2, para 0013 - 0014), (see figure 3) Note; the PMK is authentication information associated with the AAA/RADIUS authentication server];
receiving, associated with the second electronic device, an authentication request [i.e., STA transmits an association request to AP_A (see figure 6), (page 5, para 0080) i.e., reassociation request (page 5, para 0083) i.e., re-authentication procedure performed by an EAP-TLS protocol (page 2, para 0021), (see figure 4)]; and
in response to communication with the authentication computer being available, performing authentication of the second electronic device to a network based at least in part on the authentication information [i.e., STA 130a to 130d authenticate to their respective APs 120a and 120b to access the WLAN system. In other words, the STAs 130a to 130d are allowed to access the network only by an authentication procedure (page 1, para 0008), (see figure 1) i.e., IEEE 802.1X/1aa provides a framework for user authentication and key exchange (page 1, para 0011) Note; authentication of the STA to the WLAN based on the PMK authentication information received from the AAA/RADIUS server that necessarily occurs while communication with the AAA server is available/exist], wherein the authentication information comprises a dynamic pre-shared key (DPSK) [i.e., generates a PMK for a prospective neighbor AP using a PRF: PMKnext=PRE(RK, PMKcurr, STAmac, nextAPmc) (para 0081 - 0082) Note; the generated PMK therefore is not a fixed/static key i.e., transmitting the generated PMK to the prospective AP before the STA subsequently moves to/reassociates with that AP, and the prospective AP stores the PMK in a cache (para 0083) i.e., for roaming that may occur later, the STA must have knowledge of the PMK corresponding to the prospective neighbor AP. The STA may receive the PMK directly from AP A, or may obtain the information needed to calculate that same PMK (para 0094) i.e., when the STA later accesses AP B, AP B and the STA use their corresponding PMK to derive PTK and establish the security system (para 0095 and 0098 – 0099) Note; accordingly, the PMK is shared/known in advance of its subsequent use in establishing security between the STA and prospective AP] associated with the second electronic device [i.e., derives PMKnext using STAmac i.e., the MAC address of the particular STA, together with the prospective AP’s MAC address (para 0081 – 0082) i.e., STA-specific PMKs for AP B and AP E using the STA MAC address in the respective PRF calculations. (para 0092 – 0094) Note; thus, the dynamically generated key is expressly associated with the particular second electronic device/STA i.e., the proactive keys include a master key (MK), a pairwise master key (PMK), and a pairwise transient key (PTK) (page 1, para 0013)].
Regarding claim 2, the first electronic device of claim 1, wherein, after performing the authentication, the operations comprise:
generating an encryption key [i.e., symmetric key encryption algorithm (page 1, para 0011) i.e., the PTK serves as a key encryption key (KEK) (page 1, para 0013), (see figure 13) i.e., the proactive keys include a master key (MK), a pairwise master key (PMK), and a pairwise transient key (PTK) (page 1, para 0013)]; and
establishing secure communication with the second electronic device by performing a four-way handshake [i.e., derive PTK INSTALL (4-way handshake) (see figure 13)] with the second electronic device based at least in part on the encryption key [i.e., IEEE 802.11i further defines 4-way handshakes as a key exchange method (page 1, para 0011), (page 5, para 0080), (see figure 6)].
Regarding claim 3, the first electronic device of claim 2, wherein the encryption key comprises a pairwise master key (PMK) [i.e., a pairwise master key (PMK) (page 1, para 0013), (see figure 2) Note; the PMK is inside the WLAN encryption-key hierarchy].
Regarding claim 4, the first electronic device of claim 2, wherein the four-way handshake [i.e., derive PTK INSTALL (4-way handshake) (see figure 13)] comprises or is compatible with Extensible Authentication Protocol (EAP) over local area network (EAPol) [i.e., EAPOL-key (see figure 13)].
Regarding claim 5, the first electronic device of claim 1, wherein, prior to receiving the authentication request, the operations comprise:
providing an identity request addressed to the second electronic device [i.e., AP sends EAP-Request Identity (see figure 12), (page 8, para 0119)]; and
receiving, associated with the second electronic device, an identity response [i.e., AP receives EAP-Response identity (see figure 12), (page 8, para 0119).
Regarding claim 6, the first electronic device of claim 1, wherein the first electronic device is located in a common environment as the second electronic device [i.e., an AP and associated STAs form a basic server set (BSS)…and a collection of the Aps 120a and 120b can extend the BSSs to an extended service set (ESS) (page 1, para 0008)].
Regarding claim 7, the first electronic device of claim 6, wherein the authentication computer is remotely located from the electronic device and the second electronic device [i.e., the AAA/RADIUS server remotely connected through DS/wired infrastructure (page 2, para 0014), (see figure 3)].
Regarding claim 9, the first electronic device of claim 1, wherein the authentication information comprises an expiration date of the authentication information [i.e., PMK and timeout (page 8, para 0122)].
Regarding claim 11, the first electronic device of claim 1, wherein the first electronic device comprises an access point [i.e., an access point (AP) (see ref. 120 of figure 1) and (see ref. 320 and 330 of figure 3), (page 1, para 0008)].
Regarding claim 12, the first electronic device of claim 1, wherein the authentication computer comprises a remote authentication dial-in user service (RADIUS) server [i.e., the AP1 320 communicating with a RADIUS (see ref. 310 of figure 3), (page 2, para 0014)] or an authentication, authorization, and accounting (AAA) server [i.e., the AP1 320 communicating with an authentication, authorization, and accounting (AAA) server (see ref. 310 of figure 3), (page 2, para 0014)].
Regarding claim 13, the first electronic device of claim 1, wherein, after the receiving authentication information, the operations comprise storing, in the memory, the authentication information [i.e., AP_B 430 stores the PMK (page 2, para 0021), (see figure 4) i.e., AP_B stores PMK.sub.next in a cache (page 5, para 0083)]; and wherein, after receiving the authentication request and prior to performing the authentication, the operations comprise accessing the authentication information that was stored in the memory [i.e., the STA 440 and AP_B 430 can create a PTK from the PMK. When the STA 440 moves to AP_B 430, it can maintain an on-going service using the PTK (page 2, para 0021), (see figure 4)].
Regarding claim 14, the first electronic device of claim 1, wherein the authentication is compatible with a type of Extensible Authentication Protocol (EAP) [i.e., EAP-TLS protocol (page 2, para 0021), (see figure 4)].
Regarding claim 15, the first electronic device of claim 1, wherein, prior to performing the authentication, the operations comprise associating with the second electronic device [i.e., reassociation to the new-AP (page 2, para 20), (see figures 3 – 4), i.e., reassociation to AP_B (see figure 6), (page 5, para 0083)].
Regarding claim 18, a non-transitory computer-readable storage medium for use in conjunction with a first electronic device, the non-transitory computer-readable storage medium configured to store program instructions that, when executed by the first electronic device, cause the first electronic device to perform operations [i.e., access point (AP) (see figures 1 and 3) Note; the AP must comprises a memory including instructions to perform the operations] comprising:
receiving, associated with an authentication computer, authentication information [i.e., AP_A receives the PMK from the AAA server (page 5, para 0080), (see figure 6) i.e., the AAA server 310 generates a pairwise master key (PMK) and transmit it to AP1 (page 2, para 0013 - 0014), (see figure 3) Note; the PMK is authentication information associated with the AAA/RADIUS authentication server];
receiving, associated with a second electronic device, an authentication request [i.e., STA transmits an association request to AP_A (see figure 6), (page 5, para 0080) i.e., reassociation request (page 5, para 0083) i.e., re-authentication procedure performed by an EAP-TLS protocol (page 2, para 0021), (see figure 4)]; and
in response to communication with the authentication computer being available, performing authentication of the second electronic device to a network based at least in part on the authentication information [i.e., STA 130a to 130d authenticate to their respective APs 120a and 120b to access the WLAN system. In other words, the STAs 130a to 130d are allowed to access the network only by an authentication procedure (page 1, para 0008), (see figure 1) i.e., IEEE 802.1X/1aa provides a framework for user authentication and key exchange (page 1, para 0011) Note; authentication of the STA to the WLAN based on the PMK authentication information received from the AAA/RADIUS server that necessarily occurs while communication with the AAA server is available/exist], wherein the authentication information comprises a dynamic pre-shared key (DPSK) [i.e., generates a PMK for a prospective neighbor AP using a PRF: PMKnext=PRE(RK, PMKcurr, STAmac, nextAPmc) (para 0081 - 0082) Note; the generated PMK therefore is not a fixed/static key i.e., transmitting the generated PMK to the prospective AP before the STA subsequently moves to/reassociates with that AP, and the prospective AP stores the PMK in a cache (para 0083) i.e., for roaming that may occur later, the STA must have knowledge of the PMK corresponding to the prospective neighbor AP. The STA may receive the PMK directly from AP A, or may obtain the information needed to calculate that same PMK (para 0094) i.e., when the STA later accesses AP B, AP B and the STA use their corresponding PMK to derive PTK and establish the security system (para 0095 and 0098 – 0099) Note; accordingly, the PMK is shared/known in advance of its subsequent use in establishing security between the STA and prospective AP] associated with the second electronic device [i.e., derives PMKnext using STAmac i.e., the MAC address of the particular STA, together with the prospective AP’s MAC address (para 0081 – 0082) i.e., STA-specific PMKs for AP B and AP E using the STA MAC address in the respective PRF calculations. (para 0092 – 0094) Note; thus, the dynamically generated key is expressly associated with the particular second electronic device/STA i.e., the proactive keys include a master key (MK), a pairwise master key (PMK), and a pairwise transient key (PTK) (page 1, para 0013)].
Regarding claim 20, the non-transitory compute-readable storage medium of claim 18, wherein the first electronic device comprises an access point [i.e., an access point (AP) (see ref. 120 of figure 1) and (see ref. 320 and 330 of figure 3), (page 1, para 0008)].
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status.
The following is a quotation of 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) 10 and 16 - 17 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Lee in view of the prior art of record, Hooda et al., (US 2019/0037390 A1) (hereinafter “Hooda”).
Regarding claim 10, Lee discloses; the first electronic device of claim 1 [i.e., (see claim 1 above)].
Lee does not disclose;
wherein the authentication information comprises an identifier of a virtual local area network (VLAN) or a virtual extensible local area network (VXLAN).
However, Hooda discloses;
authentication information comprises an identifier of a virtual local area network (VLAN) [i.e., wireless LAN controller (WLC) assigns one or more Virtual Network Identifier VNID(s) (page 2, para 0023 and 0027), (see figure 1] or a virtual extensible local area network (VXLAN) [i.e., VXLAN (page 3, para 0038), (see figure 4)].
Before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art to modify the teachings of Lee by adapting the teachings of Hooda to make mobility of clients in enterprise fabric network as fast as possible (See Hooda; page 1, para 0005).
Regarding claim 16, Lee discloses; the first electronic device of claim 1 [i.e., (see claim 1 above)].
Lee does not disclose;
wherein the network comprises a virtual network associated with a location.
However, Hooda discloses;
the network comprises a virtual network associated with a location [i.e., a virtual network (page 4, para 0041)].
Before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art to modify the teachings of Lee by adapting the teachings of Hooda to make mobility of clients in enterprise fabric network as fast as possible (See Hooda; page 1, para 0005).
Regarding claim 17, the first electronic device of claim 16 [i.e., (see claim 12 above)].
Lee does not disclose;
wherein the virtual network comprises: a virtual local area network (VLAN) or a virtual extensible local area network (VXLAN).
However, Hooda discloses;
virtual network comprises: a virtual local area network (VLAN) [i.e., wireless LAN controller (WLC) assigns one or more Virtual Network Identifier VNID(s) (page 2, para 0023 and 0027), (see figure 1] or a virtual extensible local area network (VXLAN) [i.e., VXLAN (page 3, para 0038), (see figure 4)].
Before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art to modify the teachings of Lee by adapting the teachings of Hooda to make mobility of clients in enterprise fabric network as fast as possible (See Hooda; page 1, para 0005).
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 21 – 22 are objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, but would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter:
Regarding claim 21;
the prior art of record, Lee discloses the first electronic device of claim 1,
However, Lee does not disclose “wherein the operations further comprise: responsive to determining that communication with the authentication computer is unavailable, performing the authentication of the second electronic device using the DPSK stored in the memory of the first electronic device, without communicating with the authentication computer”.
These claimed limitations are not present in the prior arts of record and would not have been obvious. They in combination with other elements cited present subject matter that is novel and nonobvious. Thus, claim 21 is objected being dependent upon rejected base claim.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 07/08/2026 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive because of the followings;
Applicant argues, in substance, that Lee fail to disclose the recited dynamic pre-shared key (DPSK) associated with the second electronic device because Lee’s proactive key, including the PMK and PTK allegedly are derived through an EAP-based authentication exchange and therefore are not pre-shared keys provisioned to a device in advance of authentication.
The Examiner respectfully disagrees with this argument because it does not address the full disclosure of Lee and is based on a construction of dynamic pre-shared key that is narrower than the language presently recited in claim 1. More particularly, Lee does not merely disclose a PMK generated during the initial authentication procedure. Lee further discloses dynamically generating a new PMK for a prospective neighbor access point in preparation for a subsequent roaming/reassociation event. Specifically, Lee determines: PMKnext=PRF(RK, PMKcurr, STAmac, nextAPmac) where STAmac identifies the particular STA and nextAPmac identifies the prospective neighbor AP (para 0081 – 0082). Accordingly, Lee’s PMKnext is dynamically generated and expressly associated with the particular STA by virtue of the STA’s MAC address being used in generating the key. Lee further teaches that AP A transmits PMKnext to prospective AP B before the STA moves to AP B, and AP B stores the PMK in a cache. Only thereafter does the STA move to AP B and submit a reassociation request (para 0083). Thus, the relied upon key is generated and provided to the prospective AP in advance of its subsequent use with the STA. Lee additionally teaches that, for roaming that may occur later, the STA has knowledge of the PMK corresponding to the prospective neighbor AP. Lee explains that the STA may receive the PMK directly from AP A or may obtain the information necessary to calculate the same PMK (para 0094). When the STA subsequently attempts to access AP B, AP B and the STA use the corresponding PMK to obtain a PTK and establish the security system (para 0095). Lee further states that the neighbor APs posses PMKs that will be used for security when the STA moves to them (para 0098).
Accordingly, under the broadest reasonable interpretation consistent with the specification, Lee’s PMKnext is a dynamically generated key, associated with the particular STA, that is distributed/known in advance of its subsequent use between the STA and the prospective AP. Lee therefore teaches the recited dynamic pre-shared key associated with the second electronic device.
Applicant’s argument that a DPSK necessarily must be a particular passphrase provisioned to the device is also no persuasive because claim 1 does not recite a passphrase, does not expressly require WPA-PSK authentication, and does not expressly state that the claimed DPSK cannot comprise a dynamically generated PMK having the above-described characteristics. Although Applicant’s specification describes embodiments involving individual passphrases and calculation of corresponding PMKs, those particular implementation detail are not expressly recited in claim 1. Accordingly, limitations of a disclosed embodiment are not being read into claim 1 where the claim language itself does not recite such limitation.
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 SYED A RONI whose telephone number is (571)270-7806. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 9:00-5:00 pm (EST).
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, Jeffrey L Nickerson can be reached at (469) 295-9235. 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.
/SYED A RONI/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2432
