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 .
DETAILED ACTION
This office action is in response to the application filed on 02/28/2023. In which, claims 1-20 are pending and being considered, claims 1, 19 and 20 are independent, claims 1-20 are rejected.
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted on 02/28/2025, 12/17/2025, and 05/06/2026 are in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statement is being considered by the examiner.
Specification
The lengthy specification has not been checked to the extent necessary to determine the presence of all possible minor errors. Applicant’s cooperation is requested in correcting any errors of which applicant may become aware in the specification.
The use of the term “Bluetooth” and “Wi-Fi”, which are trade names or a marks used in commerce, has been noted in this application. The term should be accompanied by the generic terminology; furthermore the term should be capitalized wherever it appears or, where appropriate, include a proper symbol indicating use in commerce such as ™, SM , or ® following the term.
Although the use of trade names and marks used in commerce (i.e., trademarks, service marks, certification marks, and collective marks) are permissible in patent applications, the proprietary nature of the marks should be respected and every effort made to prevent their use in any manner which might adversely affect their validity as commercial marks.
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) 1, 10, 12 and 19-20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Patel et al. (U.S Pub No. 20230306547, hereinafter referred to as “Patel”) further in view of Bender et al. (U.S Pub No. 20170149782, hereinafter referred to as “Bender”)
In regards to Claim 1, Patel teaches a method comprising: storing a plurality of credentials on a client device; (Par. (0023-0024, 0034); network computer devices with program that receive and store a set of credentials)
establishing, locally on the client device, a dependency relationship between a first credential of the plurality of credentials and a second credential of the plurality of credentials; (Par. (0005); dependencies of a set of credentials with mapping relationship between first digital credentials), (Par. (0047); credential dependency between first user credential and another credential among a plurality of credentials))
determining, by the client device, that the first credential has been used to access a secure resource; and (Par. (0059); user with credential 1 attempts access to resource))
Patel does not explicitly teach in response to determining that the first credential has been used to access the secure resource, triggering an access condition associated with the second credential based on the dependency relationship established between the first and second credentials.
Wherein Bender teaches in response to determining that the first credential has been used to access the secure resource, triggering an access condition associated with the second credential based on the dependency relationship established between the first and second credentials. (Par. (0007-0009); determining that the first credential has been used to access the secure resource (determining access by first credentials (privileged credentials) to webpage) triggering an access condition associated with the second credential (outputting an alert identifying the second credential (non-privileged credentials)), (Par. (0046-0047, 0066); triggering an access condition associated with the second credential (generating and alert for user with non-privileged credentials and access condition of re-directing or blocking access when alert is generated for non-privileged credentials), (Par. (0007); triggering an access condition associated with the second credential based on the dependency relationship established between the first and second credentials (access to webpage based on list of privileged URLs for second credential (non-privileged credentials)), (Par. (0046); based on the dependency relationship established between the first and second credentials (admin with privileged and non-privileged credentials with dependency relationship (mapping with credentials))
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Patel to incorporate the teaching of Bender to utilize the above feature because of the analogous concept of credential management and dependencies, with the motivation of detecting exposures to vulnerabilities of application for e-commerce, health and sensitive data using credentials as a way of regulating authorized access. (Bender Par. (0002-0004))
In regards to Claim 10, the combination of Patel and Bender teaches the method of claim 1, Bender further teaches receiving a request to use the second credential to access another secure resource; and (Par. (0044); receiving request of second credential (multiple privileged credentials) to access another secure resource (to another resource of a webpage))
in response to receiving the request, accessing the dependency relationship to identify one or more access conditions associated with the second credential, (Par. (0044-0046); after receiving request for multiple of privileged credentials accessing condition of list of URL the credential holder has access to)), (Par. (0046); accessing the dependency relationship (admin with privileged and non-privileged credentials with dependency relationship (mapping with credentials))
the one or more access conditions being associated with one or more credentials of the plurality of credentials, the one or more credentials comprising the first credential. (Par. (0044-0046); the one or more access conditions of a list of URL the privileged credential has access to corresponds to guest and different users along with first credential (privileged and non-privileged credentials))
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Patel to incorporate the teaching of Bender for the reasons discussed in claim 1 stated above.
In regards to Claim 12, the combination of Patel and Bender teaches the method of claim 1, Patel further teaches receiving a request to use the first credential to access the secure resource; (Par. (0038, 0059); entity requesting digital credential and accessing of resource))
in response to receiving the request, establishing a physical or wireless connection with a physical access control system (PACS); and(Par. (0038); entity sending request for credentials)), (Par. (0028); establishing a physical or wireless connection (physical and wireless connection)), (Par. (0046); with a physical access control system (physical wallets and physical world with system))
sending the first credential over a physical or wireless connection from the client device to the PACS to obtain access to the secure resource. ((Par. (004, 0028); receiving of digital credentials and physical wireless connection)), (Par. (0059); access to secure resource))
In regards to Claims 19-20, claims 19-20 recite similar limitations to claim 1 and the teachings of Patel and Bender address all the limitations discussed in claim 1 and are thereby rejected under the same grounds.
Claim(s) 2-3 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Patel et al. (U.S Pub No. 20230306547, hereinafter referred to as “Patel”) and Bender et al. (U.S Pub No. 20170149782, hereinafter referred to as “Bender”) further in view of Ziraknejad et al. (U.S No. 10855664, hereinafter referred to as “Ziraknejad”)
In regards to Claim 2, the combination of Patel and Bender do not explicitly teach unlocking the second credential in response to triggering the access condition to enable use of the second credential to access another secure resource.
Wherein Ziraknejad teaches unlocking the second credential in response to triggering the access condition to enable use of the second credential to access another secure resource. (Col. 7 lines 61-67 and Col. 8 liens 1-20; unlocking of credential based on conditions and triggering access to multiple resources)), (Col. 1 lines 49-67; second credential)), (Col. 11 lines 3-55; unlocking credentials based on conditions to multiple resources))
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Patel and Bender to incorporate the teaching of Ziraknejad to utilize the above feature because of the analogous concept of credential management, with the motivation of using proximity and location data to verify identities of users attached to credentials . (Ziraknejad Col. 1 lines 20-40)
In regards to Claim 3, the combination of Patel and Bender do not explicitly teach unlocking the second credential in response to triggering the access condition to enable use of the second credential to access another secure resource.
Wherein Ziraknejad teaches wherein the second credential is unlocked for a threshold period of time. (Col. 11 lines 3-55; multiple credentials that are unlocked with time range and expiration))
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Patel and Bender to incorporate the teaching of Ziraknejad for the reasons stated in claim 2 above.
Claim(s) 4 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Patel et al. (U.S Pub No. 20230306547, hereinafter referred to as “Patel”) and Bender et al. (U.S Pub No. 20170149782, hereinafter referred to as “Bender”) further in view of Cudak et al. (U.S Pub. No. 20180054437, hereinafter referred to as “Cudak”)
In regards to Claim 4, the combination of Patel and Bender do not explicitly teach preventing use of the second credential until the first credential is used to access the secure resource.
Wherein Cudak teaches preventing use of the second credential until the first credential is used to access the secure resource. (Par. (0024); first credential access if first then replaced with second credential whose access was prevented))
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Patel and Bender to incorporate the teaching of Naik to utilize the above feature because of the analogous concept of credential management, with the motivation of preventing man in the middle attacks and determining unknown credentials to ease the computing system. (Cudak Par. (0002-0003))
Claim(s) 5 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Patel et al. (U.S Pub No. 20230306547, hereinafter referred to as “Patel”) and Bender et al. (U.S Pub No. 20170149782, hereinafter referred to as “Bender”) further in view of Naik et al. (U.S Pub. No. 20200186535, hereinafter referred to as “Naik”)
In regards to Claim 5, the combination of Patel and Bender do not explicitly teach locking the second credential in response to triggering the access condition to prevent use of the second credential to access another secure resource.
Wherein Naik teaches locking the second credential in response to triggering the access condition to prevent use of the second credential to access another secure resource. (Par. (0066); locking a secondary credential based on conditions in order to access resource, (Par. 90062); another secure resources (multiple resources access based users)), (Par. (0073-0074); locking secondary credentials from possible hackers to access another secure resource (e-wallet and resources, fund etc.))
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Patel and Bender to incorporate the teaching of Naik to utilize the above feature because of the analogous concept of credential management, with the motivation of blocking access from unknown devices and creating a security resource. (Naik Par. (0003))
Claim(s) 6 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Patel et al. (U.S Pub No. 20230306547, hereinafter referred to as “Patel”), Bender et al. (U.S Pub No. 20170149782, hereinafter referred to as “Bender”) and Naik et al. (U.S Pub. No. 20200186535, hereinafter referred to as “Naik”) further in view of Eberlein et al. (U.S Pub. No. 20190007420, hereinafter referred to as “Eberlein”)
In regards to Claim 6, the combination of Patel, Bender and Naik do not explicitly teach wherein the second credential is locked for a threshold period of time.
Wherein Eberlein teaches wherein the second credential is locked for a threshold period of time. (Par. (0007); lock-out of second credential$1 (new credential) with period of time))
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Patel, Bender and Naik to incorporate the teaching of Eberlein to utilize the above feature because of the analogous concept of credential management, with the motivation of facilitating changes to credential management in efficient manner based on period of time with credential. (Eberlein Par. (0002-0005))
Claim(s) 7 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Patel et al. (U.S Pub No. 20230306547, hereinafter referred to as “Patel”) and Bender et al. (U.S Pub No. 20170149782, hereinafter referred to as “Bender”) further in view of Lakhani et al. (U.S Pub. No. 20180332033, hereinafter referred to as “Lakhani”)
In regards to Claim 7, the combination of Patel and Bender do not explicitly teach wherein the secure resource includes a physical access control system (PACS), wherein the first credential comprises an electronic key to enter the PACS, and wherein the second credential comprises an electronic certificate to log in to a computing device within a physical region protected by the PACS.
Wherein Lakhani teaches wherein the secure resource includes a physical access control system (PACS), wherein the first credential comprises an electronic key to enter the PACS, and (Par. (0152-0154); physical access control server with unique key and security credentials to enter and attempt physical access))
wherein the second credential comprises an electronic certificate to log in to a computing device within a physical region protected by the PACS. (Par. (0045, 0068); user credentials with certificate corresponding to restricted access based on location)), (Par. (0024, 0041-0042); credentials corresponding to certificate that is used to login with password and ID for authentication based on restricted access locations))
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Patel and Bender to incorporate the teaching of Lakhani to utilize the above feature because of the analogous concept of credential management, with the motivation of permitting access based on credentials and proximity with validated information. (Lakhani Par. (0003))
Claim(s) 8 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Patel et al. (U.S Pub No. 20230306547, hereinafter referred to as “Patel”), Bender et al. (U.S Pub No. 20170149782, hereinafter referred to as “Bender”) and Lakhani et al. (U.S Pub. No. 20180332033, hereinafter referred to as “Lakhani”) further in view of Boyd et al. (U.S Pub. No. 20220076262, hereinafter referred to as “Boyd”)
In regards to Claim 8, the combination of Patel, Bender and Lakhani do not explicitly teach wherein the electronic certificate enables a user to log in to the computing device after the electronic key is used to enter the physical region protected by the PACS.
Wherein Boyd teaches wherein the electronic certificate enables a user to log in to the computing device after the electronic key is used to enter the physical region protected by the PACS. (Par. (0029); user enters physical space with electronic key then logins computing device with PIV)), (Par. (0080, 0083); certificate authorized associated with PIV))
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Patel, Bender and Lakhani to incorporate the teaching of Boyd to utilize the above feature because of the analogous concept of credential management, with the motivation of verifying personal identity to overcome shortcoming of fraud and create trustworthiness and preventing hacking. (Boyd Par. (0004-0005))
Claim(s) 9 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Patel et al. (U.S Pub No. 20230306547, hereinafter referred to as “Patel”), Bender et al. (U.S Pub No. 20170149782, hereinafter referred to as “Bender”), Lakhani et al. (U.S Pub. No. 20180332033, hereinafter referred to as “Lakhani”) and Boyd et al. (U.S Pub. No. 20220076262, hereinafter referred to as “Boyd”) further in view of Adur et al. (U.S Pub. No. 20220222995, hereinafter referred to as “Adur”)
In regards to Claim 9, the combination of Patel, Bender, Lakhani and Boyd do not explicitly teach wherein the electronic certificate prevents a user from logging into the computing device in response to determining that the electronic key has been used to leave the physical region protected by the PACS.
Wherein Adur teaches wherein the electronic certificate prevents a user from logging into the computing device in response to determining that the electronic key has been used to leave the physical region protected by the PACS. (Par. (0024, 0029); user outside location and not at office then denying access)), (Par. (0032-0035); certificate used to enter location and when user is at different location access is denied)), (Par. (0047); electronic key (access badge) is denied access because of location))
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Patel, Bender, Lakhani and Boyd to incorporate the teaching of Adur to utilize the above feature because of the analogous concept of identification information and verification for access, with the motivation of employee access to physical building and attempted access to protect privacy of users and attest at specific locations. (Adur Par. (0001-0005))
Claim(s) 11 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Patel et al. (U.S Pub No. 20230306547, hereinafter referred to as “Patel”) and Bender et al. (U.S Pub No. 20170149782, hereinafter referred to as “Bender”) further in view of Lougheed et al. (U.S Pub. No. 20200220726, hereinafter referred to as “Lougheed”)
In regards to Claim 11, the combination of Patel and Bender do not explicitly teach querying the first credential based on the dependency relationship to determine a last time that the first credential was used; and in response to determining that the last time the first credential was used is within a threshold period of time, enabling use of the second credential to access the another secure resource.
Wherein Lougheed teaches querying the first credential based on the dependency relationship to determine a last time that the first credential was used; and (Par. (0097);querying the credential based on dependency relationship (holder agent with credentials and subscriber with credentials) determine a last time (time period credential is used))
in response to determining that the last time the first credential was used is within a threshold period of time, enabling use of the second credential to access the another secure resource. (Par. (0098, 0102-0104); time period of credential is determined and when that time period expires a second credential (renewed credential) is used for access)), (Par. (0105, 0112); access to information wallets etc. based on credentials))
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Patel and Bender to incorporate the teaching of Lougheed to utilize the above feature because of the analogous concept of credential management, with the motivation of verifying credentials to determine inaccuracies, status change and fix the problems of expensive industries healthcare and financial services. (Lougheed Par. (0003-0004))
Claim(s) 13-14 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Patel et al. (U.S Pub No. 20230306547, hereinafter referred to as “Patel”) and Bender et al. (U.S Pub No. 20170149782, hereinafter referred to as “Bender”) further in view of Ben Ayed et al. (U.S Pub. No. 20150172920, hereinafter referred to as “Ben Ayed”)
In regards to Claim 13, the combination of Patel and Bender do not explicitly teach wherein the access condition enables or disables use of the second credential based on proximity of the client device to an external device.
Wherein Ben Ayed teaches wherein the access condition enables or disables use of the second credential based on proximity of the client device to an external device. (Par. (0076); when the user is out of proximity from a remote device disabling or locking access of credentials), (Par. (0055) second credentials (second application with plurality of credentials))
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Patel and Bender to incorporate the teaching of Ben Ayed to utilize the above feature because of the analogous concept of credential management, with the motivation of creating an alarm for proximity with credentials using Bluetooth to enhance wireless communication and secure sensitive data. (Ben Ayed Par. (0003-0008))
In regards to Claim 14, the combination of Patel and Bender do not explicitly teach determining the proximity of the client device to the external device using a short-range communication protocol comprising at least one of Bluetooth, ultra-wideband (UWB) communication protocol, or Near Field Communication (NFC).
Wherein Ben Ayed teaches determining the proximity of the client device to the external device using a short-range communication protocol comprising at least one of Bluetooth, ultra-wideband (UWB) communication protocol, or Near Field Communication (NFC). (Par. (0075-0076); determ8ining proximity of user between remote device corresponding to Bluetooth connection))
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Patel and Bender to incorporate the teaching of Ben Ayed for the reasons discussed in claim 13 stated above.
Claim(s) 15-16 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Patel et al. (U.S Pub No. 20230306547, hereinafter referred to as “Patel”) and Bender et al. (U.S Pub No. 20170149782, hereinafter referred to as “Bender”) further in view of Schnabel et al. (U.S Pub. No. 20220312195, hereinafter referred to as “Schnabel”)
In regards to Claim 15, the combination of Patel and Bender do not explicitly teach wherein the first credential comprises an identity document comprising a digital signature and validity period, and wherein the second credential comprises a boarding document.
Wherein Schnabel teaches wherein the first credential comprises an identity document comprising a digital signature and validity period, and (Par. (0094); digital credentials with signature and expiration date), (Par.. (0014); identity documents with credentials (information of user with credentials and electronic documents))
wherein the second credential comprises a boarding document. (Par. (0030); second credential (one or more credentials), (Par. (0037, 0095-0096); credentials with boarding pass))
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Patel and Bender to incorporate the teaching of Schnabel to utilize the above feature because of the analogous concept of credential management, with the motivation of identity information for boarding documents associated with credentials to promote faster transmission, privacy with sensitive data and without impact to the credential holder. (Schnabel Par. (0011-0012 and 0095))
In regards to Claim 16, the combination of Patel and Bender do not explicitly teach wherein triggering the access condition comprises validating the boarding document and maintaining the boarding document in a valid state for the validity period in response to determining that the identity document has been authenticated based on the digital signature.
Wherein Schnabel teaches wherein triggering the access condition comprises validating the boarding document and maintaining the boarding document in a valid state for the validity period in response to determining that the identity document has been authenticated based on the digital signature. (Par. (0094-0097); triggering the access condition comprises validating the boarding document (matching the identification on boarding pass with access conditions of digital credentials (name photo, etc. to pass through security)) (Par. (0017, 0094); maintaining the boarding document in a valid state for the validity period (credential with validity dates with credentials and boarding pass)), (Par. (0094-0097); user is authenticated when match is found ad user pass security gates with boarding pass and credentials associated with digital signature)), (Par. (0090-0093 and 0097); triggering the access condition comprises validating the boarding document (access token is determined to authenticate user based on data elements with user credentials and boarding pass))
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Patel and Bender to incorporate the teaching of Schnabel for the reasons discussed in claim 15 stated above.
Claim(s) 17 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Patel et al. (U.S Pub No. 20230306547, hereinafter referred to as “Patel”), Bender et al. (U.S Pub No. 20170149782, hereinafter referred to as “Bender”), Lakhani et al. (U.S Pub. No. 20180332033, hereinafter referred to as “Lakhani”) and Agarwal et al. (U.S Pub. No. 20190289017, hereinafter referred to as “Agarwal”) further in view of Lalgudi Natarajan et al. (U.S No. 10200858, hereinafter referred to as “Lalgudi Natarajan”)
In regards to Claim 17, the combination of Patel and Bender do not explicitly teach wherein the secure resource includes a physical access control system (PACS), wherein the first credential comprises an electronic key to enter the PACS, and wherein the second credential comprises a one-time-password (OTP) generated by an OTP generator to obtain access to a computing device over a virtual private network (VPN), further comprising disabling the OTP generator in response to determining that the electronic key has been used to enter a physical region protected by the PACS.
Wherein Lakhani teaches wherein the secure resource includes a physical access control system (PACS), (Par. (0041, 0045-0046); accessing resource corresponding to physical location), (Par. (0152-0154); physical access control server with unique key and security credentials to enter and attempt physical access))
wherein the first credential comprises an electronic key to enter the PACS, and (Par. (0152-0154); physical access control server with unique key and security credentials to enter and attempt physical access))
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Patel and Bender to incorporate the teaching of Lakhani to utilize the above feature because of the analogous concept of credential management, with the motivation of permitting access based on credentials and proximity with validated information. (Lakhani Par. (0003))
Patel, Bender and Lakhani do not explicitly teach wherein the second credential comprises a one-time-password (OTP) generated by an OTP generator to obtain access to a computing device over a virtual private network (VPN), further comprising disabling the OTP generator in response to determining that the electronic key has been used to enter a physical region protected by the PACS.
Wherein Agarwal teaches wherein the second credential comprises a one-time-password (OTP) generated by an OTP generator to obtain access to a computing device over a virtual private network (VPN), further comprising (Par. (0016-0018, 0053, 0073); credentials with one time password to gain access and second credentials with OTP/ additional credentials with OTP)), (Par. (0050); over VPN for access))
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Patel, Bender and Lakhani to incorporate the teaching of Agarwal to utilize the above feature because of the analogous concept of credential management, with the motivation of mitigating risk with one time passwords and preventing brute force attacks and leaks. (Agarwal Par. (0003))
Patel, Bender, Lakhani and Agarwal do not explicitly teach disabling the OTP generator in response to determining that the electronic key has been used to enter a physical region protected by the PACS.
Wherein Lalgudi Natarajan teaches disabling the OTP generator in response to determining that the electronic key has been used to enter a physical region protected by the PACS. (Col. 5 lines34-60); disabling the OTP generator (rejecting the OTP for access to asset), (Col. 4 lines 15-45; in response to determining that the electronic key has been used to enter a physical region protected by the PACS (denying access in response to electronic key of location determined to be breached))
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Patel, Bender, Lakhani and Agarwal to incorporate the teaching of Lalgudi Natarajan to utilize the above feature because of the analogous concept of credential management, with the motivation of preventing illegal access to assets and preventing security breaches. (Lalgudi Natarajan Col. 1 lines 30-50)
Claim(s) 18 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Patel et al. (U.S Pub No. 20230306547, hereinafter referred to as “Patel”), Bender et al. (U.S Pub No. 20170149782, hereinafter referred to as “Bender”), and Porter et al. (U.S Pub. No. 20190295101, hereinafter referred to as “Porter”) further in view of Norton et al. (U.S Pub. No. 20190069436, hereinafter referred to as “Norton”)
In regards to Claim 18, the combination of Patel and Bender do not explicitly teach wherein the first credential is associated with a specialized training certificate of a user of the client device, wherein triggering the access condition comprises unlocking the second credential for accessing a physical access control system (PACS), further comprising: receiving a request to use the second credential to access the PACS; in response to receiving the request, determining that the specialized training certificate associated with the first credential is valid; and enabling use of the second credential to access the PACS in response to determining that the specialized training certificate associated with the first credential is valid.
Wherein Porter teaches wherein the first credential is associated with a specialized training certificate of a user of the client device, (Par. (0079); credential based on training certificates of user))
receiving a request to use the second credential to access the PACS; (Par. (0100); requesting a set of credentials)), (Par. (0142-0143); request for credentials corresponding to physical sites, office, facilities, work etc.)), (Par. (0083, 0140); credentials with physical environment)
in response to receiving the request, determining that the specialized training certificate associated with the first credential is valid; and (Par. (0022-0023, 0078-0079); request credentials and verifying the credentials with training and authorized))
enabling use of the second credential to access the PACS in response to determining that the specialized training certificate associated with the first credential is valid. (Par. (0022-0023 and 0078-0080); after verifying credential with training certificate is valid and authorized issuer allowing second credential (credential receivers) to access platform)), (Par. (0083, 0140); credentials with physical environment)
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Patel and Bender to incorporate the teaching of Porter to utilize the above feature because of the analogous concept of credential management, with the motivation of verifying credential holders based on training and specific information to track qualifications and verify evaluated records. (Porter Par. (0001-0003))
Patel, Bender and Porter do not explicitly teach wherein triggering the access condition comprises unlocking the second credential for accessing a physical access control system (PACS), further comprising:
Wherein Norton teaches wherein triggering the access condition comprises unlocking the second credential for accessing a physical access control system (PACS), further comprising: (Par. (0049-0050); access condition comprises unlocking the second credential (unlocking with credentials based on access schedule and permissions) for accessing a physical access control system (PACS) (a data center for access))
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Patel, Bender and Porter to incorporate the teaching of Norton to utilize the above feature because of the analogous concept of credential management, with the motivation of preventing unauthorized access to physical spaces and create security measures to prevent malicious actions by utilizing locking mechanisms to prevent unlawful physical access. (Norton Par.(0007-0009))
Relevant Prior Art
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Howells; William (U.S Pub. No. 20200382295) “SECURITY CREDENTIALS”. Considered this reference because it addressed dependencies on multiple security credentials and storage.
Hallberg; Andréas (U.S Pub. No. 20250373602) “OUT-OF-BAND OTP EXCHANGE ACCESS CONTROL”. Considered this application because it relates to one time passwords and credentials for access.
De Kievit; Sander (U.S Pub. No. 20160242032) “Controlled Credentials Provisioning Between User Devices”. Considered this application because it addresses dependencies on digital credentials with access conditions.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to HASSAN A HUSSEIN whose telephone number is (571)272-3554. The examiner can normally be reached on 7:30am-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, Eleni Shiferaw can be reached on (571)272-3867. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300.
Information regarding the status of an application may be obtained from the Patent Application Information Retrieval (PAIR) system. Status information for published applications may be obtained from either Private PAIR or Public PAIR. Status information for unpublished applications is available through Private PAIR only. For more information about the PAIR system, see https://ppair-my.uspto.gov/pair/PrivatePair. Should you have questions on access to the Private PAIR system, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative or access to the automated information system, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000.
/HASSAN A HUSSEIN/ Examiner, Art Unit 2497
