Appeal No. 1997-3178
Application 08/464,069
claim 25 nor claim 32 recites doing anything with the
recovered secret digital information, such as actually
sending it to the user; however, the LA in Kaufman encrypts
{U} with key K and send it to the user who can recover U.
H1
The method of claim 32 is anticipated for the same reasons
as claim 25. The "name" N in Kaufman is one of the
enumerated pieces of identifying information recited in
claims 29 and 36. The anticipation rejection of claims 25,
29, 32, and 36 over Kaufman is sustained.
Appellant argues (Br18): "In general, there is no
recognition in Kaufman that a legitimate user may have
forgotten his password. Nor is there any provision in
Kaufman to permit a legitimate user to obtain that password
from a trustee." However, claims 25 and 32 are not limited
to the lost password problem. The "secret digital
information" can be the encrypted quantity {U} , the
H1
encrypted private key U, in Kaufman. The "secret encrypted
digital information" is {{U} , H2}H1 LA-PUB. Thus, the argument
is not persuasive.
Appellant argues (Br18): "Kaufman fails to disclose a
trustee. Nor does Kaufman disclose a trustee that uses the
- 18 -
Page: Previous 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007