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 .
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 02/26/2026 with respect to the rejection(s) of claim(s) 1-2, 4-8, 10-14 and 16-18 have been fully considered and are persuasive. Therefore, the rejection has been withdrawn. However, upon further consideration, a new ground(s) of rejection is made. See remarks on page 11-16.
The rejection of pending claims 1-2, 4-8, 10-14 and 16-18 under 35 U.S.C. 101 as directed to an abstract idea without significantly more, is maintained in view of MPEP 2106.04(d). Applicant’s argument of the claim integrate the abstract idea into a practical application by using a smart contract to monitor a first distributed ledger for an approval event, generate a settlement event, communicate the settlement event to a second distributed ledger, and generate a virtual payment instrument is not persuasive. The newly added limitations merely further define the business participants and ledger arrangement used to perform the approval and settlement process, including that service providers participate on the first distributed ledger, that a financial institution, merchant, and or treasury service participate on the second distributed ledger, and that the ledgers are separate. These limitations do not improve the operation of the smart contract, distributed ledger, and computer network. Therefore, the mere implementation of the steps above does not integrate the abstract idea into a practical application under Step 2A, Prong Two. See remarks on page 10-11.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 101
35 U.S.C. 101 reads as follows:
Whoever invents or discovers any new and useful process, machine, manufacture, or composition of matter, or any new and useful improvement thereof, may obtain a patent therefor, subject to the conditions and requirements of this title.
Claims 1-2, 4-8, 10-14, and 16-18 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 101 because the claimed invention is directed to a judicial exception (i.e., a law of nature, a natural phenomenon, or an abstract idea) without significantly more.
Subject Matter Eligibility Criteria – Step 1:
Claims 1-2, 4-6, 13-14, and 16-18 are directed to a method, claims 7-8, 10-12 are directed to a system. Therefore, these claims fall within the four statutory categories of invention.
Subject Matter Eligibility Criteria – Step 2A – Prong One:
Regarding Prong One of Step 2A of the Alice/Mayo test, the claim limitations are to be analyzed to determine whether, under their broadest reasonable interpretation, they “recite” a judicial exception or in other words whether a judicial exception is “set forth” or “described” in the claims. MPEP 2106.04(II)(A)(1). An “abstract idea” judicial exception is subject matter that falls within at least one of the following groups: a) certain methods of organizing human activity, b) mental processes, and/or c) mathematical concepts. MPEP 2106.04(a).
Representative independents claims 1, 7, and 13 include limitations that recite at least one abstract idea.
Claims 1 and 7 are directed to the abstract idea of “generating, by a first service provider of a plurality of service providers, a transaction approval process initiation message that initiates a complex approval flow for a transaction based on input from a second service provider or a user, wherein the transaction approval process initiation message comprises metadata for the transaction including a party name, a party identification number, an account identifier, a disbursement amount, a process identifier, a process status, and a creation date; recording, on a first distributed ledger, the transaction approval process initiation message, wherein the plurality of service providers participate on the first distributed ledger; monitoring, by a smart contract, the first distributed ledger for an indication of an approval event for the transaction associated with the transaction approval process initiation message, wherein the monitoring comprises: assigning a task to one or more service providers of the plurality of service providers; and determining one or more task completions associated with the task, the one or more service providers, and the transaction approval process initiation message; generating, by the first service provider, a settlement event for the transaction based on the indication of the approval event; recording, on the first distributed ledger, the settlement event; communicating a settlement event message to a second distributed ledger, wherein a financial institution, a merchant, and/or a treasury service participate in the second distributed ledger, and the first distributed ledger and the second distributed ledger are separate distributed ledgers; and generating, by the financial institution, the merchant, and/or the treasury service and based on the settlement event message, a virtual payment instrument for the transaction associated with the settlement event message, the indication of the approval event, and the transaction approval process initiation message.” Under its broadest reasonable interpretation, this claim is managing approval and settlement processes across a plurality of service providers, and hence falls under organizing human activity (i.e., as fundamental economic practices).
Claim 13 is directed to the abstract idea of “generating, by a first service provider of a plurality of service providers, a transaction approval process initiation message that initiates a complex approval flow for a transaction based on an interaction between a user and a second service provider of the plurality of service providers; recording the transaction approval process initiation message on a first distributed ledger; determining, by a smart contract, one or more tasks associated with the transaction approval process initiation message, wherein the transaction approval process initiation message comprises metadata for the transaction including a party name, a party identification number, an account identifier, a disbursement amount, a process identifier, a process status, and a creation date; generate a list of assigned tasks, wherein each assigned task is associated with a selected service provider of the plurality of service providers and the transaction approval process initiation message; assigning a first task of the list of assigned tasks to the selected service provider of a plurality of service providers; generating, by the first service provider, a settlement event for the transaction based on an indication of an approval event, wherein the indication of the approval event comprises a completion status of the list of assigned tasks; recording, on the first distributed ledger, the settlement event, wherein the plurality of service providers participate on the first distributed ledger; communicating a settlement event message to a second distributed ledger, wherein a financial institution, a merchant, and/or a treasury service participate in the second distributed ledger, and the first distributed ledger and the second distributed ledger are separate distributed ledgers; and generating, by the financial institution, the merchant, and/or the treasury service and based on the settlement event message, a virtual payment instrument for the transaction associated with the settlement event message, the indication of the approval event, and the transaction approval process initiation message.” Under its broadest reasonable interpretation, this claim is managing approval and settlement processes across a plurality of service providers, and hence falls under organizing human activity (i.e., as fundamental economic practices).
Dependent Claims:
Claims 2, 8, and 14 recites: wherein the settlement event message comprises a claim identifier, a recipient, a value associated with the recipient, and a status indicator of the settlement event; further describes the abstract idea of organizing human activity (i.e., as fundamental economic practices).
Claims 4, 10, and 16 recites: wherein generating the virtual payment instrument comprises: receiving, by a financial institution, the settlement event message; generating a virtual payment instrument based on the settlement event message; recording, on the second distributed ledger, an identifier of the virtual payment instrument; and assigning a value to the virtual payment instrument based on the approval event; further describes the abstract idea of organizing human activity (i.e., as fundamental economic practices).
Claim 5, 11, and 17 recites: funding the virtual payment instrument based on the value assigned; and settling the transaction, using the virtual payment instrument, with one or more recipients based on the approval event, the settlement event; further describes the abstract idea of organizing human activity (i.e., as fundamental economic practices).
Claims 6, 12, and 18 recites: wherein monitoring, the first distributed ledger for an indication of an approval event comprises: polling the first distributed ledger by the smart contract; and detecting an entry written to the first distributed ledger that includes one or more approvals and a complete status identifier; further describes the abstract idea of organizing human activity (i.e., as fundamental economic practices).
Subject Matter Eligibility Criteria – Step 2A – Prong Two:
Claims 1, 7, and 13 recites to a generic computer as an additional element to the judicial exception in the preamble. Viewed individually and in combination, this additional element to the identified judicial exception of Step 2A.1, amounts to no more than mere instructions for managing approval and settlement processes across a plurality of service providers on a generic computer. Therefore, at Step 2A.2, these additional elements do not act in combination to integrate the abstract idea into a practical application. The additional elements of claims 1, 7, and 13 considered both individually and as an ordered combination, do not amount to significantly more than the judicial exception because the additional element of a generic computer does no more than “[s]imply appending well-understood, routine, conventional activities previously known to the industry, specified at a high level of generality, to the judicial exception, e.g., a claim to an abstract idea requiring no more than a generic computer to perform generic computer functions that are well-understood, routine and conventional activities previously known to the industry.” See MPEP 2106.05 (citing to Alice Corp. Pty. Ltd. v. CLS Bank Int'l, 573 U.S. 208, 225 (2014)).
Therefore claims 1, 7, and 13 is found ineligible under 35 U.S.C. 101.
Step 2B:
Viewed as a whole, instructions/method claims recite the concept of “organizing human activity” (i.e., as fundamental economic practices) in managing approval and settlement processes across a plurality of service providers are performed by a generic computer. The method claims do not, for example, purport to improve the functioning of the computer itself. Nor do they effect an improvement in any other technology or technical field. Instead, the claims at issue amount to nothing significantly more than an instruction to apply the abstract idea using some unspecified, generic computer. See Alice Corp. Pty. Ltd., 573 U.S. 208. Mere instructions to apply the exception using a generic computer component and limitations to a particular field of use or technological environment cannot integrate a judicial exception into a practical application at Step 2A or provide an inventive concept in Step 2B. The use of a computer server is to merely automate and/or implement the abstract idea cannot provide significantly more than the abstract idea itself (MPEP 2106.05(I)(A)(f) & (h)). Therefore, the claim is not patent eligible.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
4. 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 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.
Claims 1, 4-5, 7, 10-11, and 16-17 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Thekadath et al. (US 10715531 B2), in view of Komandur et al. (US 20200177373 A1), in view of O’Neill et al. (ES 2639563 T3), in view of Vivas et al. (US 20220108311 A1), and further in view of Yan et al. (US 20220156726 A1).
6. Regarding claims 1, and 7, Thekadath discloses a method, (A system for complex process flow approval using distributed ledgers, the system comprising: a memory; and a processor, wherein the processor is configured to perform instructions stored in memory, Column 54/line 11, )
Thekadath does not explicitly disclose a method for complex process flow approval using distributed ledgers, the method comprising: generating, by a first service provider of a plurality of service providers, a transaction approval process initiation message that initiates a complex approval flow for a transaction based on input from a second service provider or a user, wherein the transaction approval process initiation message comprises metadata for the transaction including a party name, a party identification number, an account identifier, a disbursement amount, a process identifier, a process status, and a creation date.
However, Komandur teaches a method for complex process flow approval using distributed ledgers, the method comprising: generating, by a first service provider of a plurality of service providers, a transaction approval process initiation message that initiates a complex approval flow for a transaction based on input from a second service provider or a user, wherein the transaction approval process initiation message comprises metadata for the transaction including a party name, a party identification number, an account identifier, a disbursement amount, a process identifier, a process status, and a creation date. (Para. 0012-0019, When an input set of data fields is received at a first node (e.g., through a user interface), the input set of data fields is processed as the fields represent parameters of an agreement between a plurality of parties. For example, NY would like to establish an agreement with London in respect of sharing the cost of an underlying services contract with a hundred licenses (NY only needs fifty, so it wishes to share fifty with London and the cost should later be reconciled between the offices). In this case, NY could serve as the first node, and the input set of data fields can be received in NY…As the network is a trusted network, blocks storing, among others, transaction data, approvals, and sets of input fields can simply be added to the distributed ledger without proof of work or proof of stake protocols. The set of data elements representing the initial fields of the agreement, when generated, includes a hidden unique primary key (e.g., a seed) that can be sequentially or pseudo-randomly generated. The hidden unique primary key can be used with a one-way hash to expose information regarding the initial agreement, and in some embodiments, the hidden unique primary key is never accessible by any individual human. The computing nodes may interact with the blockchain by providing approvals (e.g., if a corresponding approval is required), through providing an approval signal signed using a private key corresponding to a second party of the plurality of parties. When the approval signal is provided, the blockchain data structure is updated representative of a state transition indicative of an approval by the second party of the agreement represented by the hidden unique primary key. The blockchain data structure can be configured to accept the insertion of the new state transition if and only if there exists at least one outstanding required approval of the series of the one or more required approval signals. For example, insertion of an approval cannot occur once the agreement is fully approved, and further approvals are rejected and not recorded to the blockchain. When all the approvals are obtained, the blockchain may be rendered immutable yet accessible, for example, through a consensus mechanism that does not allow further block transactions on the blockchain data structure.) Examiner interprets the term process initiation message is analogous for the term agreement objects in the cited prior art. Examiner interprets the term complex approval flow is analogous for the term series of the one or more required approval signal, blockchain data structure can be configured to accept the insertion of the new state transition if and only if there exists at least one outstanding required approval of the series of the one or more required approval signals..in the cited prior art.
One of ordinary skill in the art would have recognized that applying the known technique of Komandur to the known invention of Thekadath as modified would have been recognized that the application of the technique would have yielded predictable results because the level of ordinary skill in the art demonstrated by the references applied shows the ability to incorporate service provider features into a similar invention. Further, it would have been recognized by those of ordinary skill in the art that modifying the method for a complex process flow approval using distributed ledgers, the method comprising: generating, by a first service provider of a plurality of service providers, a transaction approval process initiation message that initiates a complex approval flow for a transaction based on input from a second service provider or a user, wherein the transaction approval process initiation message comprises metadata for the transaction including a party name, a party identification number, an account identifier, a disbursement amount, a process identifier, a process status, and a creation date results in an improved invention because applying said technique will ensure that the process message incudes the metadata information that so that transactions can be tracked, thus improving the overall performance of the invention.
Thekadath does not explicitly disclose generating, by the first service provider, a settlement event for the transaction based on the indication of the approval event; recording, on the first distributed ledger, the settlement event.
However, Komandur teaches generating, by the first service provider, a settlement event for the transaction based on the indication of the approval event; recording, on the first distributed ledger, the settlement event. (Para. 0017-0019, When the approval signal is provided, the blockchain data structure is updated representative of a state transition indicative of an approval by the second party of the agreement represented by the hidden unique primary key. The blockchain data structure can be configured to accept the insertion of the new state transition if and only if there exists at least one outstanding required approval of the series of the one or more required approval signals. For example, insertion of an approval cannot occur once the agreement is fully approved, and further approvals are rejected and not recorded to the blockchain… When all the approvals are obtained, the blockchain may be rendered immutable yet accessible, for example, through a consensus mechanism that does not allow further block transactions on the blockchain data structure.)
One of ordinary skill in the art would have recognized that applying the known technique of Komandur to the known invention of Thekadath as modified would have been recognized that the application of the technique would have yielded predictable results because the level of ordinary skill in the art demonstrated by the references applied shows the ability to incorporate service provider features into a similar invention. Further, it would have been recognized by those of ordinary skill in the art that modifying the method to include generating, by the first service provider, a settlement event for the transaction based on the indication of the approval event; recording, on the first distributed ledger, the settlement event results in an improved invention because applying said technique will ensure that the process message are automatically settled, thus improving the overall performance of the invention.
Thekadath does not explicitly disclose assigning a task to one or more service providers of the plurality of service providers; and determining one or more task completions associated with the task, the one or more service providers; and the transaction approval process initiation message.
However, O’Neill teaches assigning a task to one or more service providers of the plurality of service providers; and determining one or more task completions associated with the task, the one or more service providers; and the transaction approval process initiation message, (Summary of the Invention Section, According to a first aspect of the present invention, an event processing apparatus is provided for use in processing service initiation request messages in an event processing system, the apparatus being connectable to a plurality of service nodes from the which a subscriber can receive service during the processing of a network event, each said service node being able to transmit a service response message comprising particular data for operation of the service node, the apparatus comprising an arranged function, upon receiving a first service initiation request message sent by a server node in a network currently involved in processing said network event, to request service response messages from a plurality of service nodes, and to control the operation of at least some of said plurality of service nodes involved in the processing of the same network event based on the data contained in said service response messages, in which, in the event that the data contained in a service response message received from one of the plurality of service nodes is indicative of a request for a signaling resource that overlaps or conflicts with data contained in a message of service response received from another of the plurality of service nodes, the function is arranged to process the data contained in respective service response messages based on attribute data to enable access to the signaling resource requested by each respective node of service involved in processing the same network event) Examiner interprets the term service providers is analogous for the term different parties to the contract in the cited prior art.
One of ordinary skill in the art would have recognized that applying the known technique of O’Neill to the known invention of Thekadath as modified would have been recognized that the application of the technique would have yielded predictable results because the level of ordinary skill in the art demonstrated by the references applied shows the ability to incorporate service provider features into a similar invention. Further, it would have been recognized by those of ordinary skill in the art that modifying the method of to include assigning a task to one or more service providers of the plurality of service providers and determining one or more task completions associated with the task, the one or more service providers and the transaction approval process initiation message results in an improved invention because applying said technique will ensure that a user can assign a task to each of the service providers and that the tasks completed to optimize the workflow, thus improving the overall performance of the invention.
Thekadath as modified does not explicitly disclose monitoring, by a smart contract, the first distributed ledger for an indication of an approval event for the transaction associated with the transaction approval process initiation message,
However, Vivas teaches monitoring, by a smart contract, the first distributed ledger for an indication of an approval event for the transaction associated with the transaction approval process initiation message, (Para. 0018, Command interpreter 108 can also be configured to monitor the instructions received to determine if one or more logical conditions that relate to an aspect of the smart contract have been satisfied. Alternatively, the interpreter 108 can make requests to different APIs to determine if a logical condition has been met. Examples of logical conditions can include any data or command relating to contract formation such as an offer, counter-offer, acceptance, performance, payment, or any related evidence/proof thereof.; and Para. 0067-0068, Once smart contract application has updated status according to the selected milestone, user can review all items at step 508. Review can include approving, rejecting, or editing one or more items that are pending in the contract. If changes are made to a milestone at step 510, the method can proceed to step 512 wherein parties can approve the changes. Smart contract application can prompt or alert users to items that need approval in a particular milestone. As a continuation of the example above regarding shipment of goods, smart contract application can send an alert to the receiving party advising that the goods have been shipped. The receiving party can review, approve or acknowledge the update to the milestone.)
One of ordinary skill in the art would have recognized that applying the known technique of Vivas to the known invention of Thekadath as modified would have been recognized that the application of the technique would have yielded predictable results because the level of ordinary skill in the art demonstrated by the references applied shows the ability to incorporate smart contract features into a similar invention. Further, it would have been recognized by those of ordinary skill in the art that modifying the method to include monitoring, by a smart contract, the first distributed ledger for an indication of an approval event for the transaction associated with the transaction approval process initiation message, results in an improved invention because applying said technique will ensure that the system is automatically monitoring and checking the distributed ledger for approvals, thus improving the overall performance of the invention.
Thekadath as modified does not explicitly disclose the method comprising: communicating a settlement event message to a second distributed ledger, wherein a financial institution, a merchant, and/or a treasury service participate in the second distributed ledger, and the first distributed ledger and the second distributed ledger are separate distributed ledgers.
However, Yan teaches the method comprising: communicating a settlement event message to a second distributed ledger, wherein a financial institution, a merchant, and/or a treasury service participate in the second distributed ledger, and the first distributed ledger and the second distributed ledger are separate distributed ledgers, (Para. 0018, Various embodiments of the present disclosure can include systems, methods, and non-transitory computer readable media configured to host a blockchain associated with at least a first blockchain-based supply chain payment network and a second blockchain-based supply chain payment network. The blockchain can be a distributed database that includes a plurality of data records that represent transactions in the first blockchain-based supply chain payment network and transactions in the second blockchain-based supply chain payment network. A transaction between network participants associated with the first blockchain-based supply chain payment network can be determined. The transaction can be based on payment tokens minted for circulation in the first blockchain-based supply chain payment network. A data record that represents the transaction between the network participants associated with the first blockchain-based supply chain payment network can be verified. The data record can be posted to the blockchain associated with the first blockchain-based supply chain payment network and the second blockchain-based supply chain payment network.; and Para. 0020, determining a transaction between network participants associated with the second blockchain-based supply chain payment network, wherein the transaction is based on payment tokens minted for circulation in the second blockchain-based supply chain payment network; and verifying a data record that represents the transaction between the network participants associated with the second blockchain-based supply chain payment network, wherein the data record is posted to the blockchain associated with the first blockchain-based supply chain payment network and the second blockchain-based supply chain payment network.; and Para. 0025, determining a request from a network participant associated with the second blockchain-based supply chain payment network to convert one or more payment tokens minted for circulation in the second blockchain-based supply chain payment network to fiat or digital currency; and providing instructions to a computing system of a financial institution associated with the second blockchain-based supply chain payment network to convert the one or more payment tokens to fiat or digital currency, wherein the one or more payment tokens are burned after conversion.)
One of ordinary skill in the art would have recognized that applying the known technique of Yan to the known invention of Thekadath as modified would have been recognized that the application of the technique would have yielded predictable results because the level of ordinary skill in the art demonstrated by the references applied shows the ability to incorporate service provider features into a similar invention. Further, it would have been recognized by those of ordinary skill in the art that modifying the method to include communicating a settlement event message to a second distributed ledger, wherein a financial institution, a merchant, and/or a treasury service participate in the second distributed ledger, and the first distributed ledger and the second distributed ledger are separate distributed ledgers results in an improved invention because applying said technique automatically passes settlement information from the first distributed ledger to a separate distributed ledger, thus improving the overall performance of the invention.
Thekadath as modified does not explicitly disclose recording, on a first distributed ledger, the transaction approval process initiation message, wherein the plurality of service providers participate on the first distributed ledger.
However, Yan teaches recording, on a first distributed ledger, the transaction approval process initiation message, wherein the plurality of service providers participate on the first distributed ledger, (Para. 0003, A blockchain network is generally comprised of nodes (e.g., computing systems) that collaboratively manage a distributed database (e.g., a decentralized digital ledger). The decentralized digital ledger can be used to record various transactions that occur between network participants in a verifiable manner. For example, nodes in a blockchain network can record payment transactions in blocks that are successively linked together using cryptography to form a blockchain. Typically, each block in the blockchain includes a cryptographic hash of a preceding block in the blockchain. The blockchain can continually be updated and distributed to nodes in the blockchain network. In general, the blockchain improves transparency while ensuring data immutability subject to consensus protocols.; and Para. 0013, the transactions are between a company and one or more suppliers in the blockchain-based supply chain payment network or between a supplier and another supplier in the blockchain-based supply chain payment network.; and Claim 1. A computer-implemented method for managing supply chain payment transactions in a supply chain associated with a company based on a blockchain network associated with the company, the method comprising: storing, by at least one T-node, (i) a blockchain that can record supply chain payment transactions that occur in the supply chain associated with the company and (ii) a different blockchain that can record supply chain payment transactions that occur in a different supply chain associated with a different company, wherein the at least one T-node participates as (i) a node in the blockchain network associated with the company and (ii) as a separate node in a blockchain network associated with the different company, wherein the at least one T-node is controlled by a supplier included in both (i) the supply chain associated with the company and (ii) the different supply chain associated with the different company, and wherein the blockchain is a distributed database that includes a plurality of data records that each represent a supply chain payment transaction; determining, by the at least one T-node, a data record describing a supply chain payment transaction between entities included in the supply chain, wherein the supply chain payment transaction corresponds to a payment from an I-node that participates as a node in the blockchain network to a U-node associated with the blockchain network, wherein the I-node is controlled by the company, wherein the U-node is a digital wallet associated with another supplier in the supply chain, the determining being based on a notification to the at least one T-node from the I-node, wherein the payment is based on payment tokens minted by the I-node for circulation in the supply chain, and wherein the payment tokens are redeemable through the I-node; and verifying, by the at least one T-node, the data record that represents the transaction between the entities associated with the supply chain, wherein the data record is posted to the blockchain that records supply chain payment transactions that occur in the supply chain.)
One of ordinary skill in the art would have recognized that applying the known technique of Olson to the known invention of Thekadath as modified would have been recognized that the application of the technique would have yielded predictable results because the level of ordinary skill in the art demonstrated by the references applied shows the ability to incorporate service provider features into a similar invention. Further, it would have been recognized by those of ordinary skill in the art that modifying the method to include recording, on a first distributed ledger, the transaction approval process initiation message, wherein the plurality of service providers participate on the first distributed ledger results in an improved invention because applying said technique will ensure that the approval request are recorded on the ledger, thus improving the overall performance of the invention.
Thekadath does not explicitly disclose generating, based on the settlement event message, a virtual payment instrument for the transaction associated with the settlement event message, the indication of the approval event, and the transaction approval process initiation message.
However, Yan teaches generating, by the financial institution, the merchant, and/or the treasury service and based on the settlement event message, a virtual payment instrument for the transaction associated with the settlement event message, the indication of the approval event, and the transaction approval process initiation message, (Para. 0004, configured to mint payment tokens to conduct transactions within a blockchain-based supply chain payment network. The payment tokens can be pegged to fiat currency or digital currency. The payment tokens can be minted by a computing system that is a node in the blockchain-based supply chain payment network. A number of payment tokens to be provided to a network participant as payment can be determined. The network participant can be a supplier associated with the blockchain-based supply chain payment network. The number of payment tokens can be provided for deposit in a digital wallet associated with the network participant as payment. The cryptocurrency tokens can be redeemed as fiat or digital currency.; and Para. 0009, the number of payment tokens to be provided to the network participant is determined based on a smart contract.; and Claim 7. The computer-implemented method of claim 1, further comprising: determining, by the at least one T-node, a request from the U-node to convert one or more payment tokens minted for circulation in the supply chain to fiat or digital currency; and providing, by the at least one T-node, instructions to a computing system of a financial institution associated with the supply chain to convert the one or more payment tokens to fiat or digital currency, wherein the one or more payment tokens are burned after conversion.)
One of ordinary skill in the art would have recognized that applying the known technique of Yan to the known invention of Thekadath as modified would have been recognized that the application of the technique would have yielded predictable results because the level of ordinary skill in the art demonstrated by the references applied shows the ability to incorporate virtual payment instrument features into a similar invention. Further, it would have been recognized by those of ordinary skill in the art that modifying the method to include generating, based on the settlement event message, a virtual payment instrument for the transaction associated with the settlement event message, the indication of the approval event, and the transaction approval process initiation message results in an improved invention because applying said technique will ensure that the transactions are ready to get finalized in the workflow, thus improving the overall performance of the invention.
7. Regarding claims 4, 10, and 16, Thekadath discloses receiving, by a financial institution, the settlement event message; generating a virtual payment based on the settlement event message, (Column 6/line 16, In some embodiments, a node may be a physical electronic device that is capable of creating, receiving, or transmitting data. In other embodiments, a node may be a software module on a computing device, the software module a connection point in a communication network. In some embodiments, a node may be a computing device within an asset transfer network. A node may be able to mint an asset, transfer an asset, receive an asset, validate an asset, maintain a ledger of transactions, and/or perform any other suitable functions. Different types of nodes may be able to perform different sets of functions within an asset transfer network. In some embodiments, a node may be associated with and/or operated by a financial institution computer (e.g., a bank), a payment processor computer, a third party computer, or any other suitable entity; and Column 9/line 38, Accordingly, when the recipient institution receives an official digital asset associated with the asset transfer network, the recipient institution may be informed and guaranteed that value will be transferred from the user's account to the resource provider's account. The value can be settled between the accounts at a later time (e.g., through settlement account at a central settlement bank).) Examiner interprets the term settlement event message is analogous for the term digital asset associated with the asset transfer network in the cited prior art.
recording, on the second distributed ledger, an identifier of the virtual payment instrument, and assigning a value to the virtual payment instrument based on the approval event, (Column 45/line 20, In some embodiments, each data center can have an identical blockchain ledger with a matching set of digital asset records. In other embodiments, each data center can have a blockchain ledger that includes all digital assets, but the different blockchain ledgers can have digital assets and/or blocks listed in a different sequence. As a result, the block headers may also have different values (e.g., if the headers are generated based on the digital assets recorded in the block). In the method 1000, data centers in group A may share transaction data (e.g., block body data) with one another, but not with data centers of other groups, as described above. Accordingly, as described above for steps S805-S850 in the method 800, the first data center 750 can receive and process digital asset transfer requests, create a new block for a blockchain, and share information about the processed digital assets and new block with the second data center 850 (which is in group A). The first data center 750 may then prepare to send a ledger update to a third data center 950 in group B, but may first adjust the ledger update message (e.g., by removing transaction data from the message). At step S855, the first data center 750 can remove the transaction data from the ledger update message. For example, the first data center 750 can remove digital asset information from the ledger update message, such as information identifying the sender or recipient, a transfer value, a time and date, and/or any other suitable information. This can include removing some or all of the block body data from the message. However, the first data center 750 does not remove the block header (or other suitable transaction identifier or a transaction group identifier; and Column 9/line 64), The sending institution computer 160 may store value on behalf of the user. The sending institution computer 160 may also be able to provide value (e.g., provide a payment) on behalf of the user. An example of a sending institution may be an issuer, which may typically refer to a business entity (e.g., a bank) that issues and maintains an account (e.g., a bank account) for a user.).) Examiner interprets the term identifier of the virtual payment instrument is analogous for the term transaction identifier in the cited prior art.
8. Regarding claims 5, 11, and 17, Thekadath as modified further discloses comprising: funding the payment instrument based on the value assigned, (Column 12/line 25, A transaction processing computer may be representative of a transaction processing network. An exemplary transaction processing network may include VisaNet™. Transaction processing networks such as VisaNet™ are able to process credit card transactions, debit card transactions, and other types of commercial transactions. VisaNet™, in particular, includes a VIP system (Visa Integrated Payments system) which processes authorization requests and a Base II system which performs clearing and settlement services; and Column 35/line 20. In some embodiments, the recipient institution computer 140 may make a value indicated in a received digital asset immediately usable (e.g., withdrawable) in a resource provider account. The recipient institution computer 140 may settle the transaction by receiving the actual value from the sending institution computer 160 (instead of just an IOU) at a later time.) Examiner interprets the term funding is analogous for the term digital asset immediately usable in the cited prior art.
settling a transaction, using the payment instrument, with one or more recipients based on the approval event, the settlement event. (Column 10/line 59, the sending institution computer 160 may instruct the issuer node computer 165 to initiate a value transfer from the user account to the resource provider account. The issuer node computer 165 may then generate a digital asset indicating a transfer of funds from the user to the resource provider. The issuer node computer 165 may digitally sign the digital asset, obtain a second digital signature from the administrative node computer 150, and provide the digital asset to the recipient node computer 145. The recipient node computer 145 may provide the digital asset to the recipient institution computer 140; and Column 15/line 39, Further, the digital signature can generate and/or activate a smart contract that holds the sending institution computer 160 liable for the sending amount in the originating currency. For example, a smart contract can automatically initiate a settlement process after a certain amount of time. In some embodiments, the administrative node computer 150 can force settlement between a sending institution account and a recipient institution account at a central bank.)
9. Claims 2, 8, and 14 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Thekadath et al. (US 10715531 B2), in view of Komandur et al. (US 20200177373 A1), in view of O’Neill et al. (ES 2639563 T3), in view of Vivas et al. (US 20220108311 A1), in view of Yan et al. (US 20220156726 A1), and further in view of Sliwka et al. (US 20210082044 A1).
10. Regarding claims 2, 8, and 14, Thekadath as modified does not explicitly disclose wherein the settlement event message comprises a claim identifier, a recipient, a value associated with the recipient, and a status indicator of the settlement event.
However, Sliwka teaches wherein the settlement event message comprises a claim identifier, a recipient, a value associated with the recipient, and a status indicator of the settlement event, (Para. 0067, Thus in embodiments, the tokenization platform may be configured to issue electronic tokens (or “tokens”) that are configured to be stored on a cryptographically secure ledger to provide a process by which virtual representations allow the transfer of the item between unknown parties, while also allowing anyone to check the status of the token at any time and trust that it is correct; and Para. 0075, In some embodiments, the seller of an item (or any other suitable user) may access the platform 100 to define a virtual representation of the item that the seller is offering for transaction. The virtual representation of the item may include information that identifies the item (e.g., a serial number corresponding to the item, a model number of the item, and the like), information relating to the item (e.g., a classification of the item, textual descriptions, images, audio, video, virtual reality data, augmented reality data, and the like), and/or code that may be used to facilitate or verify transactions involving the item (e.g., smart contracts); and Para. 0085, A token may be transmitted amongst users in any suitable manner. For example, a token may be transmitted via email, instant message, text message, digital transfer, social media platforms, and the like. In some of these embodiments, the token may be transmitted directly from the sender's user device 190 (e.g., from the user's digital wallet) to a user device 190 (e.g., smartphone) or account (e.g., email account or messaging application) associated with the intended recipient. Upon initiating the transmission, the digital wallet may transmit a transfer request to the platform 100 and may transmit a copy of the token to the recipient's user device 190 or specified account). Examiner interprets the term status indicator is analogous for the term check the status of the token at any time in the cited prior art. Examiner interprets the term claim identifier is analogous for the term serial number in the cited prior art.
One of ordinary skill in the art would have recognized that applying the known technique of Sliwka to the known invention of Thekadath as modified would have been recognized that the application of the technique would have yielded predictable results because the level of ordinary skill in the art demonstrated by the references applied shows the ability to incorporate identifier features into a similar invention. Further, it would have been recognized by those of ordinary skill in the art that modifying the invention to wherein the settlement event message comprises a claim identifier, a recipient, a value associated with the recipient, and a status indicator of the settlement event results in an improved invention because applying said technique will ensure that the settlement message incudes the information needed to settle a transaction, thus improving the overall performance of the invention.
11. Claims 6, 12, and 18 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Thekadath et al. (US 10715531 B2), in view of Komandur et al. (US 20200177373 A1), in view of O’Neill et al. (ES 2639563 T3), in view of Vivas et al. (US 20220108311 A1), in view of Yan et al. (US 20220156726 A1), and further in view of Gao et al. (CN 111125787 A).
12. Regarding claims 6, 12, and 18, Thekadath discloses wherein monitoring, the first distributed ledger that includes one or more approvals and a complete status identifier, (Column 15/line 56, The update ledger module 150L may comprise code that causes the processor 150A to maintain a ledger of transactions. For example, the update ledger module 150L may contain logic that causes the processor 150A to record information about a digital asset along with records of previous digital assets. For example, the administrative node computer 150 may record a digital asset once it is minted (e.g., approved and digitally signed), and/or once it is sent to the recipient node computer 145. The ledger may be certified as authentic by the administrative node computer 150, and authenticity can be shown by a digital signature (e.g., for each transaction, or for the entire ledger; and Column 5/line 22, A data element can also be used to describe an update, a change, or a request. For example, a data element can include digital information about a change in a person's medical status, an update about the number of sick days an employee has used, a request to validate or approve of a value transfer, or a promise to transfer a value from one entity to another. One example of a data element is a digital asset.) Examiner interprets the term approvals is analogous for the term digital asset once it is minted in the cited prior art.
Thekadath as modified does not explicitly disclose polling the first distributed ledger by the smart contract; and detecting an entry written to the first distributed ledger.
However, Gao teaches polling the first distributed ledger by the smart contract; and detecting an entry written to the first distributed ledger, (Summary of the Invention Section, the intelligent module for inspection on chain data stored in the block chain account book, receiving inspection is chain data through smart contract module for polling, and the up-link data in the form of event log stored in the blockchain account book; support all inspection searching the specified device upper chain record, searching the appointed patrol all inspection on the detected human chain record, searching all inspection on chain record, searching the appointed polling person more data inquiry function chain records of all the inspection of appointed device)
One of ordinary skill in the art would have recognized that applying the known technique of Gao to the known invention of Thekadath as modified would have been recognized that the application of the technique would have yielded predictable results because the level of ordinary skill in the art demonstrated by the references applied shows the ability to incorporate smart contract features into a similar invention. Further, it would have been recognized by those of ordinary skill in the art that modifying the smart contract to include polling the first distributed ledger by the smart contract; and detecting an entry written to the first distributed ledger results in an improved invention because applying said technique will ensure the smart contract polls the first distributed ledger to detect if entries are being written on the distributed ledger, thus improving the overall performance of the invention.
13. Claim 13 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Thekadath et al. (US 10715531 B2), in view of Komandur et al. (US 20200177373 A1), in view of Casabella et al. (US 7996488 B1), in view of Yan et al. (US 20220156726 A1).
14. Regarding claim 13, Thekadath as modified does discloses a method for complex process flow approval using distributed ledgers, the method comprising, (Column 5/line 65),
Thekadath does not explicitly disclose generating, by a first service provider of a plurality of service providers a transaction approval process initiation message that initiates a complex approval flow for a transaction based on an interaction between a user and a second service provider of the plurality of service providers; recording the transaction approval process initiation message on a first distributed ledger.
However, Komandur generating, by a first service provider of a plurality of service providers a transaction approval process initiation message that initiates a complex approval flow for a transaction based on an interaction between a user and a second service provider of the plurality of service providers; recording the transaction approval process initiation message on a first distributed ledger, (Para. 0012-0019, When an input set of data fields is received at a first node (e.g., through a user interface), the input set of data fields is processed as the fields represent parameters of an agreement between a plurality of parties. For example, NY would like to establish an agreement with London in respect of sharing the cost of an underlying services contract with a hundred licenses (NY only needs fifty, so it wishes to share fifty with London and the cost should later be reconciled between the offices). In this case, NY could serve as the first node, and the input set of data fields can be received in NY…As the network is a trusted network, blocks storing, among others, transaction data, approvals, and sets of input fields can simply be added to the distributed ledger without proof of work or proof of stake protocols. The set of data elements representing the initial fields of the agreement, when generated, includes a hidden unique primary key (e.g., a seed) that can be sequentially or pseudo-randomly generated. The hidden unique primary key can be used with a one-way hash to expose information regarding the initial agreement, and in some embodiments, the hidden unique primary key is never accessible by any individual human. The computing nodes may interact with the blockchain by providing approvals (e.g., if a corresponding approval is required), through providing an approval signal signed using a private key corresponding to a second party of the plurality of parties. When the approval signal is provided, the blockchain data structure is updated representative of a state transition indicative of an approval by the second party of the agreement represented by the hidden unique primary key. The blockchain data structure can be configured to accept the insertion of the new state transition if and only if there exists at least one outstanding required approval of the series of the one or more required approval signals. For example, insertion of an approval cannot occur once the agreement is fully approved, and further approvals are rejected and not recorded to the blockchain. When all the approvals are obtained, the blockchain may be rendered immutable yet accessible, for example, through a consensus mechanism that does not allow further block transactions on the blockchain data structure.) Examiner interprets the term process initiation message is analogous for the term agreement objects in the cited prior art. Examiner interprets the term complex approval flow is analogous for the term series of the one or more required approval signal, blockchain data structure can be configured to accept the insertion of the new state transition if and only if there exists at least one outstanding required approval of the series of the one or more required approval signals..in the cited prior art.
One of ordinary skill in the art would have recognized that applying the known technique of Komandur to the known invention of Thekadath as modified would have been recognized that the application of the technique would have yielded predictable results because the level of ordinary skill in the art demonstrated by the references applied shows the ability to incorporate service provider features into a similar invention. Further, it would have been recognized by those of ordinary skill in the art that modifying the method including results in an improved invention because applying said technique will ensure that the process message incudes the metadata information that so that transactions can be tracked, thus improving the overall performance of the invention.
Thekadath does not explicitly disclose generating, by the first service provider, a settlement event for the transaction based on an indication of an approval event, wherein the indication of the approval event comprises a completion status of the list of assigned tasks.
However, Komandur teaches generating, by the first service provider, a settlement event for the transaction based on an indication of an approval event, wherein the indication of the approval event comprises a completion status of the list of assigned tasks, (Para. 0017-0019, When the approval signal is provided, the blockchain data structure is updated representative of a state transition indicative of an approval by the second party of the agreement represented by the hidden unique primary key. The blockchain data structure can be configured to accept the insertion of the new state transition if and only if there exists at least one outstanding required approval of the series of the one or more required approval signals. For example, insertion of an approval cannot occur once the agreement is fully approved, and further approvals are rejected and not recorded to the blockchain… When all the approvals are obtained, the blockchain may be rendered immutable yet accessible, for example, through a consensus mechanism that does not allow further block transactions on the blockchain data structure.)
One of ordinary skill in the art would have recognized that applying the known technique of Komandur to the known invention of Thekadath as modified would have been recognized that the application of the technique would have yielded predictable results because the level of ordinary skill in the art demonstrated by the references applied shows the ability to incorporate service provider features into a similar invention. Further, it would have been recognized by those of ordinary skill in the art that modifying the method to include generating, by the first service provider, a settlement event for the transaction based on an indication of an approval event, wherein the indication of the approval event comprises a completion status of the list of assigned tasks; recording, on the first distributed ledger, the settlement event results in an improved invention because applying said technique will ensure that the process message are automatically settled, and recorded on the distributed ledger, thus improving the overall performance of the invention.
Thekadath as modified does explicitly disclose determining, by a smart contract, one or more tasks associated with the transaction approval process initiation message, wherein the transaction approval process initiation message comprises metadata for the transaction including a party name, a party identification number, an account identifier, a disbursement amount, a process identifier, a process status, and a creation date.
However, Casabella teaches determining, by a smart contract, one or more tasks associated with the transaction approval process initiation message, wherein the transaction approval process initiation message comprises metadata for the transaction including a party name, a party identification number, an account identifier, a disbursement amount, a process identifier, a process status, and a creation date; (Abstract Section, Systems and methods are provided to integrate disparate media services and applications across an organization. The media services are connected to an interoperable media services bus by creating a connector API for each service, thereby enabling the media services to exchange messages related to transactions to be performed involving media assets and/or metadata associated with media assets. To support complex transactions involving coordinated activity by multiple media services, an orchestration service advantageously performs a coordinated sequence of request/response transactions, referred to as a "workflow." The workflow may include requests conditional on responses to previous requests, multiple parallel requests, a combination of synchronous and asynchronous requests, and so on. Multiple workflows may be managed concurrently.; Column 3/line 32, and According to another aspect of the present invention, a method for coordinating operation of a plurality of media services includes defining a workflow. The workflow specifies at least two transactions to be performed by at least two of a plurality of media services connected to an interoperable media services bus. The workflow can be executed automatically; for instance, a workflow can be stored in a data store and retrieved by the orchestration service in response to a request to execute the stored workflow. To execute the workflow, an orchestration service generates a first request message that requests a first service related to a first one of the at least two transactions. The orchestration service sends the first request message, via the interoperable media services bus, to a first one of the plurality of media services, which performs the requested service. The orchestration service receives a first response message, responsive to the first request message, via the interoperable media services bus. The orchestration service generates a second request message based at least in part on the first response message. The process of generating and sending request messages, receiving response messages, and generating further request messages based at least in part on the response messages can be continued until execution of the workflow is complete. In some embodiments, the orchestration service maintains state information indicating the status of the workflow execution and updates the state information when request messages are sent and/or responses are received.; and Column 37/line 23, Router mediator 1908 handles all incoming messages, including IMS workflow initiation messages and asynchronous reply messages received via input module 1906 as well as synchronous response messages that are sent directly to router mediator 1908. Router mediator 1908 advantageously maintains a queue of incoming messages that await processing as well as a queue of outgoing messages to be transmitted to various connected services. Messages can be processed in FIFO (first-in, first-out) order, or prioritization logic can be used to allow faster attention to high-priority messages. In one embodiment, router mediator 1908 executes all IMS workflows. In response to an IMS workflow initiation message, router mediator 1908 retrieves the IMS workflow from database 1902 and creates a workflow context that tracks the status of this instance of the IMS workflow. Based on the IMS workflow, router mediator 1908 determines the first message to be sent and sends that message. When a response (which may be synchronous or asynchronous without limitation) is received, router mediator 1908 updates the workflow context and determines the next message to be sent for that IMS workflow based on the response that was received. It is to be understood that router mediator 1908 may maintain numerous concurrent workflow contexts, allowing multiple IMS workflows to be executed concurrently. ;and Column 8/line 5, DAM services 114 and 115 advantageously maintain their catalogs of media assets in respective databases (not explicitly shown). These databases include metadata describing each media asset. The metadata may include any information about the asset, including but not limited to a title, asset type (e.g., movie, movie clip, still image, audio, etc.), asset format, date of creation, names of persons appearing and/or characters depicted in the asset, length and/or file size, location where the asset is stored, ownership and/or provenance of the asset, alternative versions of the asset (e.g., thumbnails or low bit-rate proxy versions), and so on. In some embodiments the metadata may include a "local" asset identifier assigned by the DAM service and/or a "global" asset identifier that may be assigned by the centralized asset ID service 134 as described below. It is to be understood that the particular metadata and metadata schema (e.g., field names and arrangement of metadata) can be different between DAM services 114 and 115.). Examiner interprets the term generating is analogous for the term creating in the cited prior art.
One of ordinary skill in the art would have recognized that applying the known technique of Casabella to the known invention of Thekadath as modified would have been recognized that the application of the technique would have yielded predictable results because the level of ordinary skill in the art demonstrated by the references applied shows the ability to incorporate service provider features into a similar invention. Further, it would have been recognized by those of ordinary skill in the art that modifying the method of to include determining, by a smart contract, one or more tasks associated with the transaction approval process initiation message, wherein the transaction approval process initiation message comprises metadata for the transaction including a party name, a party identification number, an account identifier, a disbursement amount, a process identifier, a process status, and a creation date in an improved invention because applying said technique will ensure that the workflows across the multiple service providers are secure by recording the messages on the ledger, thus improving the overall security and performance of the invention.
Thekadath as modified does explicitly disclose generate a list of assigned tasks, wherein each assigned task is associated with a selected service provider of the plurality of service providers and the transaction approval process initiation message; assigning a first task of the list of assigned tasks to the selected service provider of a plurality of service providers.
However, Casabella teaches generate a list of assigned tasks, wherein each assigned task is associated with a selected service provider of the plurality of service providers and the transaction approval process initiation message; assigning a first task of the list of assigned tasks to the selected service provider of a plurality of service providers, (Column 9/line 63, Each request message advantageously includes a function name that uniquely identifies the function being requested, a list of parameters applicable to the function, protocol bindings, and any other information that needs to be provided. It should be noted that, to the extent possible, where the same function is included in multiple connector classes, the messages invoking that function in each connector class are advantageously the same. Thus, it is possible to create a master list of potentially available functions and define connector classes based on which subset of the master list is supported. To illustrate connector classes, FIG. 2 is a table 200 listing some of the messages supported according to an embodiment of the present invention and indicating which of various connector classes support each message. Column 202 lists messages (by function name) and can be viewed as a portion of a master list of functions. The remaining columns 204 correspond to different connector classes that might be defined: "T-code" is a transcoder class, "Editor" is an editor class, "HSM" is a hierarchical storage manager class; "Storage" is a non-hierarchical storage manager class, and "DAM" is a digital asset manager class. It is to be understood that the number and combination of supported classes may vary from that shown. A check mark indicates that a particular function is supported by a particular connector classes. A first group of functions 210 includes functions applicable to services that maintain asset databases, such as HSM service 116 and DAM services 114 and 115 of FIG. 1. "SearchAssetMetadata" provides an interface via which a client (e.g., a consumer) can query the database. In some embodiments, IMS bus 102 can use metadata mapping service 136 to translate a query into the appropriate schema for the service, as described below. The response to a SearchAssetMetadata request advantageously includes a listing of results of the query. "BrowseAssets" allows a client to request a list of assets managed or stored by the service; the service responds by returning some or all of the metadata for each asset in the database. "VerifyAssetPresence" allows a client to query whether a particular asset is or is not stored by the service; the service returns a yes/no response. "SendAssetMetadata" allows a requester to obtain all of the metadata for an asset specified in the message; the service returns all of the metadata for the specified asset; and Column 4/line 65, In some embodiments, the accounting service maintains an account for each business unit that is debited for transactions in which that business unit's system acts as the requesting client and credited for transactions in which that business unit's system acts as the service provider. In addition to per-transaction costs, the accounting service may charge a periodic "connection fee" for each connected service to cover costs associated with maintaining IMS bus 102; such a fee would be credited to the business unit that maintains IMS bus 102.; and Column 27/line 45, Periodically, the accounting service may generate invoices (or checks or other payment instruments) to the various business units based on their current account balances. Alternatively, if the accounting service has direct access, the accounting service may transfer funds from one business unit to another. Still other centralized services might include rendering and production services usable to create media assets, encoding services and the like. Such services can be specially implemented for IMS system 100, or they can be conventional systems with connector APIs similar to editing service 117 and/or transcoding service 118.; and Column 33/line 4, If, at step 1706, sender 1402 decides to grant the request, then at step 1714, sender 1402 returns a grant message 1422 to recipient 1404 via IMS bus 102 to confirm that sender 1402 will undertake to transfer media asset 1406. Sender 1402 then generates (step 1716) a new waybill 1408 describing the transfer. Creating waybill 1408 may include, e.g., populating the fields in identifiers category 1530 and task definition category 1550 and inserting a timestamp 1514 and account number 1516 in attributes category 1510. Sender 1402 sends the new waybill 1408 to transport service 150, in particular to manager 1604 of FIG. 16 (step 1718). At step 1720, transport manager 1604 validates the new waybill 1408. Validating may include testing the validity or internal consistency of any or all information included in waybill 1408. For instance, manager 1604 may check transport profiles data store 1312 (FIG. 13) to verify that it has transport profiles for sender 1402 and recipient 1404. Manager 1604 may also determine whether the system ID in field 1532 corresponds to the file identifier 1536 to verify that waybill 1408 originated from the service currently in possession of the media asset to be transferred. Other validity tests may also be performed at step 1720. If waybill 1408 is determined to be invalid, manager 1604 reports an error to sender 1402 at step 1722, and process 1700 ends (step 1724). If, at step 1720, waybill 1408 is successfully validated, then at step 1728, manager 1604 responds to sender 1402 with proposed delivery terms. The terms may include, e.g., estimated cost, expected date and/or time of delivery, security measures to be used, etc. In one embodiment, the delivery terms are presented by modifying constraints 1552 in waybill 1408 and returning waybill 1408 to sender 1402 for approval. At step 1730, sender 1402 reviews the terms and decides whether to accept them. Depending on implementation, step 1730 may include user approval and/or automatic decision procedures. If sender 1402 rejects the terms, then at step 1732, sender 1402 cancels the new waybill 1408, e.g., by modifying action field 1518 to include the "cancel" action and returning the modified waybill 1408 to transport manager 1604. At step 1734, sender 1402 may notify recipient 1404 that the asset will not be transported, and process 1700 ends (step 1736). In response to a notification of non-transport, recipient 1404 may take appropriate action, such as renewing the request (which would restart process 1700 from step 1702) or seeking to obtain the asset through an alternative channel.)
One of ordinary skill in the art would have recognized that applying the known technique of Casabella to the known invention of Thekadath as modified would have been recognized that the application of the technique would have yielded predictable results because the level of ordinary skill in the art demonstrated by the references applied shows the ability to incorporate service provider features into a similar invention. Further, it would have been recognized by those of ordinary skill in the art that modifying the method of to include generating a list of assigned tasks, wherein each assigned task is associated with a selected service provider of the plurality of service providers and the transaction approval process initiation message; assigning a first task of the list of assigned tasks to the selected service provider of a plurality of service providers results in an improved invention because applying said technique will ensures that tasks are performed correctly by tracking the workflow to make sure all tasks are completed efficiently, thus improving the overall performance of the invention.
Thekadath as modified does not explicitly disclose communicating a settlement event message to a second distributed ledger, wherein a financial institution, a merchant, and/or a treasury service participate in the second distributed ledger, and the first distributed ledger and the second distributed ledger are separate distributed ledgers.
However, Yan teaches communicating a settlement event message to a second distributed ledger, wherein a financial institution, a merchant, and/or a treasury service participate in the second distributed ledger, and the first distributed ledger and the second distributed ledger are separate distributed ledgers, (Para. 0018, Various embodiments of the present disclosure can include systems, methods, and non-transitory computer readable media configured to host a blockchain associated with at least a first blockchain-based supply chain payment network and a second blockchain-based supply chain payment network. The blockchain can be a distributed database that includes a plurality of data records that represent transactions in the first blockchain-based supply chain payment network and transactions in the second blockchain-based supply chain payment network. A transaction between network participants associated with the first blockchain-based supply chain payment network can be determined. The transaction can be based on payment tokens minted for circulation in the first blockchain-based supply chain payment network. A data record that represents the transaction between the network participants associated with the first blockchain-based supply chain payment network can be verified. The data record can be posted to the blockchain associated with the first blockchain-based supply chain payment network and the second blockchain-based supply chain payment network.; and Para. 0020, determining a transaction between network participants associated with the second blockchain-based supply chain payment network, wherein the transaction is based on payment tokens minted for circulation in the second blockchain-based supply chain payment network; and verifying a data record that represents the transaction between the network participants associated with the second blockchain-based supply chain payment network, wherein the data record is posted to the blockchain associated with the first blockchain-based supply chain payment network and the second blockchain-based supply chain payment network.; and Para. 0025, determining a request from a network participant associated with the second blockchain-based supply chain payment network to convert one or more payment tokens minted for circulation in the second blockchain-based supply chain payment network to fiat or digital currency; and providing instructions to a computing system of a financial institution associated with the second blockchain-based supply chain payment network to convert the one or more payment tokens to fiat or digital currency, wherein the one or more payment tokens are burned after conversion.)
One of ordinary skill in the art would have recognized that applying the known technique of Yan to the known invention of Thekadath as modified would have been recognized that the application of the technique would have yielded predictable results because the level of ordinary skill in the art demonstrated by the references applied shows the ability to incorporate service provider features into a similar invention. Further, it would have been recognized by those of ordinary skill in the art that modifying the method to include communicating a settlement event message to a second distributed ledger, wherein a financial institution, a merchant, and/or a treasury service participate in the second distributed ledger, and the first distributed ledger and the second distributed ledger are separate distributed ledgers results in an improved invention because applying said technique automatically passes settlement information from the first distributed ledger to a separate distributed ledger, thus improving the overall performance of the invention.
Thekadath as modified does not explicitly disclose recording, on the first distributed ledger, the settlement event, wherein the plurality of service providers participate on the first distributed ledger.
However, Yan teaches recording, on the first distributed ledger, the settlement event, wherein the plurality of service providers participate on the first distributed ledger, (Para. 0003, A blockchain network is generally comprised of nodes (e.g., computing systems) that collaboratively manage a distributed database (e.g., a decentralized digital ledger). The decentralized digital ledger can be used to record various transactions that occur between network participants in a verifiable manner. For example, nodes in a blockchain network can record payment transactions in blocks that are successively linked together using cryptography to form a blockchain. Typically, each block in the blockchain includes a cryptographic hash of a preceding block in the blockchain. The blockchain can continually be updated and distributed to nodes in the blockchain network. In general, the blockchain improves transparency while ensuring data immutability subject to consensus protocols.; and Para. 0013, the transactions are between a company and one or more suppliers in the blockchain-based supply chain payment network or between a supplier and another supplier in the blockchain-based supply chain payment network.; and Claim 1. A computer-implemented method for managing supply chain payment transactions in a supply chain associated with a company based on a blockchain network associated with the company, the method comprising: storing, by at least one T-node, (i) a blockchain that can record supply chain payment transactions that occur in the supply chain associated with the company and (ii) a different blockchain that can record supply chain payment transactions that occur in a different supply chain associated with a different company, wherein the at least one T-node participates as (i) a node in the blockchain network associated with the company and (ii) as a separate node in a blockchain network associated with the different company, wherein the at least one T-node is controlled by a supplier included in both (i) the supply chain associated with the company and (ii) the different supply chain associated with the different company, and wherein the blockchain is a distributed database that includes a plurality of data records that each represent a supply chain payment transaction; determining, by the at least one T-node, a data record describing a supply chain payment transaction between entities included in the supply chain, wherein the supply chain payment transaction corresponds to a payment from an I-node that participates as a node in the blockchain network to a U-node associated with the blockchain network, wherein the I-node is controlled by the company, wherein the U-node is a digital wallet associated with another supplier in the supply chain, the determining being based on a notification to the at least one T-node from the I-node, wherein the payment is based on payment tokens minted by the I-node for circulation in the supply chain, and wherein the payment tokens are redeemable through the I-node; and verifying, by the at least one T-node, the data record that represents the transaction between the entities associated with the supply chain, wherein the data record is posted to the blockchain that records supply chain payment transactions that occur in the supply chain.)
One of ordinary skill in the art would have recognized that applying the known technique of Olson to the known invention of Thekadath as modified would have been recognized that the application of the technique would have yielded predictable results because the level of ordinary skill in the art demonstrated by the references applied shows the ability to incorporate service provider features into a similar invention. Further, it would have been recognized by those of ordinary skill in the art that modifying the method to include recording, on the first distributed ledger, the settlement event, wherein the plurality of service providers participate on the first distributed ledger results in an improved invention because applying said technique will ensure that the approval request are recorded on the ledger, thus improving the overall performance of the invention.
Thekadath does not explicitly disclose generating, by the financial institution, the merchant, and/or the treasury service and based on the settlement event message, a virtual payment instrument for the transaction associated with the settlement event message, the indication of the approval event, and the transaction approval process initiation message.
However, Yan teaches generating, by the financial institution, the merchant, and/or the treasury service and based on the settlement event message, a virtual payment instrument for the transaction associated with the settlement event message, the indication of the approval event, and the transaction approval process initiation message, (Para. 0004, configured to mint payment tokens to conduct transactions within a blockchain-based supply chain payment network. The payment tokens can be pegged to fiat currency or digital currency. The payment tokens can be minted by a computing system that is a node in the blockchain-based supply chain payment network. A number of payment tokens to be provided to a network participant as payment can be determined. The network participant can be a supplier associated with the blockchain-based supply chain payment network. The number of payment tokens can be provided for deposit in a digital wallet associated with the network participant as payment. The cryptocurrency tokens can be redeemed as fiat or digital currency.; and Para. 0009, the number of payment tokens to be provided to the network participant is determined based on a smart contract.; and Claim 7. The computer-implemented method of claim 1, further comprising: determining, by the at least one T-node, a request from the U-node to convert one or more payment tokens minted for circulation in the supply chain to fiat or digital currency; and providing, by the at least one T-node, instructions to a computing system of a financial institution associated with the supply chain to convert the one or more payment tokens to fiat or digital currency, wherein the one or more payment tokens are burned after conversion.)
One of ordinary skill in the art would have recognized that applying the known technique of Yan to the known invention of Thekadath as modified would have been recognized that the application of the technique would have yielded predictable results because the level of ordinary skill in the art demonstrated by the references applied shows the ability to incorporate virtual payment instrument features into a similar invention. Further, it would have been recognized by those of ordinary skill in the art that modifying the method to include generating, by the financial institution, the merchant, and/or the treasury service and based on the settlement event message, a virtual payment instrument for the transaction associated with the settlement event message, the indication of the approval event, and the transaction approval process initiation message results in an improved invention because applying said technique will ensure that the transactions are ready to get finalized in the workflow, thus improving the overall performance of the invention.
Conclusion
THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a). The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Systems and Method for Validation of Distributed Data Storage Systems (US 20210224792 A1) teaches a risk framework tool for a distributed ledger-based computing system (i.e., blockchain) that can present a common risk framework to a user that can then allow for the user to determine what risks are important for it to manage. The risk framework can then take those specified risks and convert them in to a plurality of tests that can be used to validate the organization's blockchain system. In one or more examples, the risk framework can provide a graphical user interface to user that allows them specify the risks they wish to manage within the blockchain computing system, and based on the user's inputs, can determine one or more continuous real-time validation tests to be performed on the blockchain computing system so as to characterize the risk specified by user using the risk framework.
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 mailing date of this final action.
In addition to the foregoing, other aspects are described in the claims, drawings, and text. Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Davida L. King whose telephone number is (571) 272-4724. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 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, Neha 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.
/D.L.K./Examiner, Art Unit 3699
Prosecution Insights