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 .
Election/Restrictions
Applicant’s election without traverse of Group I in the reply filed on 23 September 2026 is acknowledged.
Claims 13-22 are withdrawn from further consideration pursuant to 37 CFR 1.142(b) as being drawn to a nonelected invention, there being no allowable generic or linking claim. Election was made without traverse in the reply filed on 23 September 2026.
Response to Amendment
Applicant’s amendment filed 23 September 2026 cancels claims 13-22 and adds claims 26-35. Applicant’s amendment has been fully considered and entered.
Examiner Notes
All claims have been reviewed for compliance with 35 U.S.C. §112 and 35 U.S.C. §101 (as set forth in MPEP 2106).
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.
Claims 1, 6, 7, 9, 11, 12, 23, 28, 29, 31, 33-35 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Lee, U.S. Publication No. 2023/0134534.
Referring to claim 1, Lee discloses a storage device that receives a RPMB data read operation from a host ([0224] & Figure 21, step S2105) wherein the read request includes a message authentication code (MAC) ([0232] & Figure 22: MAC reads on the claimed MAC key), which meets the limitation of receive a read command to read data from a read protected memory block (RPMB) region, the read command comprising a first message authenticated code (MAC) key. The MAC received in the host message is authenticated ([0239] & [0241] & Figures 24 & 25), which meets the limitation of authenticate the read command using the first MAC key. If the MAC is authenticated, the requested data is read from corresponding storage area ([0241]), which meets the limitation of retrieve the data from the RPMB region based at least in part on authenticated the read command. The retrieved data is then provided to the requested host ([0241]), which meets the limitation of transmit the data based at least in part on retrieving the data form the RPMB region.
Referring to claim 6, Lee discloses that the read operation includes an address to be read and the MAC received in the host message is authenticated ([0239] & [0241] & Figures 24 & 25) such that if the MAC is authenticated, the requested data is read from corresponding storage area ([0241]) and if the address is outside of range, a failure code is provided (Page 5, Table 1), which meets the limitation of determine whether an address included in the read command is within the RPMB region based at least in part on receiving the read command, wherein authenticating the read command using the first MAC key is based at least in pat on determining that the address is within the RPMB region.
Referring to claim 7, Lee discloses that if the address is outside of range, a failure code is provided (Page 5, Table 1), which meets the limitation of output an indication that the address is invalid based at least in part on determining that the address is outside of the RPMB region.
Referring to claim 9, Lee discloses that the comparison of a counter against a maximum value ([0083]) such that a code is output when such a counter comparison fails (Page 5, Table 1: Examiner notes that the name of counter represents non-functional descriptive material that does not receive patentable weight. See MPEP 2111.04-2111.05), which meets the limitation of output an indication that a first read counter is different than a second read counter based at least in part on comparing the first read counter with the second read counter.
Referring to claim 11, Lee discloses that the retrieved data is then provided to the requested host ([0241]), which meets the limitation of transmit an RPMB message comprising the data.
Referring to claim 12, Lee discloses that the retrieved data is then provided to the requested host ([0241]: Examiner notes that the content of the message is never functionally utilized in the claims and would therefore be considered to be non-functional descriptive material that does not receive patentable weight. See MPEP 2111.04-2111.05), which meets the limitation of transmit an indication of a second MAC field of the memory system.
Referring to claim 23, Lee discloses a storage device that receives a RPMB data read operation from a host ([0224] & Figure 21, step S2105) wherein the read request includes a message authentication code (MAC) ([0232] & Figure 22: MAC reads on the claimed MAC key), which meets the limitation of receive a read command to read data from a read protected memory block (RPMB) region, the read command comprising a first message authenticated code (MAC) key. The MAC received in the host message is authenticated ([0239] & [0241] & Figures 24 & 25), which meets the limitation of authenticate the read command using the first MAC key. If the MAC is authenticated, the requested data is read from corresponding storage area ([0241]), which meets the limitation of retrieve the data from the RPMB region based at least in part on authenticated the read command. The retrieved data is then provided to the requested host ([0241]), which meets the limitation of transmit the data based at least in part on retrieving the data form the RPMB region.
Referring to claim 28, Lee discloses that the read operation includes an address to be read and the MAC received in the host message is authenticated ([0239] & [0241] & Figures 24 & 25) such that if the MAC is authenticated, the requested data is read from corresponding storage area ([0241]) and if the address is outside of range, a failure code is provided (Page 5, Table 1), which meets the limitation of determine whether an address included in the read command is within the RPMB region based at least in part on receiving the read command, wherein authenticating the read command using the first MAC key is based at least in pat on determining that the address is within the RPMB region.
Referring to claim 29, Lee discloses that if the address is outside of range, a failure code is provided (Page 5, Table 1), which meets the limitation of output an indication that the address is invalid based at least in part on determining that the address is outside of the RPMB region.
Referring to claim 31, Lee discloses that the comparison of a counter against a maximum value ([0083]) such that a code is output when such a counter comparison fails (Page 5, Table 1: Examiner notes that the name of counter represents non-functional descriptive material that does not receive patentable weight. See MPEP 2111.04-2111.05), which meets the limitation of output an indication that a first read counter is different than a second read counter based at least in part on comparing the first read counter with the second read counter.
Referring to claim 33, Lee discloses that the retrieved data is then provided to the requested host ([0241]), which meets the limitation of transmit an RPMB message comprising the data.
Referring to claim 34, Lee discloses that the retrieved data is then provided to the requested host ([0241]: Examiner notes that the content of the message is never functionally utilized in the claims and would therefore be considered to be non-functional descriptive material that does not receive patentable weight. See MPEP 2111.04-2111.05), which meets the limitation of transmit an indication of a second MAC field.
Referring to claim 35, Lee discloses a storage device that receives a RPMB data read operation from a host ([0224] & Figure 21, step S2105) wherein the read request includes a message authentication code (MAC) ([0232] & Figure 22: MAC reads on the claimed MAC key), which meets the limitation of receiving a read command to read data from a read protected memory block (RPMB) region of a memory system, the read command comprising a first message authenticated code (MAC) key. The MAC received in the host message is authenticated ([0239] & [0241] & Figures 24 & 25), which meets the limitation of authenticating the read command using the first MAC key. If the MAC is authenticated, the requested data is read from corresponding storage area ([0241]), which meets the limitation of retrieving the data from the RPMB region based at least in part on authenticated the read command. The retrieved data is then provided to the requested host ([0241]), which meets the limitation of transmitting the data based at least in part on retrieving the data form the RPMB region.
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.
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.
Claims 10, 32 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Lee, U.S. Publication No. 2023/0134534, in view of Hobson, U.S. Publication No. 2018/0191706. Referring to claim 10, Lee discloses that if the MAC is authenticated, the requested data is read from corresponding storage area ([0241]) and provided to the requested host ([0241]). Lee does not specify the use of read counters.
Hobson discloses controlling access to shared resources by utilizing read counters such that the read counters are incremented in response to a corresponding read request ([0060]) such that a reset signal is transmitted when the counter reaches a predetermined value N ([0061]), which meets the limitation of increment a read counter stored by the memory system based at least in part on retrieving the data from the RPMB region, wherein transmitting the data includes transmitting an indication of the read counter that has been incremented. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention for the data storage and authenticated access of Lee to have utilized read counters in order to provide a means of managing data accesses as suggested by Hobson ([0051]).
Referring to claim 32, Lee discloses that if the MAC is authenticated, the requested data is read from corresponding storage area ([0241]) and provided to the requested host ([0241]). Lee does not specify the use of read counters.
Hobson discloses controlling access to shared resources by utilizing read counters such that the read counters are incremented in response to a corresponding read request ([0060]) such that a reset signal is transmitted when the counter reaches a predetermined value N ([0061]), which meets the limitation of increment a read counter based at least in part on retrieving the data from the RPMB region, wherein transmitting the data includes transmitting an indication of the read counter that has been incremented. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention for the data storage and authenticated access of Lee to have utilized read counters in order to provide a means of managing data accesses as suggested by Hobson ([0051]).
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 2-5, 8, 24-27, 30 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.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Vaassen, U.S. Publication No. 2024/0135040, discloses secured memory that performs read command authentication using digital signatures.
Jung, EP 4020296, discloses protected read commands using command protect configuration block requests.
Lee, U.S. Publication No. 2021/0278979, discloses authenticated read and write requests utilizing message authentication codes.
Sela, U.S. Publication No. 2020/0014544, discloses protected memory that performs authenticated read and write requests.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to BENJAMIN E LANIER whose telephone number is (571)272-3805. The examiner can normally be reached M-Th: 5:30-4:00.
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, Alexander Lagor can be reached at 5712705143. 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.
/BENJAMIN E LANIER/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2437
