DETAILED ACTION
Acknowledgements
This office action is in response to the claims filed 12/08/2025.
Claims 1, 3-8, 10, 13-17, 19 and 20 are amended.
Claim 2, 11, 12, and 18 are canceled.
Claims 1, 3-10, 13-17, 19 and 20 are pending.
Claims 1, 3-10, 13-17, 19 and 20 have been examined.
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 .
Claim Objections
Claim 1 is objected to because of the following informalities: claim 1 recites “send messages including ledger information toothers of the plurality of nodes”. Appropriate correction is required.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 12/08/2025 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
NOTE: In the interest of compact prosecution, Examiner called Applicant’s representative, Robert Kowert several times over the course of three weeks, with detailed messages about fixing the quality of the entered claims for an allowance. No response was received.
112
The claims continue to recite a lack of antecedent basis for the “node”. The rejections are maintained. New rejections have also been made.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of 35 U.S.C. 112(a):
(a) IN GENERAL.—The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor or joint inventor of carrying out the invention.
The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112:
The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor of carrying out his invention.
Claims 10, and 13-16 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(a) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), first paragraph, as failing to comply with the written description requirement. The claim(s) contains subject matter which was not described in the specification in such a way as to reasonably convey to one skilled in the relevant art that the inventor or a joint inventor, or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the inventor(s), at the time the application was filed, had possession of the claimed invention.
Claim 10 recites “ performing, by the second node comprising at least one processor and a memory:…comparing the computed value to the particular value included in the confirmation message to determine whether the second node has or has not correctly executed the at least one transaction on the account of the distributed ledger according to the ledger protocol.” According to the disclosure(¶ 9, 81, 93), “The sender node may compare the computed value to the value included in the confirmation message to determine that the receiver node has or has not received a correct sequence of messages…specifically, R sends confirmation of the messages it has received so far, including the hash of the last message received (Lines 80-81). S checks that the confirmation contains the correct hash for the messages confirmed (Lines 33-37), thus obtaining proof that R has received exactly the messages sent up until that point…he computed value indicates to the sender node that the receiver node has or has not received a correct sequence of messages.” The disclosure provides support for a sender node comparing values to determine that the receiver node has or has not received a correct sequence of messages. The disclosure does not provides support for a second node comparing the computed value to the particular value included in the confirmation message to determine whether the second node has or has not correctly executed the at least one transaction on the account of the distributed ledger. Dependent claims 13-16 are also rejected.
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.
Claims 1, 3-8 and 17-20 are 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 pre-AIA the applicant regards as the invention.
Claims 1 and 17 recite “wherein each node of the plurality of nodes locally stores and maintains a copy of a ledger and is configured to:….” The claims are unclear and indefinite as to whether “each node” of the plurality of nodes is configured to perform the steps or whether there is a specific node or first node of the plurality of nodes that performs the claimed steps. Dependent claims 3-9, 19 and 20 are rejected.
Claim 1 recites “the second node to execute” and “the first node”. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. Additionally, the claim is unclear whether “the second node” is part of the recited plurality of nodes. Dependent claims 3-9 are rejected.
Claims 1 and 17 recite “compare the computed value to the particular value included in the confirmation message to determine whether the first node has or has not correctly executed the at least one transaction on the account of the distributed ledger according to the ledger protocol.” Claim 10 recites “ performing, by the second node comprising at least one processor and a memory:…comparing the computed value to the particular value included in the confirmation message to determine whether the second node has or has not correctly executed the at least one transaction on the account of the distributed ledger according to the ledger protocol.” The claim is unclear and indefinite whether the second node checks itself to determine whether it has or has not correctly executed a transaction. Dependent claims 13-16 are rejected.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Singer et al. (US 20140136617) (“Singer”) teaches OWAC for the one way communication.
Kennedy (US 20170132625) teaches transaction messages, updating the blockchain with the updated information from the messages.
Seger (2017/0124556) (“Seger”) teaches synchronization among multiple nodes
Haldenby et al. (2017/0046792) (“Haldenby”) teaches violations of ledger policy, contracts and rules.
CHAN (No.: 2018/0068130) teaches data exchange approval based on balance checking.
An Efficient and Scalable Quasi-Aggregate Signature Scheme Based on LFSR Sequences by Saikat Chakrabarti, Santosh Chandrasekhar, Mukesh Singhal, Fellow, IEEE, and Kenneth L. Calvert
Short Paper: Service-Oriented Sharding for Blockchains by Adam Gencer and Robbert Renesse – providing same security with increased processing while controlling the amount of messages.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ILSE I IMMANUEL whose telephone number is (469)295-9094. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 9:00 am to 5:00pm.
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, NEHA H PATEL can be reached on (571) 270-1492. 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.
/ILSE I IMMANUEL/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3699
Prosecution Insights