DETAILED ACTION
The instant application having Application No. 19/212542 filed on May 19, 2025 is presented for examination by the examiner.
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.
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 .
Internet Communications
Applicant is encouraged to submit a written authorization for Internet communications (PTO/SB/439, found at http:/www.uspto.gov/sites/default/files/documents/sb0439.pdf) in the instant patent application to authorize the examiner to communicate with the applicant via email. The authorization will allow the examiner to better practice compact prosecution. The written authorization can be submitted via one of the following methods only: (1) Central Fax, which can be found in the Conclusion section of this Office action; (2) regular postal mail; (3) EFS WEB; or (4) the service window on the Alexandria campus. EFS web is the recommended way to submit the form since this allows the form to be entered into the file wrapper within the same day (system dependent). Written authorization submitted via other methods, such as direct fax to the examiner or email, will not be accepted. See MPEP § 502.03.
Applicant is also encouraged to contact the Examiner for an Interview, should the Applicant determine that clarifying and further illustrating the distinguishing features of the instant application may further the prosecution.
Oath/Declaration
The applicant’s oath/declaration has been reviewed by the examiner and is found to conform to the requirements prescribed in 37 C.F.R. 1.63.
Information Disclosure Statement
As required by M.P.E.P. 609(C), the applicant’s submission of the Information Disclosure Statement is acknowledged by the examiner and the cited references have been considered in the examination of the claims now pending. As required by M.P.E.P. 609(C), a copy of the PTOL-1449 initialed and dated by the examiner is attached to the instant office action.
Drawings
The applicant’s drawings submitted are acceptable for examination purposes.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 103 which forms the basis for all obviousness rejections set forth in this Office action:
A patent may not be obtained though the invention is not identically disclosed or described as set forth in section 102 of this title, if the differences between the subject matter sought to be patented and the prior art are such that the subject matter as a whole would have been obvious at the time the invention was made to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which said subject matter pertains. Patentability shall not be negatived by the manner in which the invention was made.
Claims 1-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Carr (US 2024/0129120) in view of Khedr (US 2021/0075588).
As per claims 1, 9, and 17, Carr teaches a method comprising:
receiving a plaintext dataset (Carr, paragraphs 21, 87, and 173-175, teaches inputting a plaintext into a cipher algorithm to transform the plaintext into ciphertext.);
…
selecting coefficients of the polynomial (Carr, paragraph 117, teaches “selecting an at least one polynomial or quadratic equation having an at least one set of polynomial or quadratic coefficients”.);
projecting the plaintext dataset into a higher dimension plaintext space, using a first Riemannian metric (Carr, paragraphs 166-167, teaches “the manifold is processed into the projective Euclidean space. Finite element analysis and surface mesh generation algorithms transform the Ri geometric manifold Minto surface facets ... The polynomial is processed into the projective Euclidean space”. Carr, paragraphs 71-72, also recites “The manifold generator can generate a manifold of at least one of a sphere, a torus, a Klein bottle, a double torus, a cross surface, a Riemannian manifold”.);
encrypting the [data] with an encryption algorithm, generating an encrypted [data] (Carr, paragraphs 21, 75-78, 87, 97, 173-175, 188, 190, and 197, teaches encrypting data.) and
using the encrypted [data], as a second Riemannian metric of a ciphertext space, projecting the plaintext space into the ciphertext space (Carr, paragraphs 71-72, 75-78, 97, 166-167, 173, and 197, teaches transforming the plaintext into ciphertext.)
However, Carr fails to teach “selecting an order of a polynomial; … encrypting the polynomial with an encryption algorithm, generating an encrypted polynomial; and using the encrypted polynomial …”.
Khedr discloses selecting an order of a polynomial (Khedr, paragraphs 84-85, teaches selecting an order of a polynomial.); encrypting the polynomial with an encryption algorithm, generating an encrypted polynomial (Khedr, paragraphs 122-123, and 145, teaches encrypting a polynomial.); using the encrypted polynomial (Khedr, paragraphs 122-123, teaches comparing/using the encrypted polynomial.). Khedr further teaches projecting the plaintext space into the ciphertext space (Khedr, paragraphs 122-124, and 145, teaches encrypting a polynomial into a ciphertext.)
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing data to have modified the system of Carr by including selecting an order of a polynomial; encrypting the polynomial with an encryption algorithm, generating an encrypted polynomial; using the encrypted polynomial as taught by Khedr because the modification would help protect the system from outside attackers (Khedr, paragraph 122) and increase the performance and efficiency of the messaging system 100 (Khedr, paragraph 130).
Claim 9 recites the additional limitations of “A non-transitory computer storage that stores executable program instructions that, when executed by one or more computing devices, configure the one or more computing devices to perform operations comprising …” (Carr, paragraphs 30 and 120-121, teaches a medium to store computer instructions to be executed by a processor.)
Claim 17 recites the additional limitations of “A system comprising one or more processors, wherein the one or more processors are configured to perform operations comprising … ” (Carr, paragraphs 30 and 120-121, teaches a medium to store computer instructions to be executed by a processor.)
As per claims 2, 10, and 18, Carr teaches wherein the first Riemannian metric comprises a first product of a first radial basis function and the polynomial (Carr, paragraphs 71-72, 75-78, 97, 166-167, 173, 197), and wherein the second Riemannian metric comprises a second product of a second radial basis function and the encrypted [data] (Carr, paragraphs 71-72, 75-78, 97, 166-167, 173, 197). Khedr further teaches the encrypted polynomial (Khedr, paragraphs 122-123).
As per claims 3, 11, and 19, Carr teaches wherein the first and second radial basis functions are the same (Carr, paragraphs 71-72, 75-78, 97, 166-167, 173, 197).
As per claims 4, 12, and 20, Khedr teaches wherein the encryption algorithm comprises an algorithm resistant to quantum computing attacks (Khedr, paragraph 119).
As per claims 5 and 13, Carr teaches further comprising: generating one or more operators in the ciphertext space (Carr, paragraphs 173 and 167).
As per claims 6 and 14, Carr teaches wherein the plaintext dataset, comprises a numerical or a scaler dataset (Carr, paragraphs 21, 87, 167, and 173).
As per claims 7 and 15, Carr teaches wherein projecting the plaintext dataset into the plaintext space and projecting the plaintext space into the ciphertext space, preserve the relative order and magnitude of elements in the plaintext dataset in the plaintext space and the ciphertext space (Carr, paragraphs 71-72, 75-78, 97, 166-167, 173, 197).
As per claims 8, and 16, Khedr teaches wherein the encryption algorithm comprises a lattice based cryptography algorithm (Khedr, paragraph 145).
Related Prior Art
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure includes:
Hoshizuki (US 2024/0022395) – teaches performing homomorphic operations on fully homomorphic encryption data.
Miller (US 2025/0201349) – teaches using Riemannian geometry to perform Uniform Manifold Approximation and Projection for Dimension Reduction.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to JOHN B KING whose telephone number is (571)270-7310. The examiner can normally be reached on Monday-Friday 10AM-6PM EST.
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, Yin-Chen Shaw can be reached on 5712728878. 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 http://pair-direct.uspto.gov. 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.
/John B King/
Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2498
Prosecution Insights