Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status
1. The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
2. EXAMINER’S NOTE: The claims have been reviewed and considered under the new guidance pursuant to the 2019 Revised Patent Subject Matter Eligibility Guidance (PEG 2019) issued January 7, 2019.
3. This communication is in response to Applicant’s Preliminary Amendment filed on 28 February 2025. Claims 18 and 22-27 have been canceled. Claims 4-8, 10, 14, and 19 have been amended. Claims 1-17 and 19-21 remain pending.
Information Disclosure Statement
4. The Information Disclosure Statements respectfully submitted on 10 March 2025 and 06 August 2026 have been considered by the Examiner.
Claim Objections
5. Claim 4 is objected to because of the following informalities: Claim 4 recite acronyms without defining their meaning in the claim language (i.e. SPDC). The claim terms must have clear support so that the meaning of the terms can be ascertained. Appropriate correction is required.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
6. 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.
7. Claims 1, 4-6, and 16 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Ahn (Pub No. 2017/0324551).
Referring to the rejection of claim 1, Ahn discloses a quantum-capable secure user and data authentication system comprising: (See Ahn, para. 16-18 and 31, i.e., increase the security of a mobile payment application between a communication device and a relay or server via a quantum key distribution (QKD) method)
a first communication device; (See Ahn, para. 62, i.e., a communication device, item 310)
a first key distribution module communicatively coupled to the first communication device for secure communication therewith; (See Ahn, para. 147, i.e., generate a first secret key)
a second communication device; (See Ahn, para. 62, i.e., a server, item 320)
and a second key distribution module communicatively coupled to the second communication device for secure communication therewith, (See Ahn, para. 147, i.e., generate a second secret key)
wherein the first communication device and the second communication device enable quantum-safe authentication therebetween while a key distribution protocol between the first key distribution module and the second key distribution module is utilized to establish a shared random between the first communication device and the second communication device, and wherein the first communication device and the second communication device have established a pre-agreed secret password and utilize the pre-agreed secret password and the shared random for the quantum-safe authentication therebetween. (See Ahn, para. 144, i.e., The quantum cryptography authentication method for a communication device of randomly generating, by the random number generation unit, a series of first quantum states and a series of second quantum states based on random numbers, and selecting, by the processor, a first polarization basis based on the series of randomly generated first quantum states, generating, by the processor, a secret key from the series of second quantum states, and controlling, by the processor, the polarization generation unit to generate the secret key as the series of first polarized signals based on the first polarization basis)
Referring to the rejection of claim 4, Ahn discloses wherein either or both of the first key distribution module and the second key distribution module comprise a SPDC photonic communication module for the key distribution protocol therebetween. (See Ahn, para. 19)
Referring to the rejection of claim 5, Ahn discloses wherein either or both of the first key distribution module and the second key distribution module comprise a Quantum Key Distribution (QKD) module, and wherein the key distribution protocol between the first key distribution module and the second key distribution module comprises QKD protocol. (See Ahn, para. 16-18 and 31)
Referring to the rejection of claim 6, Ahn discloses wherein the first key distribution module is communicatively coupled to the first communication device via a secure Application Programming Interface (API), and wherein the second key distribution module is communicatively coupled to the second communication device via a secure API. (See Ahn, para. 16 and 103)
Referring to the rejection of claim 16, Ahn discloses a method for quantum-capable secure user and data authentication in a system including a first communication device communicatively coupled to a first Quantum Key Distribution (QKD) module and a second communication device communicatively coupled to a second QKD module, wherein the first communication device and the second communication device are communicatively coupled across a first communication path, the method comprising: (See Ahn, para. 16-18, 31, 62, and 147, i.e., increase the security of a mobile payment application between a communication device and a relay or server via a quantum key distribution (QKD) method, a communication device, item 310, and a server, item 320, generate a first and second secret keys)
the first communication device and the second communication device establishing a pre-agreed secret password therebetween; (See Ahn, para. 62-63, i.e., A communication device 310 according to the present invention may be a mobile device or a personal terminal, generates a quantum cryptogram, and shares basis information, used for the generation of the quantum cryptogram, with a server 320. The communication device 310 may function as Alice, and the server 320 may function as Bob. Polarized signals including the quantum cryptogram generated by the communication device 310 are transferred to the communication server 320 via an optical communication channel 330, and the basis information used for the generation of the quantum cryptogram by the communication device 310 may be shared via a general communication network 340 between the communication device 310 and the communication server 320. The server 320 receives and interprets the polarized signals, in which case basis information used for the interpretation of the polarized signals may be shared with the communication device 310 via the communication network 340)
and the first communication device and the second communication device enabling quantum-safe authentication therebetween in response to lightweight communication between the first QKD module and the second QKD module to establish a shared random therebetween. (See Ahn, para. 144, i.e., The quantum cryptography authentication method for a communication device of randomly generating, by the random number generation unit, a series of first quantum states and a series of second quantum states based on random numbers, and selecting, by the processor, a first polarization basis based on the series of randomly generated first quantum states, generating, by the processor, a secret key from the series of second quantum states, and controlling, by the processor, the polarization generation unit to generate the secret key as the series of first polarized signals based on the first polarization basis)
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
8. 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.
9. Claims 2, 7-15, 17, and 19-21 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Ahn (Pub No. 2017/0324551) in view of Pointcheval et al. (Pub No. 2021/0083862). Ahn discloses the invention as described above, however, Ahn fails to explicitly disclose wherein the quantum-safe authentication utilizes Learning Parity with Noise (LPN) post- quantum cryptography. Pointcheval et al. discloses a key agreement system and method for quantum secure technologies.
Referring to the rejection of claims 2 and 17, (Ahn modified by Pointcheval et al.) discloses wherein the quantum-safe authentication utilizes Learning Parity with Noise (LPN) post- quantum cryptography. (See Pointcheval et al., para. 70, i.e., the first device may generate the private-public key pair by using the key generation algorithm included in a KEM. The KEM may be any one of a ring learning with error (RLWE) KEM, a learning parity with noise (LPN) KEM)
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date the claimed invention was made to combine Ahn’s quantum cryptography-based communication device and method in a communication device and a server, which are intended to enhance the security of an alternative payment system based on mobile commerce modified with Pointcheval et al.’s key agreement system and method for quantum secure technologies.
Motivation for such an implementation would enable a learning parity with noise to be combined with post quantum cryptography. (See Pointcheval et al., para. 70 and 84)
Referring to the rejection of claims 7 and 19, (Ahn modified by Pointcheval et al.) discloses wherein the shared random comprises a first challenge matrix. (See Pointcheval et al., para. 109 and 113)
The rationale for combining Ahn in view of Pointcheval et al. is the same as claim 2.
Referring to the rejection of claims 8 and 20, (Ahn modified by Pointcheval et al.) discloses wherein the first communication device generates a response cryptogram based on the first challenge matrix and the pre-agreed secret password and sends the response cryptogram to the second communication device. (See Ahn, para. 80-82)
Referring to the rejection of claims 9 and 21, (Ahn modified by Pointcheval et al.) discloses wherein the first communication device further generates the response cryptogram based on randomly-generated noise of a pre-defined probability. (See Pointcheval et al., para. 122)
The rationale for combining Ahn in view of Pointcheval et al. is the same as claim 2.
Referring to the rejection of claim 10, (Ahn modified by Pointcheval et al.) discloses wherein the second communication device authenticates the first communication device in response to the response cryptogram, a second challenge matrix derived from the shared random and the pre-agreed secret password. (See Ahn, para. 81-82)
Referring to the rejection of claim 11, (Ahn modified by Pointcheval et al.) discloses wherein the second communication authenticates the first communication device if a weight determined based on the response cryptogram, the second challenge matrix and the pre-agreed secret password is within a predefined acceptable authentication window. (See Pointcheval et al., para. 122)
The rationale for combining Ahn in view of Pointcheval et al. is the same as claim 2.
Referring to the rejection of claim 12, (Ahn modified by Pointcheval et al.) discloses wherein the first communication device further generates the response cryptogram based on a tag vector, and wherein the tag vector is determined in response to a hash value of a message to be sent from the first communication device to the second communication device. (See Pointcheval et al., para. 74, 89, and 120-123)
The rationale for combining Ahn in view of Pointcheval et al. is the same as claim 2.
Referring to the rejection of claim 13, (Ahn modified by Pointcheval et al.) discloses wherein the tag vector is further determined in response to the hash value of the message to be sent from the first communication device to the second communication device and a tag matrix, wherein the quantum-safe authentication further includes the first key distribution module and the second key distribution module sharing the tag matrix therebetween. (See Pointcheval et al., para. 109, 113, and 151)
The rationale for combining Ahn in view of Pointcheval et al. is the same as claim 2.
Referring to the rejection of claim 14, (Ahn modified by Pointcheval et al.) discloses wherein, after the message is sent from the first communication device and received at the second communication, the second communication device authenticates the first communication device and the message in response to the response cryptogram, a second challenge matrix derived from the shared random, the tag vector, and the pre-agreed secret password. (See Pointcheval et al., para. 74, 89, and 120-123)
The rationale for combining Ahn in view of Pointcheval et al. is the same as claim 2.
Referring to the rejection of claim 15, (Ahn modified by Pointcheval et al.) discloses wherein the second communication authenticates the first communication device and the message if a weight determined based on the response cryptogram, the second challenge matrix, the tag vector, and the pre-agreed secret password is within a predefined acceptable authentication window. (See Pointcheval et al., para. 122)
The rationale for combining Ahn in view of Pointcheval et al. is the same as claim 2.
Claim 3 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Ahn (Pub No. 2017/0324551) in view of Carl “A note on the security of the hHB protocol” published July 2015.
Regarding claim 3, Ahn discloses the invention as described above, however, Ahn fails to explicitly disclose wherein the LPN post-quantum cryptography comprises a Hopper-Blum protocol. Carl in analogous art, however, discloses wherein the LPN post-quantum cryptography comprises a Hopper-Blum protocol (1. Introduction and 2. The hHb protocol; LPN plays an important role in post-quantum cryptography in contrast to classic number theoretic problems. LPN consists of very basic arithmetic operations and is therefore a perfect fit for light-weight cryptography)
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date the claimed invention was made to combine Ahn’s quantum cryptography-based communication device and method in a communication device and a server, which are intended to enhance the security of an alternative payment system based on mobile commerce modified with Carl et al.’s in order to provide a system with basic arithmetic operations with minimalistic protocol. (1. Introduction Carl).
Conclusion
11. The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
12. Newton et al. (Pub No. 2020/0328886) discloses a method and system for generating a private cryptographic key for use in a secure cryptogram for transmission between a first entity and a second entity.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to COURTNEY D FIELDS whose telephone number is (571)272-3871. The examiner can normally be reached IFP M-F 8am-4:30pm.
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, SHEWAYE GELAGAY can be reached at (571)272-4219. 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.
/COURTNEY D FIELDS/Examiner, Art Unit 2436 September 30, 2026
/SHEWAYE GELAGAY/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2436
