DETAILED ACTION
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: “the blockchain application” in line 12 should be written as “distributed blockchain application”. Appropriate correction is required.
Claim 1 is objected to because of the following informalities: “and to establish” in line 18 should be written as “and establish”. Appropriate correction is required.
Claim 10 is objected to because of the following informalities: “the blockchain application” in line 12 should be written as “distributed blockchain application”. Appropriate correction is required.
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 10-17, and 23 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 enablement requirement. The claim(s) contain subject matter which was not described in the specification in such a way as to enable one skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and/or use the invention.
Claim 10 recites “the at least one solar powered satellite transmits, receives and stores electromagnetic radiation and transmits and receives transaction data.” However, applicant specification describes supplier 508 as able to “receive transaction data,” but a satellite is not part of supplier 508, nor is a satellite described in the specification as capable of receiving “transaction” data. Applicants specification also fails to disclose how the solar powered satellite “transmits, receives and stores electromagnetic radiation.” For purposes of examination, “the at least one solar powered satellite transmits, receives and stores electromagnetic radiation and transmits and receives transaction data” is interpreted as satellites that can transmit, receive and store electromagnetic radiation and transmit data.
Claim 10 recite “ensured two-way communication.” The claim limitation was not described in the specification in such a way as to enable one skilled in the art to which it pertains and fails to describe what is an “ensured two-way communication.” For purposes of examination, “ensured two-way communication” is interpreted as communication that can go in either direction between two parties.
Claim 23 recites “quantum entanglement of those beams allows for secure and simultaneous communication among the nodes.” However, quantum entanglement cannot currently be used to transmit or send information faster than light or to achieve true “simultaneous” communication in the sense of instant messaging, because no signal travels between entangled particles. For purposes of examination, “quantum entanglement of those beams allows for secure and simultaneous communication among the nodes” is interpreted as quantum entanglement allows for secure communication among nodes.
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, 5-8, 10-17, 21-24, and 26 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 applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the applicant), regards as the invention.
The term “validates a correctness” in claim 1 is a relative term which renders the claim indefinite. The term “validates a correctness” is not defined by the claim, the specification does not provide a standard for ascertaining the requisite degree, and one of ordinary skill in the art would not be reasonably apprised of the scope of the invention. For examination purposes, examiner examines “validates a correctness” as checks for a correct transfer wireless energy.
The term “validation of the correctness” in claim 1 is a relative term which renders the claim indefinite. The term “validation of the correctness” is not defined by the claim, the specification does not provide a standard for ascertaining the requisite degree, and one of ordinary skill in the art would not be reasonably apprised of the scope of the invention. For examination purposes, examiner examines “validation of the correctness” as validating the wireless energy transfer.
Claim 13 recites the limitation "the first entity" in line 5. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
Claims 1 and 10 recite the phrase “ensured two-way communication.” The phrase “ensured two-way communication” is indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter what “ensured two-way communication” is. For purposes of examination, “ensured two-way communication” is interpreted as communication that is connected between two parties.
Claims 23 recites the phrase “near-equilateral.” The phrase “ensured two-way communication” is indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter for what the boundary “near-equilateral” is. For purposes of examination, “near-equilateral” is something considered close to equilateral.
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 (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) 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, 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 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, 7 21, and 24 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Will US 20200169125, in view of Chan US 20200160327.
Regarding claim 1, Will discloses a system for enabling wireless energy transfers and establishing a record of wireless energy transactions of said wireless energy transfers (Will, Abstract; Discussing blockchain used in context of wireless energy transfers), the system comprising:
at least one wireless energy transmitting device of a supplier, for transmitting, receiving and storing wireless energy and transmitting and receiving transaction data (Fig. 1, 110, supplier that can receive, transmit and store wireless energy and transmit and receive transaction data);
at least one wireless energy receiving device of a buyer, for receiving and storing the wireless energy from the at least one energy supplier device, and for receiving and transmitting the transaction data (Fig. 1, Element 121; Nodes 110 and 121 function as nodes in a blockchain system; See Para. 38), wherein:
the receiving device sends a signal requesting a connection to the transmitting device (Will, Para. 40, wireless communication send via NFC or a wireless network);
the transmitting device establishes an ensured two-way communication connection for receiving and transmitting the transaction data with the receiving device when the transmitting device recognizes and approves the receiving device (Will, Fig. 2 & 3; Fig. 2B, 291 and 292; Para. 47, “The endorsing peer 281 may verify the client signature and execute a chaincode function to initiate the transaction. The output may include the chaincode results, a set of key/value versions that were read in the chaincode (read set), and the set of keys/values that were written in chaincode (write set). The proposal response 292 is sent back to the client 260 along with an endorsement signature, if approved”; As shown in Fig. 1, 131, communication is “two-way”);
the transmitting device sends wireless energy to the receiving device (Will, 110 or 121 send wireless energy to 121 or 110; Para. 39, “According to example embodiments, a mobile device or vehicle, such as the vehicle 110, may engage in wireless energy transfer and exchange with a mobile device, such as mobile device 122, a vehicle, such as vehicle 121, or a stationary system, such as building 123. Like the vehicles 110 and 121, the mobile device 122 and the building 123 may function as nodes in a blockchain system. For example, the vehicle 110 may communicate 132 with the mobile device 122 to agree to exchange power for a value”);
one or more servers receive the transaction data and to establish a wireless energy transfer record by recording the transfer of wireless energy from the transmitting device to the receiving device on a distributed blockchain application, wherein the blockchain application includes at least one blockchain ledger (Will, Smart contracts are a type of “blockchain application”; Fig. 6C, smart contract; Para. 43, nodes 204-210 form a smart K; Para. 44, high level application),
Will fails to disclose wherein the distributed blockchain application validates a correctness of the transfer of wireless energy and wherein the two-way communication connection between the transmitting device and the receiving device is terminated upon delivery validation of the correctness of the wireless energy transfer. However, Chan discloses a plurality of nodes (Fig. 1, 102) that poses two-way communication between each other (Fig. 1, see arrows running both ways between multiple 102’s), with a termination condition (Para. 15, Para. 90).
It would have been considered obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective date of filing, to have modified Will with the correctness and termination on delivery of Chan. Doing so allows the system to ensure authenticity, and end the transfer to prevent any fraud post transfer of the energy.
Regarding claim 7, modified Will discloses a plurality of devices configured as mobile transmitting or receiving power stations through which a plurality of devices can navigate, maneuver, beam ride, and/or recharge from point to point (Will, devices 110 and 121 are a plurality of devices; They are capable of recharging from point to point);
wherein the plurality of devices are configured to transmit and receive power and data to and from a land-based, air-based, water-based, and/or space- based system to serve as power and data hubs, coupled to a plurality of tethers to further distribute power and/or data (Will, Fig. 4, 410, 420 and 430 transmit and receive power and data with blockchain platform).
Regarding claim 21, modified Will discloses wherein the transfer of wireless energy, between a plurality of nodes consisting of buyers and suppliers is achieved through an array of receiver/transmitters forming a network for receiving and transmitting power, data and/or information (Will, Fig. 1, 110, 122 and 121 are a plurality of nodes that form an array).
Regarding claim 24, modified Will discloses wherein a payment is processed between a supplier device associated with the supplier and a buyer device associated with the buyer (Fig. 4, 455 and updates to 462 and 463; Para. 60-61; “The smart contract and/or communication 453 may provide an indication of confirmation that payment has been placed on hold for the energy offered for transfer”; “Communication 455 may include an indication that payment has been, will be, or is in progress, for the energy.”).
Claim(s) 2 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Will US 20200169125, in view of Chan US 20200160327, as applied to claim 1 above, further in view of Power Ledger, “Power Ledger White Paper,” 2017.
Regarding claim 2, modified Will fails to disclose comprising a wireless energy two-part blockchain currency, the two-part currency comprising a first currency and a second currency. However, Power Ledger discloses a wireless energy two-part blockchain currency, with a first currency and a second currency (Power Ledger White Paper, Power Ledger, Two-part token system with POWR as the utility token for platform access and SPARKZ, as the energy-specific token representing kilowatt hours for transactions; Fig. 5.5.3.1 - Energy transfer is facilitated through smart cities and smart devices, on the grid, with grid being described throughout; “grid-supplied energy”; See also Section 2.3 describing “microgrids”; Grids are supplied with wireless energy; See also Section 5.5.5. describing grid development).
It would have been considered obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective date of filing, to have modified Will with the two-part blockchain currency. Doing so creates greater flexibility and more market usage for the currency.
Claim(s) 3 and 5 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Will US 20200169125, in view of Chan US 20200160327 and Power Ledger, “Power Ledger White Paper,” 2017, as applied to claim 2 above, further in view of Hertzog, et al., in “Bancor Protocol: Continuous Liquidity for Crypotgraphic Tokens through their Smart Contracts,” 2018.
Regarding claim 3, modified Will fails to disclose a trust server which stores the two-part currency and fiat currency. However, Hertzog et al., discloses a Bancor Protocol and Relay Token system with smart tokens that have one or more connectors to a network which allows the deposit of two different tokens (for example, BNT and ERC20; See also discussion of asset tokenizers on page 17, which include fiat) into a smart contract (with smart contract blockchains; Noting that blockchains have their own respective server), and where the smart mints a new “relay token” which represents the combined deposit, and the token can be sold or redeemed through the smart contract.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective date of filing, to have modified Will with Hertzog. Doing so allows multiple currencies to interact, increasing the market potential for selling the energy while increasing the demand for the energy product, given more users being able to purchase with different currencies and increasing salability (Hertzog, Section 5.1, “More Scalable and Reliable Token Markets,” pg. 14).
Modified Will also discloses a first server, wherein the first server receives fiat currency from a buyer transaction device in a first transaction recorded on the at least one blockchain ledger and exchanges the fiat currency for two-part currency from the trust server (Power Ledger, Section 1.8, Pg. 11, Buyers exchange fiat currency for Sparkz tokens through the platform, with the Power Core layer processing fiat payment; “The Power Ledger Platform (Platform) is a trustless, transparent and interoperable energy trading platform that supports an ever-expanding suite of energy applications, with an exchangeable frictionless energy trading token, Sparkz. The Power Ledger Token (POWR) is the fuel of the Power Ledger Ecosystem with bespoke private trading applications creating Sparkz in exchange for POWRs. Sparkz are currently purchased and redeemed using fiat currencies with individual trading platforms hosting closed-loop exchanges for energy and Sparkz.”; Applicant discloses “server” as a “server platform” throughout specification (“server platform 202”)) & exchanging - (Power Ledger, Section 4.3, Pg. 18, disclosing dual token ecosystem, with Sparkz tokens priced, issued and redeemed in the local currency of the Platform Participant; POWR tokens are required to generate Sparkz; Section 1.8, pg. 11; See also “Dual Token Ecosystem,” Section 4.3, “Purchasing a sufficient amount of POWR tokens allows Application Hosts access to the Ecosystem from where they can convert their POWR tokens to Sparkz and on-board their customer base.”; Section 1.8, “The Power Ledger Token (POWRTM) is the fuel of the Power Ledger Ecosystem with bespoke private trading applications creating Sparkz in exchange for POWRs. Sparkz are currently purchased and redeemed using fiat currencies with individual trading platforms hosting closed-loop exchanges for energy and Sparkz.”);
Modified Will also discloses wherein the first currency is provided to the buyer transaction device and the second currency is retained by the first server (Power Ledger, Fig. 4.1.1, Applicant buys POWR Token, generates Sparks and sells Sparkz; Section 4.3, Section 4.1, “To synchronize the Ecosystem globally and create cross-market electricity compatibility, a second token, Sparkz, is used for Ecosystem transactions. Sparkz tokens are priced, issued, and redeemed in the local currency of the Platform Participant. Purchasing a sufficient amount of POWR tokens allows Application Hosts access to the Ecosystem from where they can convert their POWR tokens to Sparkz and on-board their customer base”; Section 4.5, “POWR tokens will be escrowed for Sparkz in an Ethereum Smart Bond, and can only be unlocked from the Smart Bond upon the return of the Sparkz.”).
Regarding claim 5, modified Will discloses wherein the buyer exchanges the first currency for energy from the at least one wireless energy supplier in a second transaction recorded on the at least one blockchain ledger (Will, Para. 38, “The vehicle 110 may communicate 131 with the vehicle 121 to agree to exchange power for some value (e.g., money, credit, funds, securities, currency, virtual currency, goods, virtual goods, etc.). The communication 131 may include a negotiation over an amount of power, a time of power transfer, and a value to exchange for the power”; The second transaction can be recorded, just like the first – Para. 38, “Upon agreement to perform the exchange, and/or upon completion of the exchange, a record of the exchange may be generated and recorded in a decentralized database as, for example, a blockchain.).
Claim(s) 8 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Will US 20200169125, in view of Chan US 20200160327, as applied to claim 1 above, further in view of Glasser US 3781647.
Regarding claim 8, The system of claim 1 wherein the at least one energy transmitter comprises at least one solar powered satellite. However, Glasser discloses a satellite that transmits solar power (Abstract, “Solar radiation is collected and converted to microwave energy by means maintained in outer space on a satellite system”; “The radiation energy derived from the sun is converted to microwave energy in equipment maintained in outer space, then it is transmitted as microwave energy to suitable collectors on earth. Hence, the problems of absorption of the solar radiation by the atmosphere and of sudden interruptions are eliminated because microwaves can pass through the atmosphere with minimum absorption and scattering.).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective date of filing, to have modified Will with solar powered satellite of Glasser. Doing so decreases the cost of accumulating energy for the energy transmitter, which comes from a space that collects energy and transmits to earth; energy that is collected from the sun.
Claim(s) 22 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Will US 20200169125, in view of Chan US 20200160327, as applied to claim 1 above, further in view of Zhang, et. al, in “6G Wireless Networks: Vision, Requirements, Architecture, and Key Technologies,” from IEEE Vehicular Technology Magazine, July, 2019.
Regarding claim 22, modified Will fails to disclose further comprising a quantum secured blockchain network for wireless transfer by a plurality of nodes for receiving and transmitting power, data and/or information. However, Zhang et al. discloses a 6G communication network for wireless communication with a large autonomous network structure that integrates space, air, ground and underwater networks for wireless connectivity (“In this article, we present our vision of what 6G will be and describe usage scenarios and requirements for multi-terabyte per second (Tb/s) and intelligent 6G networks. We present a large-dimensional and autonomous network architecture that integrates space, air, ground, and underwater networks to provide ubiquitous and unlimited wireless connectivity”) with blockchain-based spectrum sharing that provides strong security (Fig. 3, “Blockchain based spectrum sharing” enabling strong security; Pg. 36, “THz communications, laser communications and VLC, and spectrum sharing are important techniques to increase 6G’s spectrum resources, while blockchain-based spectrum shar ing can significantly improve the efficiency and security of conventional spectrum sharing. SM-MIMO and OAM multiplexing can improve spectrum efficiency significantly by multiplexing many parallel data streams on the same frequency channel. Quantum communications and computing [14] can improve the efficiency of computing and provide strong security for 6G”) with several nodes communicating and transmitting information (See Figure 1 & 4)
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective date of filing, to have modified Will with the secured 6G communication network with blockchain. Doing so enables stronger security for the wireless transfer of information between interested parties in a transaction.
Claim(s) 23 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Will US 20200169125, in view of Chan US 20200160327 and Zhang, et. al, in “6G Wireless Networks: Vision, Requirements, Architecture, and Key Technologies,” from IEEE Vehicular Technology Magazine, July, 2019, as applied to Claim 21 above, further in view of Kuzmin, in “Scalable repeater architectures for multi-party states,” from Quantum Information, 2019.
Regarding claim 23, modified Will fails to disclose wherein the plurality of nodes number at least three, the nodes are configured to transmit and receive quantum-entangled laser beams in order to exchange information, and the nodes are arranged in an equilateral or near-equilateral triangle and quantum entanglement of those beams allows for secure and simultaneous communication among the nodes. However, Kuzmin discloses three nodes in an equilateral triangle with a laser beam context (Fig. 2, A, B, C are nodes; “Ensembles A and C are driven by weak coherent laser pulses resulting in entangled states of the ensembles and the corresponding forward-scattered photons”; Examiner Notes that Applicants provisional filed 8/16/2019 does not disclose “quantum-entangled laser beams”) that provides for secure communication within the quantum network (“The development of quantum networks holds the promise to realize quantum technologies such as secure communication schemes, [and] distributed quantum computing”).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective date of filing, to have modified Will with the quantum network of three nodes from Kuzmin. Doing so
allows for multi-party entangled states and provides greater scalability for processing quantum information.
Claim(s) 26 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Will US 20200169125, in view of Chan US 20200160327, as applied to claim 1 above, further in view of Crouch US 8072380.
Regarding claim 26, modified Will fails to disclose wherein the wireless energy is transferred through an array of retrodirective antennas. However, Crouch discloses a wireless power transmission system that an array of transmitting antennas for wireless power transmission (“The system sequentially illuminates a set of dispersed wireless power receivers with a single narrow beam of radio-frequency (RF) radiation at one frequency (also referred to as an “illumination frequency”) from an array of transmitting antennas, which may, for example, be a retrodirective antenna array (also referred to as an “RDA”; “The amplified signals from each element in the RDA converge at the activated beacon”; “The electric-field vectors of the amplified signals 56 are in phase and of the same polarization and therefore add vectorially to power the WPR located at the first section 42 with a signal that is greater than the signal emitted from any one element in the array.”; See also Claim 18: “A method of wirelessly transmitting power from a retrodirective array to an array of wireless power receivers”).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective date of filing, to have modified Will with the retrodirective array for wireless power. Doing so amplifies the transmission of wireless power emitted with greater signals (“The electric-field vectors of the amplified signals 56 are in phase and of the same polarization and therefore add vectorially to power the WPR located at the first section 42 with a signal that is greater than the signal emitted from any one element in the array.”).
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to BRANDON M DUCK whose telephone number is (469)295-9049. The examiner can normally be reached 8am - 5pm.
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, Michael Anderson can be reached at 571-270-0508. 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.
/BRANDON M DUCK/Examiner, Art Unit 3693
Prosecution Insights