DETAILED ACTION
This Office Action is in response to the communication filed on 4/30/2025.
Claims 1-20 are pending.
Claims 1-20 are rejected.
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 .
Domestic Benefit
The instant application is a continuation-in-part of application 17/802,122 filed August 4, 2022 and also claims benefit to other related applications. A review of the disclosure (specification claims drawings) of the instant application reveals that “a TRN pool with an address and/or mapping index for use with RCP pool” is not described in the prior filed applications. Therefore, the effective filing data of the instant claims is the actual filling data of the instant application 4/30/2025.
Note: McCarthy 2017-08-11 (U.S. 20190182034) could have been used as a basis for rejection, however, presuming Applicant will be addressing the domestic benefit issue, Examiner did not use this reference in the rejection in the interest compact prosecution.
Objections Specifications
The specification is objected to as failing to provide proper antecedent basis for the claimed subject matter. See 37 CFR 1.75(d)(1) and MPEP § 608.01(o). Correction of the following is required: a true random numbers (TRN) pool with an address and/or mapping index for use with RCP pool including separate and unique generation of sets/pools/arrays of true random numbers.
35 U.S.C. 112(a) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, requires the specification to be written in “full, clear, concise, and exact terms.” The specification is replete with terms which are not clear, concise and exact. The specification should be revised carefully in order to comply with 35 U.S.C. 112(a) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112. Examples of some unclear, inexact or verbose terms used in the specification are: Terminology inconsistent, which are reflected in the claims, see below for a non-limiting list of examples.
Claim Objections
Claims 1-20 are objected to because of the following informalities: terminology inconsistent first, second, another, downstream; array, pool, set; verb inconstancies; ect..
Claim 1 is objected to because of the following informalities: “true number random generator” should read “true random number generator”.
Claim 1 is objected to because of the following informalities: “separate and uniquely” should read “separately and uniquely”.
Claims 1 and 18 recite “selecting a first set of key data elements from a true random number pool”, “select a set of key data elements from an array of true random numbers”. It is not clear how “key data elements” are “selected” form because, as recited, the pools/arrays do not contain “key data elements” they contain “true random numbers”.
Claim 17 recites “decrypting the encrypted data elements…. after decrypting of the encrypted data elements”. It is not clear how data elements, which are no longer encrypted, are decrypted.
Claim 19 recites “another computing system comprising additional memory… and another processed couple to the memory” which should read “another computing system comprising additional memory… and another processed couple to the additional memory”
Appropriate correction is required.
Claim Rejections – 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(b):
(b) CONCLUSION.—The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph:
The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the applicant regards as his invention.
Claims 1120 rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor (or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the applicant), regards as the invention.
Claim 1-20 are rejected as failing to define the invention in the manner required by 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, second paragraph.
The claims replete with indefinite language. The structure which goes to make up the device must be clearly and positively specified. The structure must be organized and correlated in such a manner as to present a complete operative device.
Claims 1, 3, 9-12, 18 and 20 rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor (or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the applicant), regards as the invention.
The term “substantially” in claims 1, 11-12, 18 and 20 is a relative term which renders the claim indefinite. The term “substantially” is not defined by the claim, the specification does not provide a standard for ascertaining the requisite degree, and one of ordinary skill in the art would not be reasonably apprised of the scope of the invention. “substantially match…” and substantially uniform…” has been rendered indefinite.
The term “relatively” in claim 12 is a relative term which renders the claim indefinite. The term “relatively” is not defined by the claim, the specification does not provide a standard for ascertaining the requisite degree, and one of ordinary skill in the art would not be reasonably apprised of the scope of the invention. “relatively larger” has been rendered indefinite.
Claims 1 and 10 recites the limitation "the another downstream random number generator". There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
Claims 1 and 10 both recite “a scrambling device” and then claim 10 recites “the scrambling”. It is not clear which scrambling device is the antecedent basis for performing the scrambling”
Claim 1 recites the limitation “generated separate and uniquely from the set of true random numbers”, “uniquely” has no ascertainable boundary and the specifications do not define the term, therefore the scope of the term is unascertainable.
Claim 3:
Claim 1 recites “downstream random number generator” and Claim 3 recites “downstream second random number” causing antecedent basis and claim interpretation/scope issues. Clarification is required. Examiner is interpreting these to be the same objects.
Claim 1 recites “a set of true random numbers” and “another set of true random numbers” and then Claim 3 recites “a second set of true random numbers”. It is not clear whether the “a second set of true random numbers” recited in claim 3 is the same or distinct form the recitations in Claim 1.
Claim 1 recites developed “second set of key data elements” and then Claim 3 recites “developing the second set of key data elements”. It is not clear how Claim 3 is developing already developed key data elements.
Claim 9 recites “the LFSR”, Claim 7 provides the antecedent basis for “one or more LFRSs”. It is not clear which “one or more LFSRs” is the antecedent basis for “the LSFR”.
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 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 1-3, 6, 12 and 17-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Shefi (U.S. 6266413), in view of Figueira (U.S. 20170034167).
Regarding claim 1,
Shefi discloses: A computer-implemented method for performing cryptographic procedures, comprising: (Shefi [Abstract] A method for generating an identical electronic one-time pad at a first location and a second location
delivering a set of true random numbers from a true number random generator to at least one downstream random number generator; (Shefi [Col 4 Ln10-67; Col 5 Ln10-43; Col 12 Ln45-56; Col 18 Ln25-56; Col 14 Ln55-67] teaches generating sets/tables of true random numbers to be used as seeds for the generating random numbers by devices which are downstream of the seed generation; (vi) giving the obtained true random number to the at least one pseudorandom number generator as a seed)
utilizing the set of true random numbers to define one or more variables relating to an output of the at least one downstream random number generator; (Shefi [Col 4 Ln10-Col 5 Ln64; Col 11 Ln 47-64; Col 12 Ln18-Col 14 Ln 44] teaches generating pseudorandom numbers from a seed (define variables) by combining a seed/true random number with at least one pseudorandom number generated by at least one pseudorandom number generator to form the final true random number)
selecting a first set of key data elements from a true random number pool using the output of the at least one downstream random number generator, the first set of key data elements comprising true random numbers from the true random number pool that have been addressed using the output of the at least one downstream random number generator, (Shefi [Col 4 Ln10-67; Col 5 Ln10-43; Col 12 Ln18-Col 14 Ln 44] teaches selecting select seeds (key data elements) from the true random number table (TRN pool) using pointers, a pointer can be formed using the true random numbers or by using the generated pseudorandom number as a pointer (addressed); [Col 46-56] The seeds are designated by a sequential number which functions as a pointer) wherein the first set of key data elements substantially matches a second set of key data elements developed on a second computing system; (Shefi [Col 4 Ln10-67; Col 5 Ln10-43; Col 12 Ln18-Col 14 Ln 44] teaches a identical seed tables on two different devices and selecting a selected true random number from the table at the first and the second electronic devices according to a selection procedure, the selection procedure including exchanging at least a portion of a key between the first and the second electronic devices over the communication channel, such that the selected true random number is identical for the first and the second electronic devices (matching key elements developed on different devices))
delivering another set of true random numbers to a second downstream random number generator, the another set of true random numbers being generated (Shefi [Col 4 Ln10-67; Col 5 Ln10-43; Col 12 Ln18-Col 14 Ln 56; Col 18 Ln25-56; Col 23 Ln1-31] teaches multiple different sets of tables of random numbers which are unique and are used to generate random numbers in the same manner as disclosed above “at least two sets of read-only tables of true random numbers, shown as set of tables 11 and set of tables 13, is provided on non-volatile memory 12”: In step eight, this pseudorandom number is used as a second pointer to a table of true random numbers in order to obtain a new true random number. The table of true random numbers for this step may the same table as for previous steps. Alternatively, and preferably, the table may be different… Alternatively and preferably, in step nine, a second generated pseudorandom number is generated which is also identical at location 1 and location 2. This pseudorandom number may be generated with the pseudorandom number generator of step seven, or with a different pseudorandom number generator)
utilizing the another set of true random numbers to define one or more additional variables relating to an output of the another downstream random number generator; and (Shefi [Col 4 Ln10-67; Col 5 Ln10-43; Col 12 Ln18-Col 14 Ln 44] teaches a different table of random numbers which is used to generate random numbers in the same manner as above: Alternatively and preferably, in step nine, a second generated pseudorandom number is generated which is also identical at location 1 and location 2. This pseudorandom number may be generated with the pseudorandom number generator of step seven, or with a different pseudorandom number generator)
scrambling the first set of key data elements using the output of the another downstream random number generator with a scrambling device before utilizing the first set of key data elements in an encryption and/or decryption process. (Shefi [Col 4 Ln10-67; Col 5 Ln10-52; Col 12 Ln18-Col 14 Ln 44] teaches the selected true random number selected in step eight is merged with the pseudorandom number generated in step nine to form a merged true random number… The step of merging must be performed by a function which maintains the probability distribution, so that the merged number is also a true random number. For example, the function could add them together or could perform an XOR logic bit-wise operation (scrambling); (d) encrypting a message by the first electronic device according to the one-time pad to form an encrypted message by merging at least a portion of the message with the selected true random number from the one-time pad according to an invertible merging function (scrambled before using))
Shefi does not explicitly disclose: another set of true random numbers being generated separate and uniquely
However, in the same field of endeavor Figueira discloses: another set of true random numbers being generated separate and uniquely (Figueira [0022-0024, 0068-0086] teaches an additional independent entropy source like another RNG is used to generate random sequences (separate primary RNG’s which generate true random numbers))
Shefi and Figueira are analogous art because they are from the same field of endeavor of generating one-time pads.
Before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, having the teachings of Shefi and Figueira before him or her, to modify the method of Shefi to include the additional independent entropy source like another RNG used to generate random sequences of numbers of random length (entropy) of Figueira because it will provide a solution to “the above issues including: (1) The Random Number Generation Problem (2) The Distribution Problem and (3) known ciphertext length, (4) ciphertext readily visible for analysis, (5) lack of user authentication, (6) lack of message verification and error correction, (7) ciphertext position is relative to plaintext”.
The motivation for doing so would be [“provided an independent RNG is used to generate the entropy updates, and the entropy values are pre-encrypted with a shared key before being joined to normal messages or control values in randomly composed encryption blocks, and subsequently encrypted with the outputs of a second RNG, it is mathematically possible to augment the rate of entropy (or uncertainty) in the cryptosystem faster than it can be depleted through normal use. Doing this in a perpetually synchronized manner between sender and receiver, effectively results in a perpetual information theoretically secure cryptosystem”] (Paragraph 0016-0018, 0021-0024 by Figueira)].
Therefore, it would have been obvious to combine Shefi and Figueira to obtain the invention as specified in the instant claim.
Regarding claim 12,
Shefi discloses: A computer-implemented method for performing cryptographic procedures, comprising: (Shefi [Abstract] A method for generating an identical electronic one-time pad at a first location and a second location
on a sending device: delivering a set of true random numbers from a first true random number pool to a first pseudo-random number generator; (Shefi [Col 4 Ln10-67; Col 5 Ln10-43; Col 12 Ln45-56; Col 18 Ln25-56; Col 14 Ln55-67] teaches generating sets/tables of true random numbers to be used as seeds for the generating random numbers by devices which are downstream of the seed generation; (vi) giving the obtained true random number to the at least one pseudorandom number generator as a seed)
utilizing the set of true random numbers to define one or more variables relating to an output of the first pseudo-random number generator; (Shefi [Col 4 Ln10-Col 5 Ln64; Col 11 Ln 47-64; Col 12 Ln18-Col 14 Ln 44] teaches generating pseudorandom numbers from a seed (define variables) by combining a seed/true random number with at least one pseudorandom number generated by at least one pseudorandom number generator to form the final true random number)
developing a first set of key data elements from true random numbers from a first array of true random numbers using the output of the first pseudo-random number generator, the first array of true random numbers being (Shefi [Col 4 Ln10-67; Col 5 Ln10-43; Col 12 Ln18-Col 14 Ln 67] teaches selecting select seeds from the true random number table using pointers, a pointer can be formed using the true random numbers or by using the generated pseudorandom number as a pointer; [Col 46-56] The seeds are designated by a sequential number which functions as a pointer; [Col 14 Ln 55-57] the seeds are generated according to the method of the present invention; (Shefi [Col 12 Ln1-12; Col 13 Ln 5-30] teaches a seed which is preferably continuously altered by the output of the number generator… seeds are generated according to this method of the present invention [Col 4 Ln10-67; Col 5 Ln10-52; Col 12 Ln18-Col 14 Ln 44; Col 15 Ln20-40] teaches table containing a finite number of random numbers to be selected in such a way that the location of each true random number cannot be uncovered by observing the output of the method… the method of the present invention enables a practically unlimited number of such "one-time pads" to be generated without repetition and different amounts of random numbers on at different stages of the process) Additionally, an array being larger than a pool appears to be a design choice. The claimed feature solves no stated problem and presents no unexpected result
combining clear text data elements with the first set of key data elements using an encryption operation to produce encrypted data elements; and (Shefi [Col 5 Ln42-52; Col 6 Ln 4-Col 7 Ln40;] teaches (d) encrypting the message by the first electronic device by merging at least a portion of the message with the selected true random number according to a merging function to form an encrypted message)
transmitting the encrypted data elements; (Shefi [Col 4 Ln10-67; Col 5 Ln10-43; Col 12 Ln18-Col 14 Ln 44] teaches an identical seed tables on two different devices and selecting a selected true random number from the table at the first and the second electronic devices according to a selection procedure, the selection procedure including exchanging at least a portion of a key between the first and the second electronic devices over the communication channel, such that the selected true random number is identical for the first and the second electronic devices (matching key elements developed on different devices); [Col 5 Ln42-52; Col 6 Ln 4-Col 7 Ln40] teaches (e) sending the encrypted message to the second electronic device over the communication channel)
on a receiving device: receiving the encrypted data elements; (Shefi [Col 4 Ln10-67; Col 5 Ln10-43; Col 12 Ln18-Col 14 Ln 44] teaches an identical seed tables on two different devices and selecting a selected true random number from the table at the first and the second electronic devices according to a selection procedure, the selection procedure including exchanging at least a portion of a key between the first and the second electronic devices over the communication channel, such that the selected true random number is identical for the first and the second electronic devices (matching key elements developed on different devices); [Col 5 Ln42-52; Col 6 Ln 4-Col 7 Ln40] teaches (e) sending the encrypted message to the second electronic device over the communication channel; (Shefi [Col 5 Ln 43-Col 6 Ln 16; Col 17 Ln20-Col 18Ln10] teaches decrypting the message and using an inverse function to invert and remove the obfuscations performed on the message, on the receiver device, so that the message and be read in the clear)
delivering a second set of true random numbers from a second true random number pool to a second pseudo-random number generator, the first true random number pool matching the second true random number pool; (Shefi [Col 4 Ln10-67; Col 5 Ln10-43; Col 12 Ln18-Col 14 Ln 56; Col 18 Ln25-56; Col 23 Ln1-31] teaches multiple different sets of tables of random numbers which are unique and are used to generate random numbers in the same manner as disclosed above “at least two sets of read-only tables of true random numbers, shown as set of tables 11 and set of tables 13, is provided on non-volatile memory 12”: In step eight, this pseudorandom number is used as a second pointer to a table of true random numbers in order to obtain a new true random number. The table of true random numbers for this step may the same table as for previous steps. Alternatively, and preferably, the table may be different… Alternatively and preferably, in step nine, a second generated pseudorandom number is generated which is also identical at location 1 and location 2. This pseudorandom number may be generated with the pseudorandom number generator of step seven, or with a different pseudorandom number generator)
utilizing the second set of true random numbers to define one or more variables relating to an output of the second pseudo-random number generator; and (Shefi [Col 4 Ln10-67; Col 5 Ln10-43; Col 12 Ln18-Col 14 Ln 44] teaches a different table of random numbers which is used to generate random numbers in the same manner as above: Alternatively, and preferably, in step nine, a second generated pseudorandom number is generated which is also identical at location 1 and location 2. This pseudorandom number may be generated with the pseudorandom number generator of step seven, or with a different pseudorandom number generator)
developing a second set of key data elements from true random numbers from a second array of true random numbers with the output of the second pseudo-random number generator, the first array of true random numbers matching the second array of true random numbers, the second array of true random numbers being (Shefi [Col 4 Ln10-67; Col 5 Ln10-43; Col 12 Ln18-Col 14 Ln 67] teaches selecting select seeds from the true random number table using pointers, a pointer can be formed using the true random numbers or by using the generated pseudorandom number as a pointer; [Col 46-56] The seeds are designated by a sequential number which functions as a pointer; [Col 14 Ln 55-57] the seeds are generated according to the method of the present invention; (Shefi [Col 12 Ln1-12; Col 13 Ln 5-30] teaches a seed which is preferably continuously altered by the output of the number generator… seeds are generated according to this method of the present invention [Col 4 Ln10-67; Col 5 Ln10-52; Col 12 Ln18-Col 14 Ln 44; Col 15 Ln20-40] teaches table containing a finite number of random numbers to be selected in such a way that the location of each true random number cannot be uncovered by observing the output of the method… the method of the present invention enables a practically unlimited number of such "one-time pads" to be generated without repetition and different amounts of random numbers on at different stages of the process) Additionally, an array being larger than a pool appears to be a design choice. The claimed feature solves no stated problem and presents no unexpected result
decrypting the encrypted data elements with the second set of key data elements. (Shefi [Col 4 Ln10-67; Col 5 Ln10-52; Col 12 Ln18-Col 14 Ln 44] teaches Preferably, the method further comprises the steps of: (f) receiving the encrypted message by the second electronic device; and (g) decrypting the encrypted message by performing the inverse function on the encrypted message to obtain the at least a portion of the message)
Shefi does not explicitly disclose: another set of true random numbers being separate
However, in the same field of endeavor Figueira discloses: another set of true random numbers being separate (Figueira [0022-0024, 0068-0086] teaches an additional independent entropy source like another RNG is used to generate random sequences (separate primary RNG’s which generate true random numbers))
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify with Figueira for similar reasons as cited in claim 1.
Regarding claim 18,
Shefi discloses: A computing system configured for performing cryptographic procedures, the computing system comprising: memory configured for storing computing instructions; and
a processor operably coupled to the memory for performing the computing instructions to: (Shefi [Abstract, Col 15 Ln50-65] each of the first and the second electronic devices having: (i) a non-volatile memory; (ii) a processor; (iii) at least one table of true random numbers being stored on the non-volatile memory, the table being identical for the first and the second electronic devices; and (iv) at least one software program for obtaining a true random number from the table, the software program being stored on the non-volatile memory and the at least one software program being operated by the processor)
deliver a set of true random numbers to one or more pseudo-random number generators; (Shefi [Col 4 Ln10-67; Col 5 Ln10-43; Col 12 Ln45-56; Col 18 Ln25-56; Col 14 Ln55-67] teaches generating sets/tables of true random numbers to be used as seeds for the generating random numbers by devices which are downstream of the seed generation; (vi) giving the obtained true random number to the at least one pseudorandom number generator as a seed)
utilize the set of true random numbers to define one or more initial parameters of the one or more pseudo-random number generators; (Shefi [Col 4 Ln10-Col 5 Ln64; Col 11 Ln 47-64; Col 12 Ln18-Col 14 Ln 44] teaches generating pseudorandom numbers from a seed (define variables) by combining a seed/true random number with at least one pseudorandom number generated by at least one pseudorandom number generator to form the final true random number)
select a set of key data elements from an array of true random numbers using an output of the one or more pseudo-random number generators; (Shefi [Col 4 Ln10-67; Col 5 Ln10-43; Col 12 Ln18-Col 14 Ln 67] teaches selecting select seeds from the true random number table using pointers, a pointer can be formed using the true random numbers or by using the generated pseudorandom number as a pointer)
deliver a scrambling set of true random numbers to a scrambling pseudo-random number generator, the scrambling set of true random numbers and the scrambling pseudo- random number generator being (Shefi [Col 4 Ln10-67; Col 5 Ln10-43; Col 12 Ln18-Col 14 Ln 56; Col 18 Ln25-56; Col 23 Ln1-31] teaches multiple different sets of tables of random numbers which are unique and are used to generate random numbers in the same manner as disclosed above “at least two sets of read-only tables of true random numbers, shown as set of tables 11 and set of tables 13, is provided on non-volatile memory 12”: In step eight, this pseudorandom number is used as a second pointer to a table of true random numbers in order to obtain a new true random number. The table of true random numbers for this step may the same table as for previous steps. Alternatively, and preferably, the table may be different… Alternatively and preferably, in step nine, a second generated pseudorandom number is generated which is also identical at location 1 and location 2. This pseudorandom number may be generated with the pseudorandom number generator of step seven, or with a different pseudorandom number generator)
utilize the scrambling set of true random numbers to define one or more additional variables relating to an output of the scrambling pseudo-random number generator; and (Shefi [Col 4 Ln10-67; Col 5 Ln10-43; Col 12 Ln18-Col 14 Ln 44] teaches a different table of random numbers which is used to generate random numbers in the same manner as above: Alternatively and preferably, in step nine, a second generated pseudorandom number is generated which is also identical at location 1 and location 2. This pseudorandom number may be generated with the pseudorandom number generator of step seven, or with a different pseudorandom number generator)
scramble the set of key data elements using the output of the scrambling pseudo-random number generator to produce a scrambled set of key data elements; (Shefi [Col 4 Ln10-67; Col 5 Ln10-52; Col 12 Ln18-Col 14 Ln 44] teaches the selected true random number selected in step eight is merged with the pseudorandom number generated in step nine to form a merged true random number… The step of merging must be performed by a function which maintains the probability distribution, so that the merged number is also a true random number. For example, the function could add them together or could perform an XOR logic bit-wise operation (scrambling); (d) encrypting a message by the first electronic device according to the one-time pad to form an encrypted message by merging at least a portion of the message with the selected true random number from the one-time pad according to an invertible merging function (scrambled before using))
combine clear text data elements with the scrambled set of key data elements using an encryption operation to produce encrypted data elements; and (Shefi [Col 5 Ln42-52; Col 6 Ln 4-Col 7 Ln40;] teaches (d) encrypting the message by the first electronic device by merging at least a portion of the message with the selected true random number according to a merging function to form an encrypted message)
transmit the encrypted data elements to another computing system including a synchronized set of key data elements substantially matching the scrambled set of key data elements on the computing system. (Shefi [Col 4 Ln10-67; Col 5 Ln10-43; Col 12 Ln18-Col 14 Ln 44] teaches an identical seed tables on two different devices and selecting a selected true random number from the table at the first and the second electronic devices according to a selection procedure, the selection procedure including exchanging at least a portion of a key between the first and the second electronic devices over the communication channel, such that the selected true random number is identical for the first and the second electronic devices (matching key elements developed on different devices); [Col 5 Ln42-52; Col 6 Ln 4-Col 7 Ln40] teaches (e) sending the encrypted message to the second electronic device over the communication channel)
Shefi does not explicitly disclose: another set of true random numbers being separate
However, in the same field of endeavor Figueira discloses: another set of true random numbers being separate (Figueira [0022-0024, 0068-0086] teaches an additional independent entropy source like another RNG is used to generate random sequences (separate primary RNG’s which generate true random numbers))
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify with Figueira for similar reasons as cited in claim 1.
Regarding claim 2,
Shefi in view of Figueira discloses all the limitations of claim 1,
Shefi additionally discloses: The computer-implemented method of claim 1, further comprising:
combining clear text data elements with the first set of key data elements using an encryption operation to produce encrypted data elements; and (Shefi [Col 5 Ln42-52; Col 6 Ln 4-Col 7 Ln40;] teaches (d) encrypting the message by the first electronic device by merging at least a portion of the message with the selected true random number according to a merging function to form an encrypted message)
transmitting the encrypted data elements to the second computing system. (Shefi [Col 5 Ln42-52; Col 6 Ln 4-Col 7 Ln40] teaches (e) sending the encrypted message to the second electronic device over the communication channel)
Regarding claim 3,
Shefi in view of Figueira discloses all the limitations of claim 2,
Shefi additionally discloses: The computer-implemented method of claim 2, further comprising:
delivering a second set of true random numbers to at least one downstream second random number generator; (Shefi [Col 5 Ln10-43; Col 6 Ln 4-Col 7 Ln40; Col 13 Ln 46- Col 14 Ln 39; Col 12 Ln18-Col 14 Ln 56] (c) selecting a selected true random number from the table at the first and the second electronic devices according to a selection procedure, the selection procedure being identical for the first and the second electronic devices, such that the selected true random number is identical for the first and the second electronic devices)
utilizing the second set of true random numbers to define one or more variables relating to an output of the at least one downstream second random number generator; (Shefi [Col 5 Ln10-43; Col 6 Ln 4-Col 7 Ln40; Col 13 Ln 46- Col 14 Ln 39; Col 12 Ln18-Col 14 Ln 56] (c) selecting a selected true random number from the table at the first and the second electronic devices according to a selection procedure, the selection procedure being identical for the first and the second electronic devices, such that the selected true random number is identical for the first and the second electronic devices)
developing the second set of key data elements with the output of the at least one downstream second random number generator; and (Shefi [Col 5 Ln10-43; Col 6 Ln 4-Col 7 Ln40; Col 13 Ln 46- Col 14 Ln 67; Col 12 Ln18-Col 14 Ln 56] (c) selecting a selected true random number from the table at the first and the second electronic devices according to a selection procedure, the selection procedure being identical for the first and the second electronic devices, such that the selected true random number is identical for the first and the second electronic devices and that the seeds are generated according to the method of the present invention)
decrypting the encrypted data elements with the second set of key data elements from the second computing system. (Shefi [Col 5 Ln10-43; Col 6 Ln 4-Col 7 Ln40; Col 13 Ln 46- Col 14 Ln 39; Col 12 Ln18-Col 14 Ln 56] (g) decrypting the encrypted message by performing the inverse function on the encrypted message to obtain the at least a portion of the message)
Regarding claim 6,
Shefi in view of Figueira discloses all the limitations of claim 1,
Shefi additionally discloses: The computer-implemented method of claim 1, further comprising providing the another set of true random numbers from a second true random number generator. (Shefi [Col 4 Ln10-67; Col 5 Ln10-43; Col 12 Ln18-Col 14 Ln 56; Col 18 Ln25-56; Col 23 Ln1-31] teaches multiple different sets of tables of random numbers which are unique and are used to generate random numbers in the same manner as disclosed above “at least two sets of read-only tables of true random numbers, shown as set of tables 11 and set of tables 13, is provided on non-volatile memory 12”: In step eight, this pseudorandom number is used as a second pointer to a table of true random numbers in order to obtain a new true random number. The table of true random numbers for this step may the same table as for previous steps. Alternatively, and preferably, the table may be different… Alternatively and preferably, in step nine, a second generated pseudorandom number is generated which is also identical at location 1 and location 2. This pseudorandom number may be generated with the pseudorandom number generator of step seven, or with a different pseudorandom number generator)
Regarding claim 17,
Shefi in view of Figueira discloses all the limitations of claim 12,
Shefi in view of Figueira discloses: The computer-implemented method of claim 12, further comprising,
Shefi additionally discloses: and, on the receiving device, further decrypting the encrypted data with an inverse process of the initial process after the decrypting of the encrypted data elements with the second set of key data elements. (Shefi [Col 5 Ln 43-Col 6 Ln 16; Col 17 Ln20-Col 18Ln10] teaches decrypting the message and using an inverse function to invert and remove the obfuscations performed on the message, on the receiver device, so that the message and be read in the clear)
Shefi does not explicitly disclose: on the sending device, initially encrypting the clear text data elements in an initial process prior to the combining of the clear text data elements with the first set of key data elements
However, Figueira additionally discloses: on the sending device, initially encrypting the clear text data elements in an initial process prior to the combining of the clear text data elements with the first set of key data elements (Figueira [0024, 0094-0096, 0104-0108] teaches obfuscating plaintext prior to encryption)
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify with Figueira for similar reasons as cited in claim 5.
Regarding claim 19,
Shefi in view of Figueira discloses all the limitations of claim 18,
Shefi in view of Figueira discloses: The computing system of claim 18, wherein the system includes the another computing system comprising additional memory configured for storing additional computing instructions and another processor operably coupled to the memory for performing the additional computing instructions to: (Shefi [Abstract; Col 4 Ln10-67; Col 5 Ln10-43; Col 12 Ln45-56; Col 18 Ln25-56; Col 14 Ln55-67] teaches identical electronic one-time pad at a first location and a second location, two separate devices with separate memory, separate processors working together where each device delivers, derives, utilizes and develops sets of one-time pads; these two devices/location teaches the “the computing system” and “the another computing system” limitations of this claim; additionally)
deliver another set of true random numbers to another pseudo-random number generator; (Shefi [Col 4 Ln10-67; Col 5 Ln10-43; Col 12 Ln45-56; Col 18 Ln25-56; Col 14 Ln55-67] teaches generating sets/tables of true random numbers to be used as seeds for the generating random numbers by devices which are downstream of the seed generation; (vi) giving the obtained true random number to the at least one pseudorandom number generator as a seed)
utilize the another set of true random numbers to define one or more initial parameters of the another pseudo-random number generator; and (Shefi [Col 4 Ln10-Col 5 Ln64; Col 11 Ln 47-64; Col 12 Ln18-Col 14 Ln 44] teaches generating pseudorandom numbers from a seed (define variables) by combining a seed/true random number with at least one pseudorandom number generated by at least one pseudorandom number generator to form the final true random number)
develop a synchronized set of key data elements with the another pseudo-random number generator. (Shefi [Col 4 Ln10-67; Col 5 Ln10-43; Col 12 Ln18-Col 14 Ln 44] teaches an identical seed tables on two different devices and selecting a selected true random number from the table at the first and the second electronic devices according to a selection procedure, the selection procedure including exchanging at least a portion of a key between the first and the second electronic devices over the communication channel, such that the selected true random number is identical for the first and the second electronic devices (matching key elements developed on different devices))
Regarding claim 20,
Shefi in view of Figueira discloses all the limitations of claim 18,
Shefi in view of Figueira discloses: The computing system of claim 19, wherein the another set of true random numbers on the another computing system substantially matches the set of true random numbers on the computing system. (Shefi [Abstract; Col 4 Ln10-67; Col 5 Ln10-43; Col 12 Ln45-56; Col 18 Ln25-56; Col 14 Ln55-67] teaches identical electronic one-time pad at a first location and a second location, two separate devices with separate memory, separate processors working together where each device delivers, derives, utilizes and develops sets of one-time pads; these two devices/location teaches the “the computing system” and “the another computing system” limitations of this claim; additionally)
Claim 4 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Shefi (U.S. 6266413), in view of Figueira (U.S. 20170034167) and in further view of Cammarota (U.S. 20180198603)
Regarding claim 4,
Shefi in view of Figueira discloses all the limitations of claim 2,
Shefi in view of Figueira discloses: The computer-implemented method of claim 2,
Shefi does not explicitly disclose: further comprising initially obfuscating the clear text data elements in an initial randomization process comprising substitution-box (S-Box) substitution prior to the combining of the clear text data elements with the first set of key data elements. However, Figueira additionally discloses: further comprising initially obfuscating the clear text data elements in an initial randomization process (Figueira [0024, 0094-0096, 0104-0108] teaches obfuscating plaintext prior to encryption using a pre-encryption process)
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify with Figueira for similar reasons as cited in claim 1.
Shefi in view of Figueira does not explicitly disclose: comprising substitution-box (S-Box) substitution
However, in the same field of endeavor Cammarota discloses: comprising substitution-box (S-Box) substitution (Cammarota [0038-0039] teaches S-Box or Substitution Box of an example block cipher algorithm)
Shefi in view of Figueira and Cammarota are analogous art because they are from the same field of endeavor of cryptography.
Before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, having the teachings of Shefi in view of Figueira and Cammarota before him or her, to modify the method of Shefi in view of Figueira to include the S-Box or Substitution Box of Cammarota because it will improve cryptographic security.
The motivation for doing so would be [“securing data on a computing device where output of a substitution round of the cryptographic algorithm can be modified to have a constant Hamming weight”] (Paragraph 0040-0041 by Cammarota)].
Therefore, it would have been obvious to combine Shefi in view of Figueira and Cammarota to obtain the invention as specified in the instant claim.
Claims 5 and 13 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Shefi (U.S. 6266413), in view of Figueira (U.S. 20170034167) and in further view of Morad (U.S. 20090327381)
Regarding claim 5,
Shefi in view of Figueira discloses all the limitations of claim 1,
Shefi in view of Figueira does not explicitly disclose: The computer-implemented method of claim 1, further comprising synchronizing the at least one downstream random number generator, the second downstream random number generator, the scrambling device, and the true random number pool with a single clock.
However, in the same field of endeavor Morad discloses: synchronizing the at least one downstream random number generator, the second downstream random number generator, the scrambling device, and the true random number pool with a single clock. (Morad [Abstract, 0013, 0025] teaches a synchronizing circuit for synchronizing said single true random bit to the clock domain of said apparatus; (e) an LFSR, synchronized with said clock domain, which receives said synchronized single true random bit)
Shefi in view of Figueira and Morad are analogous art because they are from the same field of endeavor random number generation.
Before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, having the teachings of Shefi in view of Figueira and Morad before him or her, to modify the method of Shefi in view of Figueira to include the synchronizing circuit of Morad because it will effectively generate a truly random number.
The motivation for doing so would be [“provide a random number generator that outputs a truly random”] (Paragraph 0002-0012, 0025 by Morad)].
Therefore, it would have been obvious to combine Shefi in view of Figueira and Morad to obtain the invention as specified in the instant claim.
Regarding claim 13,
Shefi in view of Figueira discloses all the limitations of claim 1,
Shefi in view of Figueira does not explicitly disclose: The computer-implemented method of claim 12, further comprising: synchronizing the first pseudo-random number generator and the first array of true random numbers with a single clock on the sending device; and synchronizing the second pseudo-random number generator and the second array of true random numbers with a single clock on the receiving device.
However, in the same field of endeavor Morad discloses: The computer-implemented method of claim 12, further comprising: synchronizing the first pseudo-random number generator and the first array of true random numbers with a single clock on the sending device; and (Morad [Abstract, 0013, 0025] teaches a synchronizing circuit for synchronizing said single true random bit to the clock domain of said apparatus; (d) a synchronizing circuit for synchronizing said single true random bit to the clock domain of said apparatus; The generated seed, i.e. the true random bit, is then fed into clock synchronizer 40 where it is synchronized with the clock of the LFSR 50)
synchronizing the second pseudo-random number generator and the second array of true random numbers with a single clock on the receiving device. (Morad [Abstract, 0013, 0025] teaches a synchronizing circuit for synchronizing said single true random bit to the clock domain of said apparatus; (e) an LFSR, synchronized with said clock domain, which receives said synchronized single true random bit; The generated seed, i.e. the true random bit, is then fed into clock synchronizer 40 where it is synchronized with the clock of the LFSR 50)
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify with Morad for similar reasons as cited in claim 5.
Claims 7-10 and 14-16 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Shefi (U.S. 6266413), in view of Figueira (U.S. 20170034167), in further view of Clements (U.S. 20050203979).
Regarding claim 7,
Shefi in view of Figueira discloses all the limitations of claim 1,
Shefi in view of Figueira discloses: The computer-implemented method of claim 1, further comprising selecting the at least one downstream random number generator (Shefi [Col 4 Ln10-67; Col 5 Ln10-43; Col 12 Ln45-56; Col 18 Ln25-56; Col 14 Ln55-67] teaches generating sets/tables of true random numbers to be used as seeds for the generating random numbers by devices which are downstream of the seed generation; (vi) giving the obtained true random number to the at least one pseudorandom number generator as a seed)
Shefi in view of Figueira does not explicitly disclose: to comprise one or more linear feedback shift registers (LFSRs).
However, in the same field of endeavor Clements discloses: selecting the at least one downstream random number generator to comprise one or more linear feedback shift registers (LFSRs). (Clements [0021-0033] teaches that random number generators can comprise LFSR’s)
Shefi in view of Figueira and Clements are analogous art because they are from the same field of endeavor random number generation.
Before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, having the teachings of Shefi in view of Figueira and Clements before him or her, to modify the method of Shefi in view of Figueira to include the LFSR’s, initialization vectors for the cryptographic session and primitive polynomial of Clements because it will power efficient random number generation.
The motivation for doing so would be [“generate a true random number while consuming low power”] (Paragraph 0010, 0031-0032 by Clements)].
Therefore, it would have been obvious to combine Shefi in view of Figueira and Clements to obtain the invention as specified in the instant claim.
Regarding claim 8,
Shefi in view of Figueira discloses all the limitations of claim 7,
Shefi additionally discloses: The computer-implemented method of claim 7, further comprising inputting the set of true random numbers into the at least one downstream random number generator to define at least one of: (Shefi [Col 4 Ln10-Col 5 Ln64; Col 11 Ln 47-64; Col 12 Ln18-Col 14 Ln 44] teaches generating pseudorandom numbers from a seed (define variables) by combining a seed/true random number with at least one pseudorandom number generated by at least one pseudorandom number generator to form the final true random number)
Shefi in view of Figueira do not explicitly disclose: one or more selectable taps, one or more initial vectors or parameters, one or more prime polynomials, or a shift index.
However, in the same field of endeavor Clements discloses: one or more selectable taps, one or more initial vectors or parameters, one or more prime polynomials, or a shift index. (Clements [0021-0025] The cryptographic key generator 14 may generate random cryptographic keys, randomization vectors for an initial state of a cryptographic session or initialization vectors for the cryptographic session)
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify with Clements for similar reasons as cited in claim 7.
Regarding claim 9,
Shefi in view of Figueira discloses all the limitations of claim 7,
Shefi in view of Figueira The computer-implemented method of claim 7, (Shefi [Col 4 Ln10-67; Col 5 Ln10-43; Col 12 Ln45-56; Col 18 Ln25-56; Col 14 Ln55-67] teaches generating sets/tables of true random numbers to be used as seeds for the generating random numbers by devices which are downstream of the seed generation; (vi) giving the obtained true random number to the at least one pseudorandom number generator as a seed)
Shefi in view of Figueira do not explicitly disclose: further comprising basing taps of the LFSR on a primitive polynomial.
However, in the same field of endeavor Clements discloses: basing taps of the LFSR on a primitive polynomial. (Clements [0025-0032] LFSR’s designed using a primitive polynomial)
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify with Clements for similar reasons as cited in claim 7.
Regarding claim 10,
Shefi in view of Figueira discloses all the limitations of claim 1,
Shefi additionally discloses: The computer-implemented method of claim 1, further comprising inputting a pseudo-random binary sequence (PRBS) into a scramble device with the another downstream random number generator (Shefi [Col 5 Ln 57- Col 6 Ln 29; Col 14 Ln20-40; Col 17 Ln 20-Col 18 Ln 20] teaches forming a merged true random number by using a pseudorandom number or XOR logic bit-wise operation (scrambling key data elements)
Shefi in view of Figueira does not explicitly disclose: comprising a linear feedback shift register (LFSR)
However, in the same field of endeavor Clements discloses: comprising a linear feedback shift register (LFSR) (Clements [0021-0033] teaches that random number generators can comprise LFSR’s)
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify with Clements for similar reasons as cited in claim 7.
Regarding claim 14,
Shefi in view of Figueira discloses all the limitations of claim 12,
Shefi in view of Figueira discloses: The computer-implemented method of claim 12, further comprising outputting strings of random numbers with the first pseudo-random number generator (Shefi [Col 4 Ln10-67; Col 5 Ln10-43; Col 12 Ln45-56; Col 18 Ln25-56; Col 14 Ln55-67; Col 19 Ln 51-65] teaches generating strings of pseudo random numbers)
Shefi in view of Figueira does not explicitly disclose: comprising one or more linear feedback shift registers (LFSRs).
However, in the same field of endeavor Clements discloses: comprising one or more linear feedback shift registers (LFSRs). (Clements [0021-0033] teaches that random number generators can comprise LFSR’s)
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify with Clements for similar reasons as cited in claim 7.
Regarding claim 15,
Shefi in view of Figueira discloses all the limitations of claim 14,
Shefi in view of Figueira discloses: The computer-implemented method of claim 14, further comprising scrambling at least one of the first set of key data elements or the second set of key data elements before use in an encryption and/or decryption process with an output of
Shefi in view of Figueira does not explicitly disclose: one or more second linear feedback shift registers (LFSRs).
However, in the same field of endeavor Clements discloses: one or more second linear feedback shift registers (LFSRs). (Clements [0021-0033] teaches that random number generators can comprise LFSR’s)
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify with Clements for similar reasons as cited in claim 7.
Regarding claim 16,
Shefi in view of Figueira discloses all the limitations of claim 15,
Shefi in view of Figueira discloses: The computer-implemented method of claim 15, further comprising utilizing another set of true random numbers to define one or more variables relating to an output of (Shefi [Col 4 Ln10-67; Col 5 Ln10-43; Col 12 Ln18-Col 14 Ln 44] teaches a different table of random numbers which is used to generate random numbers in the same manner as above: Alternatively, and preferably, in step nine, a second generated pseudorandom number is generated which is also identical at location 1 and location 2. This pseudorandom number may be generated with the pseudorandom number generator of step seven, or with a different pseudorandom number generator… The table of true random numbers for this step may the same table as for previous steps. Alternatively, and preferably, the table may be different… Alternatively and preferably, in step nine, a second generated pseudorandom number is generated which is also identical at location 1 and location 2. This pseudorandom number may be generated with the pseudorandom number generator of step seven, or with a different pseudorandom number generator)
Shefi does not explicitly disclose: another set of true random numbers being separate
However, in the same field of endeavor Figueira discloses: another set of true random numbers being separate (Figueira [0022-0024, 0068-0086] teaches an additional independent entropy source like another RNG is used to generate random sequences (separate primary RNG’s which generate true random numbers))
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify with Figueira for similar reasons as cited in claim 1.
Shefi in view of Figueira does not explicitly disclose: one or more the second linear feedback shift registers (LFSRs),
However, in the same field of endeavor Clements discloses: one or more the second linear feedback shift registers (LFSRs), (Clements [0021-0033] teaches that random number generators can comprise LFSR’s)
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify with Clements for similar reasons as cited in claim 7.
Claim 11 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Shefi (U.S. 6266413), in view of Figueira (U.S. 20170034167) and in further view of Lio (E.P. 3451158)
Regarding claim 11,
Shefi in view of Figueira discloses all the limitations of claim 1,
Lio additionally discloses: The computer-implemented method of claim 1, further comprising maintaining a substantially uniform distribution in the output of the at least one downstream random number generator. (Lio [0026-0032] teaches The LFSR module is configured to generate random numbers obeying a uniform distribution and further configured to generate real random numbers by detecting thermal noise of resistors)
Shefi in view of Figueira and Lio are analogous art because they are from the same field of endeavor random number generation.
Before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, having the teachings of Shefi in view of Figueira and Lio before him or her, to modify the method of Shefi in view of Figueira to include the generating random numbers obeying a uniform distribution of Lio because it will ensure the random numbers will be random.
The motivation for doing so would be [to generate real random numbers”] (Paragraph 0026-0032 by Lio)].
Therefore, it would have been obvious to combine Shefi in view of Figueira and Lio to obtain the invention as specified in the instant claim.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's
disclosure.
McCarthy 2017-08-11 (U.S. 20190182034) teaches Systems and methods with multiple different modes for bidirectional data transfer of messages encrypted with Random Cipher Pads (RCPs) are disclosed. A direct mode is from one single endpoint to another endpoint in a peer-to-peer fashion. A throughput mode may be configured as a communication between endpoints with a cryptographic data server (CDS) managing communications and additional encryption between the endpoints. The CDS further encrypts the messages such that there is a peer-to-peer encryption between the source endpoint and the CDS and a different peer-to-peer encryption between the CDS and destination endpoints. The throughput mode may also be configured as a broadcast communication between a sender and multiple destinations, each with its own different RCP encryption. A router-to-router mode may be thought of as a specific type of peer-to-peer transfer where the peers on each end are routers, servers, Virtual Private Network servers, and gateways rather than user endpoints.
Hammon 2018-06-18 (U.S. 20190058579) teaches Methods for a server include defining a starting element and an element step size. A pad mapping is applied to a data Random Cipher Pad (RCP) to obtain a Key RCP using each element of the Data RCP once in a predetermined non-sequential order. The starting element and the element step size are combined with the Data RCP. The Data RCP is encrypted using the Key RCP to produce a subsequent Data RCP. The subsequent Data RCP is transmitted to another computer. Methods for clients include applying a pad mapping to a Data RCP to obtain a Key RCP using each element of the Data RCP once in a predetermined non-sequential order to develop the Key RCP. The Key RCP is encrypted using the Data RCP to produce a subsequent Key RCP. A data structure is encrypted using the Data RCP to produce an encrypted data structure.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to THOMAS A CARNES whose telephone number is (571)272-4378. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday.
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.
THOMAS A. CARNES
Examiner
Art Unit 2436
/THOMAS A CARNES/Examiner, Art Unit 2436
Prosecution Insights