DETAILED ACTION
Claims 1-3, 5, 7, 9, 10 are pending in the application and claims 1-3, 5, 7, 9, 10 are rejected.
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 .
Continued Examination Under 37 CFR 1.114
A request for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, including the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e), was filed in this application after final rejection. Since this application is eligible for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114. Applicant's submission filed on 4/21/2025 has been entered.
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.
Claim(s) 1-3, 5, 7, 9, 10 are/is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Wasserman US2018/0268382 in view of Brody et al. US2020/0034457 in view of Pack et al. US2019/0068615
Regarding claim 1, Wasserman teaches: a user terminal comprising a first processor and a first memory connected to the first processor; and (Wasserman see paragraph 0309 0314 0318 0335 0366 customer to have virtual account directly connected to server network such that each server comprises memory and processor)
an approval terminal comprising a second processor and a second memory connected to the second processor, (Wasserman see paragraph 0309 0314 0318 0334 0366 financial institution to have virtual account directly connected to server network such that each server comprises memory and processor)
a blockchain network; (Wasserman see paragraph 0175 blockchain as a network)
wherein a distributed ledger of the blockchain system includes a state database that stores a state of a smart contract for a plurality of tokens; (Wasserman see paragraph 0001 0175 0281 blockchain as a database storing smart contracts and tokens)
wherein the first processor of the user terminal is configured to: issue, to the blockchain network, a transaction causes a parent token to split into multiple child tokens; (Wasserman see paragraph 0231 0281 request from customer modifying blockchain resulting in a split, splitting oldest token into two)
wherein the second processor of the approval terminal is configured to:
collect one or more transactions issued to the blockchain network within a predetermined time interval, the one or more transactions including the issued transaction; (Wasserman see paragraph 0250 0281 0284 financial institution to fulfill requests on blockchain such that certain transactions may be based on a line of credit specified for a period of time)
update data indicative of a child token of the multiple child tokens based on the issued transaction in the state database;
generate a block including the issued transaction;
cause the block and the state database to be reflected in the distributed ledger; and (Wasserman see paragraph 0284 upon splitting token based on requests blockchain is updated by appending block comprising data reflecting changes)
set tracking data for the child token in the state database, the state database comprising tracking data for each token of the plurality of tokens, the tracking data of the child token comprising generating the child token, of the child token, (ii) a token ID of the parent token each child token of the multiple child tokens is derived, and (iii) a smart contract of the parent token. (Wasserman see paragraph 0175 0179 0212 0213 0214 0222 0223 0281 0284 all changes made to blockchain to add new blocks on blockchain as a chain of modifications with complete history such that a change deals with modification with tokens being split and tokens having a real world currency ID for given smart contracts)
Wasserman does not distinctly disclose: (i) a block number of a block, the block number indicates a change point of a state of the smart contract, a smart contract address
However, Brody teaches: a smart contract address (Brody see paragraph 0018 0019 0034 0035 history of blockchain recorded in blockchain including blockchain address smart contract address)
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified a merging tokens in blockchain as taught by Wasserman to include a smart contract address as taught by Brody for the predictable result of more efficiently organizing and managing data.
Further, the combination of Wasserman and Brody does not appear to distinctly disclose: (i) a block number of a block, the block number indicates a change point of a state of the smart contract
However, Pack teaches: (i) a block number of a block, the block number indicates a change point of a state of the smart contract (Pack see paragraphs 0087-0089 0091 0092 latest transaction where value is written to smart contract with an associated block number in blockchain)
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified a updating data as taught by Patterson as modified to include a block number as taught by Pack for the predictable result of more efficiently organizing and managing data.
Regarding claim 2, Wasserman teaches: a user terminal comprising a first processor and a first memory connected to the first processor; (Wasserman see paragraph 0309 0314 0318 0335 0366 customer to have virtual account directly connected to server network such that each server comprises memory and processor)
an approval terminal comprising a second processor and a second memory connected to the second processor; (Wasserman see paragraph 0309 0314 0318 0334 0366 financial institution to have virtual account directly connected to server network such that each server comprises memory and processor)
a blockchain network, wherein a distributed ledger of the blockchain system includes a state database that stores a state of a smart contract for a plurality of tokens; (Wasserman see paragraph 0001 0175 0281 blockchain as a database storing smart contracts and tokens)
wherein the first processor of the user terminal is configured to: (Wasserman see paragraph 0231 0281 request from customer modifying blockchain)
wherein the second processor of the approval terminal is configured to:
collect one or more transactions issued to the blockchain network within a predetermined time interval, the one or more transactions including the issued transaction; (Wasserman see paragraph 0250 0281 0284 financial institution to fulfill requests on blockchain such that certain transactions may be based on a line of credit specified for a period of time)
generate a block including the issued transaction;
cause the block and the state database to be reflected in the distributed ledger; (Wasserman see paragraph 0284 upon splitting token based on requests blockchain is updates the blockchain by appending block comprising data reflecting changes)
Wasserman does not distinctly disclose: issue, to the blockchain network, a transaction that causes a first token to merge with a second token to create a merged token
update data indicative of the merged token based on the issued transaction in the state database;
set tracking data for the merged token in the state database, the state database comprising tracking data for each token in the plurality of tokens, the tracking data of the merged token comprising
(i) a block number of a block generating the merged token the block number indicates a change point of a state of the smart contract of the child token, (ii) token IDs corresponding to the first token and the second token that the merged token is derived, and (iii) smart contract addresses for each of the first token and the second token
However, Brody teaches: issue, to the blockchain network, a transaction that causes a first token to merge with a second token to create a merged token (Brody see paragraph 0033 0034 tokens to be merged in blockchain)
update data indicative of the merged token based on the issued transaction in the state database; (Brody see paragraphs 0033 0034 assignment of ownership is performed by merging tokens into a single token defining a composite token and destroying the sub assets used to create the composite token, such actions to be recorded blockchain)
set tracking data for the merged token in the state database, the state database comprising tracking data for each token in the plurality of tokens, the tracking data of the merged token comprising
generating the merged token, of the child token, (ii) token IDs corresponding to the first token and the second token that the merged token is derived, and (iii) smart contract addresses for each of the first token and the second token (Brody see paragraph 0018 0019 0034 0035 merging of tokens recorded in blockchain including blockchain address smart contract address and an asset token as a digital identifier or an identifier added to each token resulting in recorded history of blockchain)
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified a merging tokens in blockchain as taught by Wasserman to include a smart contract address as taught by Brody for the predictable result of more efficiently organizing and managing data.
Further, the combination of Wasserman and Brody does not appear to distinctly disclose: (i) a block number of a block, the block number indicates a change point of a state of the smart contract
However, Pack teaches: (i) a block number of a block, the block number indicates a change point of a state of the smart contract (Pack see paragraphs 0087-0089 0091 0092 latest transaction where value is written to smart contract with an associated block number in blockchain)
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified a updating data as taught by Patterson as modified to include a block number as taught by Pack for the predictable result of more efficiently organizing and managing data.
Regarding claim 3, Wasserman as modified teaches: wherein the second processor of the approval terminal is configured to set a flag indicating that the merged token is consumed in each of the first token and second token in the state database. (Brody see paragraph 00330034 0047 0051 0054 each modification such as a token merge to be recorded in blockchain using a hash)
Regarding claims 5, 7, 9, 10, note the rejection of claim(s) 1-3. The instant claims recite substantially same limitations as the above-rejected claims and are therefore rejected under same prior-art teachings.
Response to arguments
Applicant’s argument: Prior art of record does not teach newly amended subject matter
Examiner’s response: Applicant’s argument is moot as newly amended subject matter is responded to in the above rejection
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.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ALLEN S LIN whose telephone number is (571)270-0612. The examiner can normally be reached on M-F 9-5.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Kavita Stanley can be reached on (571)272-8352. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300.
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.
/ALLEN S LIN/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2153
Prosecution Insights