Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status
The present application is being examined under the pre-AIA first to invent provisions.
Drawings
The drawings are objected to as failing to comply with 37 CFR 1.84(p)(5) because they include the following reference character(s) not mentioned in the description: “74” (Fig. 3); “76” (Fig. 3); “78” (Fig. 3); “80” (Fig. 3); and “135” (Fig. 5). Further: The drawings are objected to as failing to comply with 37 CFR 1.84(p)(5) because they do not include the following reference sign(s) mentioned in the description: “70” (see [0088]) and “72” (see [0088]). Corrected drawing sheets in compliance with 37 CFR 1.121(d), or amendment to the specification to add the reference character(s) in the description in compliance with 37 CFR 1.121(b) are required in reply to the Office action to avoid abandonment of the application. Any amended replacement drawing sheet should include all of the figures appearing on the immediate prior version of the sheet, even if only one figure is being amended. Each drawing sheet submitted after the filing date of an application must be labeled in the top margin as either “Replacement Sheet” or “New Sheet” pursuant to 37 CFR 1.121(d). If the changes are not accepted by the examiner, the applicant will be notified and informed of any required corrective action in the next Office action. The objection to the drawings will not be held in abeyance.
Double Patenting
The nonstatutory double patenting rejection is based on a judicially created doctrine grounded in public policy (a policy reflected in the statute) so as to prevent the unjustified or improper timewise extension of the “right to exclude” granted by a patent and to prevent possible harassment by multiple assignees. A nonstatutory double patenting rejection is appropriate where the conflicting claims are not identical, but at least one examined application claim is not patentably distinct from the reference claim(s) because the examined application claim is either anticipated by, or would have been obvious over, the reference claim(s). See, e.g., In re Berg, 140 F.3d 1428, 46 USPQ2d 1226 (Fed. Cir. 1998); In re Goodman, 11 F.3d 1046, 29 USPQ2d 2010 (Fed. Cir. 1993); In re Longi, 759 F.2d 887, 225 USPQ 645 (Fed. Cir. 1985); In re Van Ornum, 686 F.2d 937, 214 USPQ 761 (CCPA 1982); In re Vogel, 422 F.2d 438, 164 USPQ 619 (CCPA 1970); In re Thorington, 418 F.2d 528, 163 USPQ 644 (CCPA 1969).
A timely filed terminal disclaimer in compliance with 37 CFR 1.321(c) or 1.321(d) may be used to overcome an actual or provisional rejection based on nonstatutory double patenting provided the reference application or patent either is shown to be commonly owned with the examined application, or claims an invention made as a result of activities undertaken within the scope of a joint research agreement. See MPEP § 717.02 for applications subject to examination under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA as explained in MPEP § 2159. See MPEP § 2146 et seq. for applications not subject to examination under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA . A terminal disclaimer must be signed in compliance with 37 CFR 1.321(b).
The filing of a terminal disclaimer by itself is not a complete reply to a nonstatutory double patenting (NSDP) rejection. A complete reply requires that the terminal disclaimer be accompanied by a reply requesting reconsideration of the prior Office action. Even where the NSDP rejection is provisional the reply must be complete. See MPEP § 804, subsection I.B.1. For a reply to a non-final Office action, see 37 CFR 1.111(a). For a reply to final Office action, see 37 CFR 1.113(c). A request for reconsideration while not provided for in 37 CFR 1.113(c) may be filed after final for consideration. See MPEP §§ 706.07(e) and 714.13.
The USPTO Internet website contains terminal disclaimer forms which may be used. Please visit www.uspto.gov/patent/patents-forms. The actual filing date of the application in which the form is filed determines what form (e.g., PTO/SB/25, PTO/SB/26, PTO/AIA /25, or PTO/AIA /26) should be used. A web-based eTerminal Disclaimer may be filled out completely online using web-screens. An eTerminal Disclaimer that meets all requirements is auto-processed and approved immediately upon submission. For more information about eTerminal Disclaimers, refer to www.uspto.gov/patents/apply/applying-online/eterminal-disclaimer.
Claim 1 is rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claim 1 of U.S. Patent Nos. US9268923B2 and US11870758B2. Although the claims at issue are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other because:
19/229,911 Claim:
1. A method for providing an application with access to a shared library on a user device, the method comprising:
US-9268923-B2 Claim:
1. A method for providing an application with access to a shared library on a user device, the method comprising:
receiving a request for access to a shared library on a user device;
receiving a request for access to a shared library on a user device;
verifying provisioning data stored on the user device containing an application identifier;
verifying provisioning data stored on the user device containing an application identifier;
verifying the shared library stored on the user device using a library manifest containing information that can be used to identify and verify the shared library;
verifying the shared library stored on the user device using a library manifest containing information that can be used to identify and verify the shared library, wherein the library manifest contains at least one hash value of the shared library, and wherein verifying the shared library comprises taking a hash value of the shared library and comparing the hash value against the at least one hash value contained in the manifest;
negotiating a session token key with the shared library using the user device; and
negotiating a session token key with the shared library using the user device; and
providing a session token encrypted with the session token key to the application using the user device, wherein the session token key grants access to the shared library.
providing a session token encrypted with the session token key to the application using the user device, wherein the session token key grants access to the shared library.
and:
19/229,911 Claim:
1. A method for providing an application with access to a shared library on a user device, the method comprising:
US-11870758-B2 Claim:
1. A method for granting access to a software library on a user device, the method comprising:
Examiner note: When a library is granted access to, the library is a shared library.
receiving a request for access to a shared library on a user device;
receiving a request for access to a software library on a user device;
verifying provisioning data stored on the user device containing an application identifier;
verifying provisioning data stored on the user device, the provisioning data containing an application identifier;
verifying the shared library stored on the user device using a library manifest containing information that can be used to identify and verify the shared library;
verifying the software library stored on the user device using a library manifest containing information that can be used to identify and verify the software library, wherein the library manifest contains at least one hash value of at least one file of the software library, and wherein verifying the software library comprises taking a hash value of the at least one file of the shared library and comparing the hash value against the at least one hash value contained in the library manifest;
negotiating a session token key with the shared library using the user device; and
negotiating a session token key with the software library using the user device; and
providing a session token encrypted with the session token key to the application using the user device, wherein the session token key grants access to the shared library.
providing a session token encrypted with the session token key to the application using the user device, wherein the session token key grants access to the software library.
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.
Claim 1 is 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. Particularly:
Claim 1 introduces “a shared library” in line 1, as well as introduces “a shared library” in line 3. Subsequently, claim 1 recites “the shared library” in line 7. There is unclear antecedent basis as to which of the first or second introduced shared library is being referred to by “the shared library”.
Claim 1 introduces “a user device” in line 1, as well as introduces “a user device” in line 3. Subsequently, claim 1 recites “the user device” in line 7. There is unclear antecedent basis as to which of the first or second introduced user device is being referred to by “the user device”.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
The following is a quotation of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 103(a) which forms the basis for all obviousness rejections set forth in this Office action:
(a) A patent may not be obtained though the invention is not identically disclosed or described as set forth in section 102, 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 negated by the manner in which the invention was made.
Claim 1 is rejected under pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 103(a) as being unpatentable over Sherkin et al. (US20090222903A1; Hereinafter “Sherkin”) in view of Karabulut et al. (US20100088236A1; Hereinafter “Karabulut”).
Regarding claim 1, Sherkin teaches a method for providing an application with access to a shared library on a user device ([0087-088] and [0050] – application executes in a runtime environment on a wireless device <i.e., user device> and is granted permission to access a shared resource. The shared resource may be, e.g., a library deployed to a wireless device), the method comprising:
receiving a request for access to a shared library on a user device ([0087-088] and [0050] – an application owner requests access to the shared resource. The shared resource may be, e.g., the library deployed in the wireless device runtime <i.e., shared library on the user device>);
verifying provisioning data stored on the user device containing an application identifier ([0105-108], [0088], and [0119] – an access control/application ticket <i.e., provisioning data> is transported to the runtime environment within the application <i.e., stored on the user device>. The application ticket includes a heading with an application identifier/identifier field. The application may be identified by, e.g., a URI or hash value of the application; [0099] and [0114-117] – the access control ticket further comprises a digital signature used to verify authenticity of the ticket. The ticket is verified <i.e., verifying the provisioning data>);
verifying the shared library stored on the user device using a library manifest containing information that can be used to identify and verify the shared library ([0089-090], [0110-111], and [0125] – shared resource information <i.e., library manifest>, e.g., CVOID and permissions, includes an object identifier and cryptographically verifiable identifier. The shared resource identifier may comprise a URI or hash value of the shared resource <i.e., information that can be used to identify and verify the shared library>; [0088], [0099], and [0125] – the library <i.e., shared library> is deployed in the device’s runtime environments <i.e., stored on the user device>. The identity of the shared resource is verified using the shared resource information <i.e., verifying the library>).
Yet, Sherkin appears to fail to specifically disclose negotiating a session token key with the shared library using the user device; and providing a session token encrypted with the session token key to the application using the user device, wherein the session token key grants access to the shared library.
However, Karabulut teaches a similar system for securely using software resources (see, e.g., abstract, [0040-042]), comprising negotiating a session token key with the shared |service provider software component| using the user device ([0018-019], [0050-051], and [0143-149] – service consumer “SC” sends the service provider “SP”’s backend systems “BP” a request containing an SC-BS session key SecKSC-BS <i.e., session token key> and authentication information protected using the SecKSC-BS. The BS extracts and uses SecKSC-BS to authenticate the SC. BS returns information encrypted with SecKSC-BS to confirm its identity/willingness to serve SC. SC decrypts and verifies the confirmation using SecKSC-BS before proceeding with the session <i.e., negotiating session token key with the service-provider software component>); and
providing a session token encrypted with the session token key to the application using the user device, wherein the session token key grants access to the shared |service provider software component| ([0051] and [0143-149] – BS generates a capability token CTBS-SC <i.e., session token>, encrypts CTBS-SC using SecKSC-BS <i.e., session token key>, and sends the encrypted CTBS-SC to SC. SC decrypts the CTBS-SC using SecKSC-BS <i.e., session token key> and uses the CTBS-SC in subsequent requests. BS receives the requests/decrypts them/verifies them and then executes the requested service(s) <i.e., session token key grants access to the protected software functionality>).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Sherkin with the teachings of Karabulut, comprising negotiating a session token key with the shared library using the user device; and providing a session token encrypted with the session token key to the application using the user device, wherein the session token key grants access to the shared library, to provide session-specific cryptographic authentication and integrity for shared-library access (see, e.g., Sherkin at [0087-088]; with Karabulut at [0046] and [0143-149]).
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. Yamaguchi et al. (US20040139341) teaches a program using/authenticating a shared library, wherein the shared library directly executes a key exchange to establish a common key (see, e.g., Yamaguchi at abstract, [0081], and [0090-093]). Parthasarathy et al. (EP1399808B1) teaches an application-runtime verification of shared DLL/assembly components using an assembly manifest containing ID information/hashes, wherein manifest hashes are compared with module hashes to verify integrity (see, e.g., Parthasarathy at abstract, [0011-014], and [0044]).
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to JOSHUA RAYMOND WHITE whose telephone number is (571)272-4365. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Thursday, & Alternate Fridays.
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, Taghi Arani can be reached at 5712723787. 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.
/J.R.W./Examiner, Art Unit 2438 /TAGHI T ARANI/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2438
Prosecution Insights