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 .
DETAILED ACTION
This action is in response to the application filed 10/24/2025.
Claims 1-4, 6-12, and 14-16 are pending and have been examined.
Claims 1-4, 6-12, and 14-16 are rejected.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed on 10/24/2025 have been fully considered but they are moot in view of new grounds of rejections.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 103 which forms the basis for all obviousness rejections set forth in this Office action:
A patent for a claimed invention may not be obtained, notwithstanding that the claimed invention is not identically disclosed as set forth in section 102 of this title, if the differences between the claimed invention and the prior art are such that the claimed invention as a whole would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which the claimed invention pertains. Patentability shall not be negated by the manner in which the invention was made.
The factual inquiries set forth in Graham v. John Deere Co., 383 U.S. 1, 148 USPQ 459 (1966), that are applied for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized as follows:
1. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art.
2. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue.
3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art.
4. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness.
Claim(s) 1-4, 6-7, 9-12, and 14-15 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Sliwka (US 2022/0230240 A1), in view Kramer et al. (US 20210240733), in view of Vo et al. (US 2019/0340266 A1), further in view of Davis (US 2018/0019867 A1).
As per claim 1, Sliwka discloses A method for representing state of an asset through a [partitioned blockchain], comprising: storing, in a memory of a blockchain node in a blockchain network, a partitioned blockchain associated with an asset, wherein the partitioned blockchain includes a plurality of partitions, [each partition being associated with a different state value of the asset having an identifier associated with the asset] (par. [0081, wherein the distributed ledger (block chain) is maintained on computing nodes.]; [0082 and par.0119, wherein the distributed ledger (blockchain) 310 includes side chains 314 (partition group). A side chain 314 may refer to a shard of the distributed ledger 310 that extends from a segment (e.g., a block) of a main chain 312 of the ledger 310.]);
receiving, by a receiver of the blockchain node, a first new block that has been confirmed for addition to the partitioned blockchain, said first new block including at least a first block header and at least one first new transaction data value for each of a plurality of partition groups (par. [0056 and Fig. 16, wherein a transaction is received in the blockchain having block and header (block and block header is inherited in blockchain)]), where one of the one or more first new transaction data values included in a first partition group of the plurality of partition groups includes a specific asset identifier (par.0119, 0124, and 0173, wherein a side chain 314 may pertain to a particular classification of item (asset identifier)), wherein the blockchain node monitors for state updates for a specific asset associated with the specific asset identifier (par. [0321, wherein the history node monitors all data blocks being written to the distributed ledgers 2016));
receiving, by the receiver of the blockchain node, a second new block including at least a second block header and at least one second new transaction data value for each of the plurality of partition groups, where one of the one or more second new transaction data values included in a second partition group of the plurality of partition groups includes the specific asset identifier (par. [0119, 0124, and 0173, wherein the first and second chains are the plurality of partition groups. “second side chain 314-2 may store photographs depicting shoes represented in the first side chain 314-1, video clips depicting shoes represented in the first side chain 314-1, audio clips relating to shoes represented in the first side chain 314-1, virtual reality content depicting shoes represented in the first side chain 314-1”]);
[detecting a state change of the specific asset by detecting, by a processor of the blockchain node, that the specific asset identifier is included in the one of the one or more transaction data values included in the second partition group in the second new block];
in response to detecting the state change of the specific asset, [performing, by the processor of the blockchain node, one or more predetermined actions] (para. [0065-0066: “In the case of a loan request function, a loan smart contract may take the parameters received from a user who desires to take out a loan and incorporate that request information into a new block in the blockchain so that potential lenders can view the request.”]); and
[storing, in the memory of the blockchain node, a data pair including (1) the specific asset identifier that is included in (i) the one of the one or more first new transaction data values included in the first partition group and (II) the one of the one or more transaction data values included in the second partition group in the second new block] and (2) [an executable script associated with the specific asset identifier] (para.[0006 and 0075 explaining smart contracts as scripts: “Provided herein are systems and methods for facilitating decentralized loan processes with a smart contract architecture.”]).
Silwka does not explicitly disclose, however, Kramer in an analogous art discloses:
partitioned blockchain, comprising: storing, in a memory of a blockchain node in a blockchain network, a partitioned blockchain associated with an asset, wherein the partitioned blockchain includes a plurality of partitions, each partition being associated with a different state value of the asset having an identifier associated with the asset (Kramer [0013: “According to an aspect of the present disclosure, there is provided a computer-implemented method of partitioning a blockchain network into shards. The method comprises: identifying a transaction id of a blockchain transaction; and allocating the transaction to a shard based on the transaction id.”]);
detecting a state change of the specific asset by detecting, by a processor of the blockchain node, that the specific asset identifier is included in the one of the one or more transaction data values included in the second partition group in the second new block (Kramer [0073-0078: “In step 304, using this transaction id, an operation is carried out based on the txid and the available number of shards in the sharded network.” . . . 0077: “Therefore, when nodes in a given shard receive a transaction, they can easily check it has been sent to the correct shard.”]);
in response to detecting the state change of the specific asset, performing, by the processor of the blockchain node, one or more predetermined actions (Kramer [0068; 0097-0115: “When nodes in a given shard subsequently receive a transaction, they may check it has been sent to the correct shard.” . . . 0100: “According to the sixth embodiment, a node in Shard 4 makes a request to the nodes in Shard 1 that are known to it to fetch the UTXO.”]);
storing, in the memory of the blockchain node, a data pair . . . an executable script associated with the specific asset identifier (Kramer [0102: “As discussed in the background section, it is known that software clients or programs or applications installed on nodes may perform this validation on a UTXO by executing its locking and unlocking scripts. In some implementations, this is referred to as the validity data for the transactions.”]).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention was made to incorporate the TEACHINGS of ART into the INVENTION of ART to produce an expected result with reasonable expectation of success of COMBINED. The modification would be obvious because one of ordinary skill in the art would be motivated to reduce time processing the blockchain using state and partition system (Kramer [0006: “This approach, while secure, does have scaling flaws related to the fact that each transaction is validated and stored by every full node. In terms of validation, this causes delays in network propagation of transactions, as each transaction needs to be validated before it can be propagated onwards towards a miner.”]).
Sliwka does not explicitly disclose, however, Vo in an analogous art discloses:
detecting a state change of the specific asset by detecting, by a processor of the blockchain node, that the specific asset identifier is included in the one of the one or more transaction data values included in the second partition group in the second new block (Sliwka [0022-0023 and 0034, wherein the system identifies presence of data/asset in the blockchain. par.0046, “The cross-chain handler 424 may store the results of the cross-chain transaction in a blockchain 422 which links together results of all cross-chain transactions performed in the system. Furthermore, the cross-chain handler 424 may also update the partition blockchains that provided data for the transaction with the results of the cross-chain transaction to enable the partition blockchains to update the data/assets stored therein”. Par.0052, “the transaction may identify a particular asset or data item, and the partition information may identify where the asset or data item is stored based on a partitioner smart contract that manages the master chain and the partitioning information”]);
performing, by the processor of the blockchain node, one or more predetermined actions (par.0022-0023 and 0034, wherein execution of smart contract is the action and wherein “in response to receiving a request to execute a transaction, the transaction router smart contract (of the master chain) may identify multiple different blockchains having data/asset for performing a transaction and provide locations of the different blockchains to the cross-chain handling smart contract (of the mixed chain). The cross-chain handling smart contract may retrieve the data/asset from the different blockchains, execute the cross-chain transaction, and update the different blockchains based on the result of the cross-chain transaction”. par.0059, the smart contract 640 may execute transactions and invoke changes to multiple different blockchain ledgers as a result of a cross-chain transaction being executed thereby updating a world state of multiple blockchains at the same time (i.e., simultaneously)”).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the computer art before the effective filing date to incorporate the different blockchains of Vo to the blockchain system of Sliwka to produce an expected result of performing an action when the same asset is in other blockchain or partition. The modification would be obvious because one of ordinary skill in the art would be motivated to expand the throughput of a blockchain to optimize efficiency (Vo, par.0004).
Sliwka in view of Vo do not explicitly teach, however, Davis in an analogous art discloses:
storing, in the memory of the blockchain node, a data pair including (1) the specific asset identifier that is included in (i) the one of the one or more first new transaction data values included in the first partition group and (ii) the one of the one or more transaction data values included in the second partition group in the second new block (para. [0024: “Each pair in the sequence of pairs may be comprised of a subnet identifier and a merkle root. The subnet identifier may be an identification value associated with the corresponding subnet.”]; [0018: “The processing server 102, discussed in more detail below, may be a node in a blockchain network configured to generate and add blocks to a partitioned blockchain.” New partition]; [0019: “As used herein, the term “subnet” may refer to a partition in the partitioned blockchain that is representative of a category, group, or other demarcation of transaction records in the partitioned blockchain that is formatted or otherwise subject to semantics that are associated with the respective subnet.” Showing grouping for partitions.]).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the computer art before the effective filing date to incorporate the partitioned blockchain of Kramer and Davis into the blockchain system of Sliwka to produce an expected result of portioning a single blockchain into groups and assign each partition an identifier. The modification would be obvious because one of ordinary skill in the art would be motivated to provide a partitioned blockchain capable of storing multiple transaction formats and types in a single blockchain, reducing the computing resources and processing power required for deployment and operation of the blockchain (Davis, par.0004).
As per claim 2, rejection for claim 1 is incorporate and further Vo in view of Davis discloses The method of claim 1, wherein the one or more predetermined actions includes generating, by the processor of the blockchain node, a third new block, the third new block including at least a third block header and at least one third new transaction data value for each of the plurality of partition groups, where one of the one or more third new transaction data values included in a third partition group includes the specific asset identifier (Vo [par.0022-0023 and 0034, wherein partitioning data across multiple chains or routing data to different blockchains or replicating blockchains include creating new blocks in the target blockchain (third partition group). Also see Davis above for partitioned blockchain.] And, see above reference to Kramer for partition group.).
As per claim 3, rejection for claim 2 is incorporate and further Vo discloses The method of claim 2, further comprising:
transmitting, by a transmitter of the blockchain node, the generated third new block to a plurality of additional nodes in the blockchain network (Vo [par.0123, wherein the generated new block is broadcasted to other computing nodes. Also see Sliwka for adding nodes to block chain stated in claim 1 rejection.] and Kramer [0059: “As can be seen in FIG. 1b, a particular node can be a member of one or more shard groups.”]).
As per claim 4, rejection for claim 1 is incorporate and further Vo in view of Sliwka discloses The method of claim 1, wherein the one or more predetermined actions includes executing, by the processor of the blockchain node, the executable script associated with the specific asset identifier (Vo [par.0022-0023 and 0034, wherein execution of smart contract is the action and the smart contract is analogous to script] See Kramer above for script.).
As per claim 6, rejection for claim 4 is incorporate and further Sliwka discloses The method of claim 4, further comprising: storing, in the memory of the blockchain node, a data entry including the specific identifier and a plurality of scripts, wherein the executable script is associated with a status indicator associated with the second partition group (Sliwka [Fig. 20, par. 007- 008 and par.0229, wherein plurality of smart contract (scripts) are stored and each smart contract corresponds to specific asset processing phase]. Also, see Kramer above for status indicators and use of scripts with partition group.).
As per claim 7, rejection for claim 1 is incorporate and further Sliwka in view of Davis discloses The method of claim 1, further comprising: storing, in the memory of the blockchain node, a data pair including the specific asset identifier and a status indicator associated with the first partition group (Sliwka [par.0082, the previous and current item token defining the class of item (identifier) and ownership are stored] in view of Davis [0019: “As used herein, the term “subnet” may refer to a partition in the partitioned blockchain that is representative of a category, group, or other demarcation of transaction records in the partitioned blockchain that is formatted or otherwise subject to semantics that are associated with the respective subnet.”] Also, see Kramer above for status indicators and use of scripts with partition group.); and updating, by the processor of the blockchain node, the status indicator in the data pair including the specific asset identifier to a new status indicator associated with the second partition group after detecting the specific asset identifier (Sliwka [Par.0085, wherein the ownership of the token is updated to indicate new ownership. And par .0247, wherein within the workflow environment using side chains, the transition between each stage of the workflow is the update of the item status indicator. Par.0085, wherein the ownership of the token is updated to indicate new ownership]).
Claims 9-12 and 14-15 amount to a system for performing the method of claims 1-4 and 6-7 respectively. These claims are rejected for substantially the same rationale as presented above for claims 1-4 and 6-7 respectively and based on the references’ disclosure of the necessary supporting hardware and software (Sliwka para. 0372 showing system).
Claim(s) 8 and 16 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Sliwka, in view of Kramer, in view Vo, further in view of Davis, further in view in view of Kim et al. (US 2022/0173916 A1).
As per claim 8, rejection for claim 1 is incorporate and further Sliwka discloses The method of claim 1, wherein the memory includes an original asset identifier, and the specific asset identifier is a [hash value of the original asset identifier] (Sliwka para. [0086, 0113, 0118: identifiers]).
Even though Sliwka discloses identifiers, it does not explicitly teach, however, Kim in an analogous art discloses: hash value of the original asset identifier (par. [0008-0009, generating an identifier by hashing an identifier of the product and recording it in blockchain]). Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the computer art before the effective filing date to incorporate the identifier hash of Kim to the blockchain system of Sliwka and Vo to produce an expected result of hashing a product identifier to get a second product identifier. The modification would be obvious because one of ordinary skill in the art would be motivated to provide data security by using a hash as identifier.
Claim 16 amounts to a system for performing the method of claim 8. This claim is rejected for substantially the same rationale as presented above for claim 8 and based on the references’ disclosure of the necessary supporting hardware and software (see above).
Comments
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Kwatra et al. (US 20200285631) – Showing partitioned blockchain with state change monitoring.
The examiner requests, in response to this Office action, support be shown for language added to any original claims on amendment and any new claims. That is, indicate support for newly added claim language by specifically pointing to page(s) and line no(s) in the specification and/or drawing figure(s). This will assist the examiner in prosecuting the application.
When responding to this office action, Applicant is advised to clearly point out the patentable novelty which he or she thinks the claims present, in view of the state of the art disclosed by the references cited or the objections made. He or she must also show how the amendments avoid such references or objections See 37 CFR 1.111(c).
Conclusion
Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP § 706.07(a). Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a).
A shortened statutory period for reply to this final action is set to expire THREE MONTHS from the mailing date of this action. In the event a first reply is filed within TWO MONTHS of the mailing date of this final action and the advisory action is not mailed until after the end of the THREE-MONTH shortened statutory period, then the shortened statutory period will expire on the date the advisory action is mailed, and any extension fee pursuant to 37 CFR 1.136(a) will be calculated from the mailing date of the advisory action. In no event, however, will the statutory period for reply expire later than SIX MONTHS from the date of this final action.
Contact Information
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Taelor Kim whose telephone number is (571) 270-7166. The examiner can normally be reached on Monday-Thursday (11AM-5PM) EST.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Ajay Bhatia can be reached on 571-272-3906. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-270-8166. Information regarding the status of an application may be obtained from the Patent Application Information Retrieval (PAIR) system. Status information for published applications may be obtained from either Private PAIR or Public PAIR. Status information for unpublished applications is available through Private PAIR only. For more information about the PAIR system, see http://pair-direct.uspto.gov. Should you have questions on access to the Private PAIR system, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative or access to the automated information system, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000.
/TAELOR KIM/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2836
Prosecution Insights