Appeal No. 2003-1829
Application No. 08/994,878
Appellant argues (Brief, page 4) that Asay teaches storing
an encrypted copy of the user's key at the location of the user,
and, thus, Asay fails to teach the claim limitation of
"destroying, or avoiding making, any non-volatile record of the
private key at the location of the user." Appellant contends
that Asay "specifically teaches making, saving, and not
destroying at least one non-volatile record of the key." We
disagree.
Asay discloses (column 7, lines 46-50) a subscriber (or
user) "creating a standby application for certification of a new
key pair, digitally signing the standby application with a
private key and then destroying the private key" (emphasis ours).
Similarly, Asay states (column 30, lines 55-57) that the private
key is destroyed immediately after it is used to sign the standby
application. Thus, Asay explicitly teaches destroying the
private key at the user's terminal. Appellant argues (Brief,
page 5) that the passage in column 30 follows a statement that
the private key is stored in a safe place in the subscriber's
system, and therefore teaches away from the "claimed destruction
of any non-volatile record of the user's private key." However,
the claim recites an alternative of "destroying or avoiding
making" any non-volatile record of the private key. Although
4
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007