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 .
Claims 1-20 have been examined and are pending.
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted on 08/04/2025 was filed. The submission is in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statement is being considered by the examiner.
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)(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.
Claim(s) 1-2 and 5-18 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) as being anticipated by Alston et al, hereinafter (“Alston”), US PG Publication 20220131692 A1.
The applied reference has a common assignee with the instant application. Based upon the earlier effectively filed date of the reference, it constitutes prior art under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2). This rejection under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) might be overcome by: (1) a showing under 37 CFR 1.130(a) that the subject matter disclosed in the reference was obtained directly or indirectly from the inventor or a joint inventor of this application and is thus not prior art in accordance with 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(A); (2) a showing under 37 CFR 1.130(b) of a prior public disclosure under 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(B) if the same invention is not being claimed; or (3) a statement pursuant to 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(C) establishing that, not later than the effective filing date of the claimed invention, the subject matter disclosed in the reference and the claimed invention were either owned by the same person or subject to an obligation of assignment to the same person or subject to a joint research agreement.
Regarding claims 1 and 17, Alston teaches a method comprising; and a non-transitory computer readable storage medium comprising instructions for a server that, when executed by a set of one or more processing devices, cause the set of one or more processing devices to perform operations comprising:
receiving a request to store a data item associated with a time controlled application at a data structure [Alston ¶0011 processors configured to indicating a duration of time for which data should be accessible; data received from the client is accompanied by an encryption request. ¶0058 he system and method is not limited by a particular data structure, the data 364 can be stored in computer registers, in a relational database as a table having a plurality of different fields and records, or XML documents.];
determining a time period during which the data item is to be invalidated based on a data access protocol for the time controlled application [Alston ¶0007 indication of a duration of time for which the data should be accessible ¶0011 and 0063 indicating a duration of time for which the data should be accessible; based on time remaining between a current time and deletion timestamp.];
identifying a cryptographic key that is pre-generated for a future time period corresponding to the determined time period [Alson¶¶ 0033-0034 and 0063 a master keeps definitive key schedule (for nodes 212-216). Fixing key generation frequency and enforcing that only one new key may be considered ‘propagating’ at a time, schedule predictability is implemented in the shred loop. The schedule predictability may be provided through one or more parameters. Subsequent key expiration times are separated by a fixed time to shred (TTS).];
causing the data item to be encrypted using the identified cryptographic key [Alston ¶0036 If a new key should be added, the master node 212 will push an update to all nodes 214, 216. ¶0064 the data is encrypted using one of a plurality of keys; executing a wrap operation]; and
storing the encrypted data item at the data structure in accordance with the received request [Alston ¶¶0054-0055 0058 0064 data can be retrieved, stored or modified by the processor 370; the data 364 (i.e. encrypted data) can be stored in computer registers, in a relational database as a table having a plurality of different fields and records, or XML documents.].
Regarding claims 2 and 18, Alston teaches claim 1 as described above.
further comprising: prior to receiving the request to store the data item, generating a plurality of cryptographic keys each corresponding to a distinct future time period, wherein the plurality of cryptographic keys includes the identified cryptographic key [Alston ¶0004 a cloud service, comprising maintaining a logical treadmill of multiple unique encryption keys that are made available. ¶0040 generating new key material and updating the key hash for any key which should be available at any point within the schedule buffer of the target time.].
Regarding claim 5, Alston teaches claim 2 as described above.
wherein identifying the cryptographic key that is pre-generated for the future time period corresponding to the determined time period comprises: determining whether the plurality of cryptographic keys comprises the cryptographic key for the determined time period [See Alston ¶0040]; and responsive to determining that the plurality of cryptographic keys does not comprise the cryptographic key for the determined time period, generating an additional cryptographic key corresponding to the determined time period [See Alston ¶¶0007 and 0034 ].
Regarding claim 6, Alton teaches claim 1 as described above.
wherein determining the time period during which the data item is to be invalidated comprises: determining one or more characteristics associated with at least one of the received request or the data item [Alston ¶0047 on unwrapping each request the server instance resolves the appropriate key that yield key bytes and a fingerprint, unwrapping ciphertext], wherein the one or more characteristics comprise at least one of a data type of the data item, an operation that is to be applied to the data item, a hardware state of a device that provided the request, a software state of the device that provided the request, or a characteristic associated with an account of a user associated with the device that provided the request [Alston ¶¶0047 if request satisfies access policy, plaintext is returned to the user]; and identifying, based on the data access protocol, the time period defined for invalidation of the data item based on the determined one or more characteristics [Alston ¶0048 If the system is compromised in one region, an attacker cannot obtain key material managed by the system in any other region; only serve instances in the same region, and every master will refuse to push to invalid peers.].
Regarding claim 7, Alston teaches claim 1 as described above.
wherein causing the data item to be encrypted using the identified cryptographic key comprises: providing the data item of the request and an identifier associated with the data item as an input to an encryption engine [Alston ¶¶0017 and 0019 provides for a logical treadmill of encryption keys which are created, distributed, and destroyed on a predictable schedule; the encryption key treadmill 100 includes a periodically updated sequence of unique encryption keys K1, K2, K3, etc. Each encryption key is identified by availability timestamp TS1A, TS2A, TS3A, and is subject to a deletion timestamp TS1B, TS2B, TS3B]; and obtaining one or more outputs of the encryption engine, wherein the outputs comprise the encrypted data item and the encrypted identifier associated with the data item [Alston ¶0007 the method may further include receiving data from a client, encrypting the data using one of the keys from the logical treadmill, and after a predetermined period of time, automatically destroying the one of the keys used to encrypt the data. See also ¶¶0017 and 0019].
Regarding claim 8, Alston teaches claim 7 as described above.
wherein storing the encrypted data item at the data structure comprises: updating an entry of the data structure to include a mapping between the encrypted data item and the encrypted identifier associated with the data item [Alston ¶0019 The encryption key treadmill 100 includes a periodically updated sequence of unique encryption keys K1, K2, K3, etc. Each encryption key is identified by availability timestamp TS1A, TS2A, TS3A. ¶0038 The update takes a treadmill schedule and a map of key material and installs both in the local replica.].
Regarding claim 9, Alston teaches claim 1 as described above.
further comprising: responsive to determining that the future time period corresponding to the determined time period has expired, erasing the cryptographic key from a memory [Alston ¶0018 system guarantees the keys will only exist in volatile memory and will be erased from all server instances when they expire].
Regarding claim 10, Alston teaches a system comprising: a memory; and a set of one or more processing devices coupled to the memory, wherein the set of one or more processing devices is to perform operations comprising: receiving a request to access a data item associated with a time controlled application [see independent claim 1]; determining whether the data item of the request is valid or invalid based on a data access protocol for the time controlled application [see independent claim 1]; responsive to determining that the data item of the request is valid, identifying a cryptographic key that corresponds to a future time period during which the data item is to be invalidated [Alston ¶¶0046-0047 the system will return (i) the hash of the key used to produces the ciphertext, (ii) the region of the instance which served the request, and (iii) the final expiration, as determined by the key used wrapping, i.e. encryption; so that each unwrapping, i.e. decryption, request, the server instance will use the key hash to resolve the appropriate key ]; retrieving the data item from a data structure of the memory, wherein the data item at the data structure is encrypted based on the identified cryptographic key [Alston ¶0054 the data can be retrieved…by the processor; See ¶0046 wherein the key used wrapping, i.e. encryption;]; and providing access to the data item based on the identified cryptographic key in accordance with the received request [Alston See ¶0047 this key will be used to unwrap, i.e. decrypt, ciphertext …If a user making the unwrapping request satisfies the access policy, the plaintext is returned to the user.].
Regarding claim 11, Alston teaches claim 10 as described above.
wherein the operations further comprise: responsive to determining that the data item of the request is invalid, providing a notification to a client device that transmitted the request, the notification indicating that the data item of the request cannot be accessed [Alston ¶0011 The data received from the client is accompanied by an encryption request indicating a duration of time for which the data should be accessible ¶0048 The system implements a region-aware security model; using a push function to peers (i.e. clients). Examiner interprets that the push function is analogous to providing a notification to a client device that transmitted the request, the notification indicating that the data item of the request cannot be accessed].
Regarding claim 12, Alston teaches claim 10 as described above.
wherein determining whether the data item of the request is valid or invalid based on the data access protocol comprises: identifying, based on the data access protocol, an expiration time period for the data item, wherein the expiration time period indicates a time period during which the data item is to be inaccessible [Alston ¶0020 The time expiration 134 indicates when data should become inaccessible, e.g., encryption/decryption key becoming inactive, data deleted, etc. ]; determining whether a current time period during which the request to access the data item is received matches or is subsequent to the expiration time period [Alston, ¶0020 It is further appreciated that the encryption/decryption key generated by the key generation unit 130 includes the time expiration (or time stamp)…]; and responsive to determining that the current time period matches or is subsequent to the expiration time period, determining that the data item of the request is invalid [Alston, ¶0020 … upon expiration of which the data encrypted with the encryption/decryption key become inaccessible, e.g., by invaliding the encryption/decryption key, by deleting the data that is encrypted, etc.].
Regarding claim 13, Alston teaches claim 10 as described above.
wherein providing access to the data item based on the identified cryptographic key comprises: decrypting the data item using the identified cryptographic key [Alston ¶0045 When executing the unwrap operation to decrypt the data, a node may consult its locally stored map to resolve the keys.]; and providing the decrypted data item to a client device that transmitted the request [Alston ¶0047 On each unwrapping request, the server instance will use the key hash to resolve the appropriate key. This key will be used to unwrap ciphertext. If a user making the unwrapping request satisfies the access policy, the plaintext is returned to the user.].
Regarding claim 14, Alston teaches claim 10 as described above.
wherein providing access to the data item based on the identified cryptographic key comprises: providing the encrypted data item retrieved from the data structure to a client device that transmitted the request for decryption by the client device using the identified cryptographic key [See Alston ¶¶0054-0055 0058 and 0064].
Regarding claim 15, Alston teaches claim 10 as described above.
wherein retrieving the data item from the data structure comprises: determining an index for the data item stored in the data structure based on the identified cryptographic key [See Alston ¶0019 … sequence of unique encryption keys K1, K2, K3, etc. Each encryption key is identified by availability timestamp TS1A, TS2A, TS3A..]; identifying an entry of the data structure that comprises the data item [Alston ¶0037 Definitive state is determined using majority rule, such as wherein a treadmill timer entry is considered to be present if written to a majority of the cells.]; and extracting the data item from the identified entry [Alston ¶0020 shortly before, key K1 is removed from the treadmill 100 and permanently erased].
Regarding claim 16, Alston teaches claim 10 as described above.
wherein the operations further comprise; responsive to determining that the data item is invalid based on the data access protocol, erasing the identified cryptographic key from a memory [See Alston ¶¶0007 and 0048].
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.
The factual inquiries for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized as follows:
1. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art.
2. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue.
3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art.
4. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness.
Claim(s) 3 and 19 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Alston et al, hereinafter (“Alston”), US PG Publication 20220131692 A1, in view of Bosworth US PG Publication 20240163081 A1.
Regarding claims 3 and 19, Alston teaches claim 2 as described above.
While Alston teaches wherein generating the plurality of cryptographic keys comprises: obtaining one or more outputs, wherein the one or more outputs comprise the plurality of cryptographic keys [Alston ¶0004 provides for a logical treadmill of encryption keys which are created, distributed, and destroyed on a predictable schedule]; however, Alston fails to explicitly teach but Bosworth teaches wherein generating the plurality of cryptographic keys comprises: obtaining one or more outputs of one or more random cryptographic key generator operations, wherein the one or more outputs comprise the plurality of cryptographic keys [Bosworth ¶0053 a keygen, such as using a random number generator function, a hardware security module (HSM), etc. perform content encryption with corresponding private cryptographic keys while external resources 424 can generate cryptographic keys such as public/private key pairs]; and associating each of the plurality of cryptographic keys with a respective future time period of a set of future time periods [Bosworth ¶¶0049 0050-0051 and 0053 The privacy settings with respect to all objects associated with the first user of that particular object-type as having a particular privacy setting; while external resources 424 can generate cryptographic keys, using keygen such as random number generator function, where such as public/private key pairs or instances according to an appropriate cryptographic system or protocol. The privacy settings associated with an object that may specify any suitable granularity of permitted access (or denial); appropriate time(s)].
Alston teaches all the features of claims 1, 10, and 17 not wherein generating the plurality of cryptographic keys comprises: obtaining one or more outputs of one or more random cryptographic key generator operations, wherein the one or more outputs comprise the plurality of cryptographic keys; and associating each of the plurality of cryptographic keys with a respective future time period of a set of future time periods. Alston teaches a system and method for reliable destruction of cryptographic keys. Bosworth teaches cryptographic key exchange. Because both Alston and Bosworth teach handling and communicating cryptographic keys, it would have been obvious to one skilled in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention was made to use the a random number generator function as taught by Bosworth to improve security and encryption environments because the server computing devices do not have access to the private keys of client computing devices used for encrypting content. [Bosworth ¶¶0039 and 0050-0051].
Claim(s) 4 and 20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Alston et al, hereinafter (“Alston”), US PG Publication 20220131692 A1, in view of Schnabel US PG Publication 20200358624 A1.
Regarding claims 4 and 20, Alston teaches claim 2 as described above.
Alston teaches wherein generating the plurality of cryptographic keys comprises: generating a first cryptographic key of the plurality of cryptographic keys [See Alston Abstract and ¶0004 a logical treadmill of encryption keys which are created, distributed, and destroyed on a predictable schedule].
However, the combination of Alston and Bosworth fail to explicitly teach but Schnabel teaches providing the generated first cryptographic key as an input to a one-way hashing operation [Schnabel ¶0027 cryptographic one-way function, e.g., hash function, password-based key derivation function 2, pseudorandom function such as SHA256, etc.]; and extracting a second cryptographic key from one or more outputs of the one-way hashing operation [Schnabel ¶¶0031 0033 system generates encryption keys that include accessing a plurality of hard drives, a plurality of flash drives, etc. Hence, Examiner interprets that a plurality of cryptographic keys may be generated and access from a storage medium enterprise 310].
Alston teaches all the features of claims 1, 10, and 17 not providing the generated first cryptographic key as an input to a one-way hashing operation; and extracting a second cryptographic key from one or more outputs of the one-way hashing operation. Alston teaches a system and method for reliable destruction of cryptographic keys. Schnabel teaches a data storage and a time bomb associated therewith. Because Alston and Schnabel teach handling and communicating cryptographic keys, it would have been obvious to one skilled in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention was made to use the one-way hashing function and integrity confirmation of blocks and block chains created traversing the network as taught by Schnabel to make data available and/or inaccessible for certain periods of time when creating cryptographic keys. [Schnabel ¶¶0015 and 0031].
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Suominen US9374227 B2 teaches verification of signed digital documents.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to SAKINAH WHITE-TAYLOR whose telephone number is (571)270-0682. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday, 10:45a-6:45p.
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, CATHERINE THIAW can be reached at 571-270-1138. 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.
SAKINAH WHITE-TAYLOR
Primary Examiner
Art Unit 2407
/Sakinah White-Taylor/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2407
