US 12207094

US patent 12207094, titled "Embedded universal integrated circuit card supporting two-factor authentication," was filed on January 18, 2024, and issued on January 21, 2025. The original assignee was Network 1 Technologies Inc, with the current assignee listed as M2M and IoT Technologies LLC, and Network-1 Technologies, Inc. (with several reassignments noted). The inventor is John A. Nix.

The abstract of US12207094B2 describes methods and systems for an embedded universal integrated circuit card (eUICC) that supports two-factor authentication. The system allows an eUICC subscription manager to send an encrypted profile to a module. This profile includes a first network module identity and a first key K. The eUICC decrypts the profile, enabling the module to perform an initial authentication with a mobile network operator (MNO) using the first key K. After this first authentication, the MNO conducts a second factor authentication with a user or service provider associated with the module. Upon successful completion of the second factor authentication, the MNO sends a symmetric key to the module, which is used by the eUICC to decrypt a second portion of the profile containing a second network module identity and a second key K. The module then disconnects and reconnects to the wireless network using this second, more securely obtained key, enhancing overall security. The patent also describes an alternative where the second key K is derived using a key derivation algorithm without electronic transfer, further increasing security.

A plain-language overview of the independent claims is as follows:

Independent Claim 1: This claim describes a method for a module with an eUICC to authenticate with a wireless network using two factors. It involves the module receiving an encrypted eUICC profile and decrypting a first part of it using an eUICC profile key to get initial network credentials (first network module identity and first key K). The module then uses these credentials for a first authentication with the wireless network. After this, a second authentication occurs involving a user or service provider, performed by the mobile network operator (MNO). Once this second authentication is successful, the MNO sends a symmetric key to the module. The module uses this symmetric key to decrypt a second part of the profile, revealing new, more secure network credentials (second network module identity and second key K). Finally, the module disconnects from the network and re-authenticates using these new second credentials.

Independent Claim 10: This claim describes a module configured to perform the method of claim 1. It specifies that the module includes an eUICC, a processing unit, a memory, a physical interface (like a radio or Ethernet port), and an operating system. The module is set up to receive and decrypt an encrypted eUICC profile, perform the two-factor authentication steps, and then use the more securely obtained second key K for subsequent network connections, as detailed in claim 1.

Independent Claim 14: This claim outlines a method for a mobile network operator (MNO) to manage authentication for a module with an eUICC. The MNO first provides an encrypted eUICC profile that includes initial network credentials (first network module identity and first key K) to a subscription manager. The MNO then authenticates the module based on the first key K. After this, the MNO performs a second factor authentication to verify a user or M2M service provider associated with the module. If this second authentication is successful, the MNO sends a symmetric key to the module. This symmetric key allows the eUICC to access a second, more secure key (second key K) from the profile. The MNO then expects and performs subsequent authentications of the module using this second key K.

Independent Claim 15: This claim describes a mobile network operator (MNO) system configured to perform the method of claim 14. The system includes a server, a processing unit, and a memory. It is equipped to provide the encrypted eUICC profile, perform the initial and second-factor authentications, and then facilitate the module's use of the more secure second key K for ongoing network access.

Regarding CAFC 2026 dockets, a search of publicly available information for May 2026 did not specifically list patent number 12207094 in any scheduled cases. However, the Google Patents information for US12207094B2 notes that "Family has litigation" and specifies a "PTAB case IPR2026-00118 filed (Pending)". It also indicates a "US case filed in Texas Eastern District Court" for case 2:25-cv-00667. The status for these is "Pending" and there is a "First worldwide family litigation filed". Therefore, while no specific CAFC 2026 docket appears immediately in the search results, there is ongoing litigation related to this patent, including a PTAB IPR case and a district court case. There is no authoritative information directly linking patent 12207094 to a specific CAFC 2026 docket at this time through the performed search.## US12207094B2: Embedded Universal Integrated Circuit Card Supporting Two-Factor Authentication

Title: Embedded universal integrated circuit card supporting two-factor authentication

Assignee: The original assignee for US12207094B2 was Network 1 Technologies Inc. Current assignees are listed as M2M and IoT Technologies LLC and Network-1 Technologies, Inc., following several reassignments.

Inventors: John A. Nix

Filing Date: January 18, 2024

Issue Date: January 21, 2025

Abstract:
The patent describes methods and systems for an embedded universal integrated circuit card (eUICC) that supports two-factor authentication. An encrypted profile containing a first network module identity and a first key K is sent from an eUICC subscription manager to a module. The eUICC decrypts this initial portion, allowing the module to perform a first authentication with a mobile network operator (MNO) using the first key K. Following this, the MNO conducts a second-factor authentication with an associated user or M2M service provider. Upon successful completion of the second authentication, the MNO provides a symmetric key to the module. This key enables the eUICC to decrypt a second portion of the profile, revealing a more secure second network module identity and a second key K. The module then disconnects and re-authenticates with the wireless network using these enhanced credentials. An alternative embodiment allows for the derivation of the second key K using a key derivation algorithm without direct electronic transfer, further bolstering security.

Plain-Language Overview of Independent Claims:

Independent Claim 1: Method for Module Authentication
This claim details a two-factor authentication process for a device (module) equipped with an embedded Universal Integrated Circuit Card (eUICC).

1. Initial Profile Reception and Decryption: The module receives an encrypted eUICC profile. The eUICC inside the module uses a pre-stored "eUICC profile key" to decrypt a first part of this profile. This decrypted part contains basic network access information: a "first network module identity" and a "first key K."
2. First Authentication: The module uses this "first network module identity" and "first key K" to perform an initial authentication with a wireless network operated by a mobile network operator (MNO).
3. Second Factor Authentication: After the initial authentication, the MNO conducts a separate, "second factor" authentication. This step verifies the identity of a user or a machine-to-machine (M2M) service provider linked to the module. This second authentication often occurs outside the direct eUICC process, potentially through a web interface, phone call, or external data exchange.
4. Symmetric Key Delivery and Second Profile Decryption: If the second factor authentication is successful, the MNO sends a "symmetric key" to the module. The eUICC then uses this symmetric key, along with a "symmetric ciphering algorithm," to decrypt a previously inaccessible second part of the received profile. This second decrypted part contains more secure network access information: a "second network module identity" and a "second key K."
5. Re-authentication with Enhanced Security: Finally, the module disconnects from the wireless network and then reconnects and performs a second authentication using the newly obtained "second network module identity" and "second key K." This ensures that the module uses a key securely released only after a complete two-factor authentication.

Independent Claim 10: Module for Two-Factor Authentication
This claim describes the physical device (module) itself, designed to carry out the method outlined in Claim 1. It specifies that the module includes:

• An eUICC: The embedded universal integrated circuit card.
• A processing unit (e.g., CPU).
• A memory (e.g., RAM, nonvolatile memory) for storing data and instructions.
• A physical interface (e.g., a radio for wireless communication or an Ethernet port for wired).
• An operating system.
  The module is specifically configured through its hardware and software to perform all the steps described in Claim 1, including receiving and decrypting the eUICC profiles, executing both phases of authentication, receiving the symmetric key, and re-authenticating with the more secure second key.

Independent Claim 14: Mobile Network Operator Method for Authentication
This claim focuses on the process from the perspective of the Mobile Network Operator (MNO) in enabling the two-factor authentication for a module with an eUICC.

1. Profile Provisioning: The MNO provides an encrypted eUICC profile, containing the "first network module identity" and "first key K," to an eUICC subscription manager. This profile also includes an encrypted "second network module identity" and "second key K."
2. First Module Authentication: The MNO authenticates the module based on the "first network module identity" and "first key K" supplied by the module's eUICC. This is the initial, less secure authentication step.
3. Second Factor Authentication of User/Provider: The MNO then performs a "second factor" authentication to verify the identity of a user or an M2M service provider associated with that specific module. This is a crucial step for enhanced security, as the MNO verifies the entity controlling the module.
4. Symmetric Key Release: Upon successful completion of this second-factor authentication, the MNO sends the "symmetric key" to the module. This key is necessary for the module's eUICC to decrypt the second, more secure part of the profile.
5. Second Module Authentication Expectation: The MNO subsequently expects and performs future authentications of the module using the "second network module identity" and the "second key K," which were made accessible to the module only after the complete two-factor authentication.

Independent Claim 15: Mobile Network Operator System for Authentication
This claim describes the MNO's system designed to implement the method outlined in Claim 14. The system comprises:

• A server.
• A processing unit.
• A memory.
  This MNO system is specifically configured to perform all the steps detailed in Claim 14, including providing the eUICC profiles, conducting both the module's initial authentication and the user/service provider's second-factor authentication, releasing the symmetric key, and managing subsequent authentications using the more secure second key.

Litigation Notes:

US Patent 12207094B2 is currently active and is involved in litigation. Google Patents indicates that a PTAB case, IPR2026-00118, has been filed and is pending. Additionally, a US case has been filed in the Texas Eastern District Court (case 2:25-cv-00667), and the patent family also has a first worldwide family litigation filed. As of April 26, 2026, a targeted search of CAFC 2026 dockets did not reveal any scheduled cases specifically listing patent number 12207094.

The Google Patents page for US12207094 states that there are litigation activities. Specifically, it mentions:

• "US case filed in Texas Eastern District Court litigation"
• "PTAB case IPR2026-00118 filed (Pending) litigation Critical"
• "First worldwide family litigation filed litigation"

Let's break down the information available for each:

1. US case filed in Texas Eastern District Court

• Jurisdiction: Texas Eastern District Court
• Case number: 2:25-cv-00667
• Source: District Court
• Current Status: Litigation (implied as active since it is listed under "Family has litigation")
  • Note: The filing date is not explicitly mentioned in the snippet for this case, but it indicates "2025" in the case number, suggesting a filing year.

2. PTAB case IPR2026-00118

• Case number: IPR2026-00118
• Current Status: Pending
• Filing date: The case number indicates 2026, so it was filed in 2026. (The specific date is not in the snippet).
• Petitioner: Not explicitly named in the snippet, but it links to "Unified Patents PTAB Data" which licenses the data.
• Jurisdiction: PTAB (Patent Trial and Appeal Board)

3. First worldwide family litigation filed

• This refers to litigation for the patent family, but doesn't provide specific case details like plaintiff, defendant, jurisdiction, case number, or filing date directly in the snippet. It links to "Darts-ip" for more details. Without clicking on the link, I cannot extract further details.

Based on the provided search results, here is the known litigation:

Known litigation involving US patent 12207094 includes:

1. United States District Court, Eastern District of Texas

   • Jurisdiction: Texas Eastern District Court
   • Case Number: 2:25-cv-00667
   • Plaintiff(s): Not explicitly stated in the provided snippet.
   • Defendant(s): Not explicitly stated in the provided snippet.
   • Filing Date: The case number suggests a filing year of 2025.
   • Outcome/Current Status: Litigation (Active).

2. Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB)

   • Jurisdiction: PTAB
   • Case Number: IPR2026-00118
   • Plaintiff(s)/Petitioner: Not explicitly stated in the provided snippet, but it links to "Unified Patents PTAB Data".
   • Defendant(s)/Patent Owner: Not explicitly stated in the provided snippet.
   • Filing Date: 2026 (implied by case number IPR2026-00118).
   • Outcome/Current Status: Pending.

There is also mention of "First worldwide family litigation filed", but specific details such as plaintiff(s), defendant(s), jurisdiction, case number, and filing date are not provided in the search result snippets without further interaction with the linked resource.Known litigation involving US patent 12207094 includes:

1. United States District Court, Eastern District of Texas

   • Jurisdiction: Texas Eastern District Court
   • Case Number: 2:25-cv-00667
   • Plaintiff(s): Not explicitly provided in the available information.
   • Defendant(s): Not explicitly provided in the available information.
   • Filing Date: The case number indicates a filing year of 2025.
   • Outcome/Current Status: The case is noted as "litigation" and is likely active.

2. Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB)

   • Jurisdiction: PTAB
   • Case Number: IPR2026-00118
   • Plaintiff(s)/Petitioner: Not explicitly provided in the available information, but the source is "Unified Patents PTAB Data".
   • Defendant(s)/Patent Owner: Not explicitly provided in the available information.
   • Filing Date: 2026 (as indicated by the case number IPR2026-00118).
   • Outcome/Current Status: Pending.

Additionally, Google Patents notes "First worldwide family litigation filed", but specific details for this case (plaintiff, defendant, jurisdiction, case number, and filing date) are not provided in the snippets.

Proceedings overview

The USPTO Open Data Portal indicates one AIA trial proceeding has been filed against US patent 12207094: IPR2026-00118. This proceeding has a status of "Institution Denied," meaning the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB) declined to initiate an inter partes review trial. This outcome strengthens the patent owner's defensive posture as the challenged claims remain intact, effectively having survived a PTAB challenge at the institution stage.

IPR2026-00118 — [[[Samsung Electronics Co.](/litigations/by-defendant/Samsung%20Electronics%20Co.), Ltd.](/litigations/by-plaintiff/Samsung%20Electronics%20Co.%2C%20Ltd.) et al.](/litigations/by-plaintiff/Samsung%20Electronics%20Co.%2C%20Ltd.%20et%20al.) v. Network-1 Technologies, Inc.

• Type: Inter Partes Review
• Filed: 2025-11-26
• Status: Institution Denied. The PTAB decided not to institute a trial on this IPR petition.
• Judge panel: John A. Squires, Under Secretary of Commerce for Intellectual Property and Director of the United States Patent and Trademark Office.
• Petition grounds: The specific claims challenged and the prior art relied upon in the petition are not explicitly detailed in the publicly available summary data. However, IPR petitions typically challenge claims under 35 U.S.C. §§ 102 (novelty) and/or 103 (obviousness). The PTAB's general data indicates these are the most common issue types in trials.
• Institution decision: Denied on 2026-05-06. The institution was denied "after review of discretionary and non-merits considerations," suggesting the Board exercised its discretion not to institute a trial, rather than making a determination on the merits of patentability.
• Final Written Decision (if issued): Not applicable, as institution of the trial was denied.
• Settlement / termination: Not applicable, as institution of the trial was denied.
• Appeal: Not applicable, as institution of the trial was denied. Decisions on institution are generally non-appealable.
• Defensive value: The denial of institution for IPR2026-00118 means that the claims of US12207094 challenged in Samsung's petition remain valid and untested by the PTAB on those specific grounds. This strengthens the patent against future assertions, particularly if those assertions rely on the same or substantially similar prior art and arguments.

Strategic summary

As of today, US patent 12207094 has undergone one AIA trial proceeding, IPR2026-00118, which concluded with an "Institution Denied" status. Consequently, all claims challenged in that petition are effectively sustained against the specific invalidity grounds presented by Samsung and remain untainted by an adverse PTAB ruling. Since institution was denied on discretionary grounds, the PTAB did not make a determination on the merits of patentability, meaning the claims were not actually found patentable by the Board, but rather that the trial was not initiated.

Regarding the estoppel landscape, 35 U.S.C. § 315(e)(2) estoppel, which bars petitioners and their privies from raising grounds raised or reasonably could have been raised in a final written decision, does not apply here because no final written decision was issued. However, the petitioner, Samsung Electronics Co., Ltd. et al., is likely barred from filing another IPR petition on the same claims or grounds against this patent due to the "same or substantially the same prior art or arguments" rule under 35 U.S.C. § 315(e)(1). Future defendants not in privy with Samsung could potentially challenge the patent on the same or other prior art grounds.

The sole proceeding to date indicates the patent owner, Network-1 Technologies, Inc., successfully defended against the IPR at the earliest stage. The denial on discretionary grounds aligns with recent policy shifts by USPTO Director John A. Squires, who has introduced additional discretionary considerations for instituting IPRs. This suggests the patent owner may have presented arguments related to these discretionary factors, leading to the favorable outcome.

Recommended next steps

For a defendant facing assertion of US patent 12207094, it is important to understand that the patent's claims have not been invalidated by the PTAB. The denial of institution in IPR2026-00118 means the patent owner prevailed at the preliminary stage, making an IPR-based defense harder if relying on the same grounds.

Since the institution was denied, there are no ongoing trial-stage milestones for this particular IPR. The Decision on Institution for IPR2026-00118 was issued on 2026-05-06.

The absence of any granted IPRs or invalidated claims means that an alleged infringer would need to develop new invalidity arguments, or consider filing an IPR with different grounds and prior art if they are not in privy with Samsung. Any new IPR petition would also need to address the PTAB's discretionary denial standards, which have become a significant hurdle for petitioners.

Inventors

• John A. Nix (Likely self-employed or independent inventor, given subsequent assignment patterns and involvement with patent monetization entities).

Original assignee

The original assignee on the issued patent US12207094B2 is Network 1 Technologies Inc. [cite: The full patent text indicates "Original Assignee: Network 1 Technologies Inc"]. Network-1 Technologies, Inc. is focused on the development, licensing, and protection of intellectual property assets, working with individual inventors and corporate/academic patent owners to develop and monetize their IP. They aim to generate licensing revenues from their patent portfolios, such as their Remote Power Patent and Content Monetization Portfolio. Network-1 Technologies, Inc. is currently an operating company.

Assignment timeline

• 2024-02-13 (executed) / recorded 2024-02-13 — Reel 056463/0187

  • Conveyance: Assignment of Assignors Interest
  • Assignor: NIX, JOHN
  • Assignee: M2M AND IOT TECHNOLOGIES, LLC
  • Correspondent: BRENT E. ROUSE, 3179 PEACHTREE RD NE, SUITE 245, ATLANTA, GA 30305
  • Context: Transfer from individual inventor to an LLC.

• 2024-02-21 (executed) / recorded 2024-02-21 — Reel 056488/0951

  • Conveyance: Assignment of Assignors Interest
  • Assignor: VOBAL TECHNOLOGIES, LLC
  • Assignee: NIX, JOHN A.
  • Correspondent: BRENT E. ROUSE, 3179 PEACHTREE RD NE, SUITE 245, ATLANTA, GA 30305. This correspondent recurs in this chain.
  • Context: Transfer from Vobal Technologies, LLC back to the individual inventor.

• 2024-03-08 (executed) / recorded 2024-03-08 — Reel 056550/0616

  • Conveyance: Assignment of Assignors Interest
  • Assignor: M2M AND IOT TECHNOLOGIES, LLC
  • Assignee: NETWORK-1 TECHNOLOGIES, INC.
  • Correspondent: BRENT E. ROUSE, 3179 PEACHTREE RD NE, SUITE 245, ATLANTA, GA 30305. This correspondent recurs in this chain.
  • Context: Transfer from M2M AND IOT TECHNOLOGIES, LLC to Network-1 Technologies, Inc.

• 2025-09-10 (executed) / recorded 2025-09-10 — Reel 057912/0339

  • Conveyance: Change of Address
  • Assignor: NETWORK-1 TECHNOLOGIES, INC.
  • Assignee: NETWORK-1 TECHNOLOGIES, INC.
  • Correspondent: Network-1 Technologies, Inc., 1114 Avenue of the Americas, 20th Floor, New York, NY 10036
  • Context: Internal administrative change of address for the assignee.

Timeline diagram

timeline
    title Ownership of US 12207094
    2024 : Inventor to M2M & IoT Technologies
         : Vobal Tech to Inventor
         : M2M & IoT to Network-1
    2025 : Issued
         : Network-1 Change of Address

NPE / troll-pattern signals

1. Shell-entity transfer — present. M2M AND IOT TECHNOLOGIES, LLC (assignee in reel 056463/0187) is described as developing cybersecurity software for secure network devices and M2M/IoT technologies, and has a focus on patent pending technology. While they develop software, their business model as described by PitchBook and their own website strongly emphasizes patented and patent pending technology and intellectual property, rather than shipping physical products in commerce. The fact that John Nix, an inventor with a history of monetizing patent portfolios, founded M2M and IoT Technologies further supports its role as an IP-focused entity.

2. Known asserter in the chain — unclear. While Network-1 Technologies, Inc. (the current assignee) is a known patent licensing entity, neither M2M AND IOT TECHNOLOGIES, LLC nor VOBAL TECHNOLOGIES, LLC appear on the readily available Unified Patents or RPX NPE lists.

3. Repeat correspondent across the chain — present. Brent E. Rouse of 3179 PEACHTREE RD NE, SUITE 245, ATLANTA, GA 30305 appears as the correspondent for multiple assignments: NIX, JOHN to M2M AND IOT TECHNOLOGIES, LLC (reel 056463/0187) and M2M AND IOT TECHNOLOGIES, LLC to NETWORK-1 TECHNOLOGIES, INC. (reel 056550/0616).

4. Cascading transfers — present. There are three assignments occurring in quick succession within a two-month period in 2024: 2024-02-13 (NIX, JOHN to M2M AND IOT TECHNOLOGIES, LLC), 2024-02-21 (VOBAL TECHNOLOGIES, LLC to NIX, JOHN A.), and 2024-03-08 (M2M AND IOT TECHNOLOGIES, LLC to NETWORK-1 TECHNOLOGIES, INC.). These transfers involve the individual inventor and two LLCs, sharing the same correspondent. (Reels 056463/0187, 056488/0951, 056550/0616).

5. Pre-litigation transfer — unclear. There is currently a PTAB case IPR2026-00118 filed (Pending) and a US case filed in Texas Eastern District Court (2:25-cv-00667) [cite: The full patent text indicates "Family has litigation"]. The assignments in early 2024 precede the earliest identified litigation (a district court case filed in 2025) by more than six months, so it does not strictly meet the pre-litigation transfer criteria of within 6 months.

6. Bankruptcy fire-sale — not present. No indication of bankruptcy for any entity in the chain.

7. Privateering — unclear. While the chain involves transfers to an IP-focused entity and then to a known patent licensor, there's no public information explicitly stating that Network-1 Technologies, Inc. is asserting this patent on behalf of another operating company.

8. Defensive aggregator (anti-NPE) — not present. The chain ends with Network-1 Technologies, Inc., which is a patent monetizer, not a defensive aggregator.

Verdict

NPE — high confidence

This verdict is supported by the presence of multiple strong signals. The patent was transferred from the individual inventor to M2M AND IOT TECHNOLOGIES, LLC, which appears to be a shell entity focused on patenting and monetization rather than product sales [cite: 4, 11, reel 056463/0187]. Subsequently, it was acquired by Network-1 Technologies, Inc., a publicly known patent licensing company [cite: 8, 14, reel 056550/0616]. The rapid cascading transfers between the inventor and the two LLCs within a two-month period, handled by the same correspondent, further strengthen the confidence in this assessment [cite: reel 056463/0187, 056488/0951, 056550/0616].

USPTO Assignment Center: https://assignmentcenter.uspto.gov/patent/index.html

To identify the most relevant prior art for US patent 12207094, I need to access the USPTO database and review the citations listed on the patent. Since I cannot directly interact with a live USPTO search portal, I will rely on the information provided in the Google Patents listing for US12207094B2, as it typically includes cited prior art.

However, the provided patent text does not include a "Prior Art Citations" section or equivalent. It only lists "Prior art keywords" and "Prior art date" (2013-12-06) on the Google Patents page, which are not specific patent citations.

Therefore, without direct access to the USPTO database or a "Prior Art Citations" section in the provided patent text, I cannot fulfill the request to identify specific prior art citations, their publication/filing dates, brief descriptions, and which claims they potentially anticipate under 35 U.S.C. § 102.

Obviousness Analysis under 35 U.S.C. § 103 for US12207094

This analysis considers the obviousness of US patent 12207094 under 35 U.S.C. § 103, based on the prior art explicitly mentioned or incorporated by reference within the patent text itself and publicly available by the patent's priority date of December 6, 2013.

1. Legal Standard

Under 35 U.S.C. § 103, a patent claim is considered obvious "if the differences between the claimed invention 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." The Supreme Court in KSR International Co. v. Teleflex Inc. emphasized that obviousness can arise from various rationales, including: (1) combining prior art elements according to known methods to yield predictable results; (2) applying a known technique to a new device or application, where the technique is known to improve similar devices in similar ways; (3) substituting an obvious equivalent for one element of the prior art; and (4) if there was a known problem, and the prior art contained a known solution that was obvious to apply to that problem.

2. Person Having Ordinary Skill in the Art (POSA)

A person having ordinary skill in the art relevant to US12207094 would possess expertise in telecommunications, mobile network architectures (especially 3GPP and ETSI standards), embedded systems, cryptography, and network security, particularly concerning SIM/UICC and eUICC technologies and machine-to-machine (M2M) communications.

3. Summary of Independent Claims

The independent claims of US12207094 (Claims 1, 10, 14, and 15) describe a two-factor authentication process for a module with an eUICC. This involves:

• An initial reception and partial decryption of an encrypted eUICC profile by the module, yielding a "first network module identity" and a "first key K" for initial authentication with a wireless network.
• A subsequent "second factor authentication" performed by the Mobile Network Operator (MNO) with a user or M2M service provider associated with the module.
• Upon successful second-factor authentication, the MNO sends a "symmetric key" to the module, which the eUICC uses to decrypt a second part of the profile, revealing a "second network module identity" and a "second key K".
• The module then re-authenticates with the wireless network using these more securely provisioned second credentials.
• An alternative embodiment (Claim 1, part d, and implied in Claim 14, part e) involves deriving the "second key K" using a key derivation algorithm rather than direct transmission.

4. Identified Prior Art References

The patent itself identifies or incorporates by reference several pieces of prior art and describes the existing challenges:

• ETSI TS 103 383 v12.1, "Smart Cards; Embedded UICC; Requirements Specification": This document, published in August 2013, specifies requirements for eUICCs and their subscription management. The patent explicitly references it for exemplary eUICC subscription managers and eUICC requirements. It would teach the concept of an eUICC, eUICC profiles, eUICC subscription managers, and the electronic transfer and recording of profiles on a module.
• U.S. patent application Ser. No. 14/084,141, filed November 19, 2013, in the name of John Nix: This earlier patent application by the same inventor is incorporated by reference in its entirety. It describes foundational aspects of the module/MNO system, including the server 105 functionality and likely the general eUICC architecture, profile loading, and initial authentication procedures.
• 3GPP TS 33.401 V12.9.0, "LTE; Security Architecture": This standard, published in December 2013, details standard authentication procedures (e.g., RAND/RES calculation with key K) for LTE networks, which the eUICC is intended to support for backward compatibility.
• ETSI TR 102 216 and ETSI TS 102 221 V11.0.0: These documents describe physical UICCs, which the eUICC is designed to emulate, including the use of a pre-shared secret key K. ETSI TS 102 221 V11.0.0 was published in October 2013.
• General knowledge of two-factor authentication (2FA): By 2013, 2FA was a widely known and applied security principle for verifying user identity for access to sensitive systems or operations.
• General knowledge of cryptographic techniques: This includes layered encryption, symmetric key distribution, public key infrastructure (PKI), and key derivation functions (KDFs) for establishing shared secrets without direct transmission.

5. Problem Solved and Motivation to Combine

The patent explicitly identifies several problems with the existing eUICC and key management paradigm:

• "Many open and remaining challenges for a eUICC pertain to securely and electronically transferring a new set of MNO network access credentials (such as an IMSI and network key K) to a module in a secure and efficient manner."
• The security of an electronically transferred "key K" is dependent on the channel used for its transfer, which "may be outside the control of the MNO." This leads to a "need exists in the art for the MNO to securely and efficiently control the use of an electronically transferred key K within a profile for an eUICC, even though copying and distributing the profile may be outside the control of the MNO."
• There is a desire for "key K to periodically rotate or change for an individual module or mobile phone in order to increase security," which is difficult with physical UICCs and poses risks with long-lived electronically transferred keys.

These problems clearly motivate a POSA to find solutions that enhance the MNO's control and the overall security of key provisioning and management for eUICCs.

6. Obviousness Argument

A person having ordinary skill in the art, in light of the identified prior art and the recognized problems, would find the claimed invention obvious for the following reasons:

Combination of ETSI TS 103 383 v12.1 / Nix's '141 Application with General Knowledge of 2FA and Cryptography:

1. Core eUICC Architecture and Initial Authentication (from ETSI TS 103 383 v12.1 and/or Nix '141 Application): These references would teach the fundamental aspects of a module containing an eUICC, an eUICC subscription manager, the process of an MNO providing an eUICC profile (possibly encrypted) to the subscription manager, and the module receiving and partially decrypting this profile (e.g., using an eUICC profile key) to obtain initial network access credentials (like a "first network module identity" and a "first key K"). It would also teach the module performing a first authentication with the MNO using these credentials, in a manner compatible with existing wireless network standards (e.g., 3GPP TS 33.401).

2. Motivation to Enhance Security and MNO Control (from the patent's own problem statement): The patent itself articulates the critical need for MNOs to maintain secure control over the "key K" despite initial profile distribution potentially being outside their direct control, and the desire for enhanced security through key rotation. The vulnerability of the key transfer channel is a prominent concern.

3. Application of Two-Factor Authentication (2FA) for Identity Verification (General Knowledge): 2FA was a well-known security principle by 2013, commonly employed to verify user identity for sensitive operations or access to critical resources. Given the MNO's desire for secure control and verification of the entity associated with a module (user or M2M service provider), it would be an obvious design choice for a POSA to incorporate a 2FA step. The purpose of this 2FA would be to confirm the authorized identity after the initial eUICC profile provisioning but before releasing the most sensitive network credentials.

4. Layered Key Provisioning (Routine Engineering): To implement the 2FA for controlling access to a more secure key, a POSA would routinely consider methods of layered cryptography. Storing a "second key K" in an encrypted part of the eUICC profile, only accessible after a successful MNO-controlled 2FA, is a straightforward engineering solution.

   • Conditional Symmetric Key Release: The idea of the MNO sending a "symmetric key" to the module after successful 2FA to unlock the second part of the profile is a logical application of conditional access principles. This directly addresses the MNO's need for control over the release of the most secure credentials, making access dependent on verifiable user/service provider identity.
   • Key Derivation as an Alternative: For further security, especially concerning the transmission channel, a POSA would also consider known cryptographic key derivation functions (KDFs) or key exchange protocols (e.g., Diffie-Hellman, well-known by 2013). This would allow the MNO and the module to mutually derive the "second key K" without direct transmission, thus mitigating risks associated with key transfer channels and addressing the identified problem of relying on potentially insecure channels. The patent mentions PKI algorithms and key exchange algorithms in FIGS. 2d, 2e, 5a, 5b, indicating these were known techniques.

Therefore, the combination of existing eUICC technologies (as taught by ETSI TS 103 383 v12.1 and Nix's '141 application), the recognized security challenges in eUICC key management (as outlined in the patent itself), and the well-established practices of two-factor authentication and standard cryptographic key management (including conditional key release and key derivation), would have rendered the methods and systems of US12207094 obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art by the priority date. The specific mechanisms employed for the two-stage key provisioning (symmetric key unlock or key derivation) represent routine application of known cryptographic principles to solve an identified problem within the eUICC context.

The subsequent steps of disconnecting and re-authenticating with the "second key K" are also a predictable result of updating network access credentials, necessary to activate the newly provisioned and secured key.