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 .
Terminal Disclaimer
The terminal disclaimer filed on 18 February 2026 disclaiming the terminal portion of any patent granted on this application which would extend beyond the expiration date of 17829616 has been reviewed and is accepted. The terminal disclaimer has been recorded.
Response to Amendment
The amendment filed 18 February 2026 has been entered. Applicant amended claims 1 and 11. Applicant previously cancelled claims 2, 6, 12, and 16. Accordingly, claims 1, 3-5, 7-11, 13-15, and 17-22 remain pending.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 18 February 2026 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
Remarks regarding Applicant’s remarks in “Prior Art Exception under 35 USC 102(b)(2)(A) and 102(b)(2)(C)
Applicant’s argument:
Respectfully, for the reasons set forth below, Applicant submits that the prior-art exceptions under 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(A) and 102(b)(2)(C) apply, and that the subject matter of Sheikh et at relied upon in the present rejection should be disqualified as prior art to this invention.
Examiner’s remarks:
Sheikh US 20190080393 qualifies as prior art under 35 USC 102(a)(1) because the publication date 14 March 2019 is before the effective filing date (01 June 2022) of this instant Application 17829612. Sheikh does not qualify as prior art under 35 USC 102(a)(2), the exception the Applicant raised in the remarks. The exception under 35 USC 102(a)(1) does not apply because Shiekh is outside the grace period. The exception 102(b)(1)(b) also does not apply because Sheikh is outside the one year grace period.
Remarks regarding the 35 USC 103 rejection:
Applicant’s remarks:
Sheikh does not permit dynamic identification of a distinct, contextually related service during execution of a first service, nor initiation of a second service while the first service is being performed without interrupting or restarting execution. This incompatibility arises from the execution model itself, rather than from a mere omission in disclosure.
The Examiner's reliance on disclosures concerning multiple bids or collaboration among
service providers does not resolve this incompatibility when the claims are read according to their express execution constraints. In Sheikh, multiple bids represent alternative offers evaluated prior to contract formation, and collaboration refers to multiple provider agents jointly delivering a single service whose scope is fixed before execution. By contrast, claim 1 requires dynamic identification of a distinct, related service during execution of a first service and autonomous initiation of that additional service with temporal overlap. Treating completion of remaining portions of a pre-defined service as 'dynamic identification of an additional service' would read out the execution-time and architectural limitations recited
in the claim.
Sheikh also does not disclose the claimed intermediate verification workflow. While
payment handling and security checks are described in connection with contract formation, claim I requires intermediate steps such as payment security verification, digital signature verification, and service review to be executed during service performance as part of a state-
controlled workflow. Relocating these steps from pre-execution contract formation into execution would require a fundamental re-architecting of Sheikh's control flow, which is
neither taught nor suggested.
Examiner’s remarks:
Page 4, of Applicant specification recite the term service as used as used herein refers to an arrangement (namely, "means for") performing an action (namely, an activity) and/or providing assistance for performing such an action. The claims does not place metes and bounds on when the service starts and when the service ends.
Paragraph 64 of Shiekh indicates that multiple services can be performed. Paragraphs 92 and 95-39 reveal the system dynamically identifies agents to perform one service and additional services (remaining portion of the service that relates to the one service). Dynamically identifying/selecting can be interpreted as choosing/filtering the service provider agents in real time based on confidence scores of the service provider AEA. Paragraphs 95-99 also disclose an aggregation of services (additional services) for one service is provided/selected. One of the multiple service provider AEA operates as a secondary client AEA wherein the secondary client AEA is operable to execute a first portion of the service (first service selection) and generate a second service request for executing a remaining portion of the service (additional service selection).
Applying BRI, the start of the services may include via the interaction of the AEA with the service provider (paragraph 82 in the fulfilling/execution of the smart contract) to provide the service and the end of the service may include when the user provide satisfaction rating subsequent to receiving the service (paragraph 73). Therefore, paragraph 82 of Shiekh reveals the intermediate steps of performing verification of payment information via generating agreements/smart contracts that is self-verifying, self-enforcing, and self-fulling during execution of the service because the contract is enforced and fulfilled contract based on interactions between AEAs, wherein paragraph 63 reveals AEA manages the service process. Paragraph 71 of Shiekh reveals the intermediate steps of providing a review of the at least one service via peer review assessment. Chikada also reveals in page 5, paragraphs 10-11 of verifying a digital signature in a smart contract during executing of the at least one service.
Applicant’s remarks:
The additional references cited by the Examiner do not remedy these deficiencies. Vass
describes mining user data and selecting or recommending offers based on behavioral analysis but operates upstream of service execution and does not orchestrate execution-time workflows, intermediate verification, or concurrent service initiation. Nuki describes generation of digital personas as analytical constructs derived from multi-factor metrics and machine-learning vectors, but such personas do not negotiate, execute, or coordinate services. Neither reference supplies execution-time control or suggests modifying Sheikh's fixed-scope execution model to enable dynamic, in-execution service expansion and concurrent orchestration.
The cited references, whether considered individually or in combination, cannot perform
the claimed sequence without modification that is neither taught nor suggested. It is
respectfully submitted that any conclusion of obviousness would require hindsight reconstruction rather than a teaching or motivation found in the art. For these reasons, it is respectfully requested that rejection of independent claim 1 under 35 U.S.C. §103 is
withdrawn.
Examiner’s remarks
Vass and Nuki were not relied upon to teach the limitations in dispute, please see examiner’s remarks above.
Applicant’s remarks
For the same reasons discussed above with respect to claim 1, the cited art cannot
perform the method steps of claim 11 in the recited order and timing. The Applicant therefore respectfully requests withdrawal of the rejection under 35 U.S.C. §103 to
independent claim 11.
Examiner’s remarks: This is not persuasive please see examiner’s remarks above.
Applicant’s remarks
In the Office Action, the Examiner rejected the dependent claims together
with the corresponding independent claims and did not separately address the additional limitations recited in the dependent claims. In view of that position, the Applicant addresses the dependent claims below on their own technical merits and thus their contribution to
allowability under 35 USC § 103.
Claims 3 and 13 specify that each digital twin comprises a digital identity and that
communication between digital entities is permitted only after completion of an identity- verification step. In the present claims, identity verification functions as a technical execution gate that determines whether autonomous digital twins may establish peer-to-peer communication within a decentralized service-orchestration framework.
Examiner’s remarks
The generality of the claims do not prevent the prior art. The combination of prior art teaches the claimed limitations as disclosed in the Office Action.
Applicant’s remarks
Claims 4 and 14 further require that the digital twin receives explicit user authorization via a user device prior to processing, with the authorization taking one of several enumerated forms, thereby enabling the digital twin to autonomously initiate and perform downstream service- execution processing on behalf of the user without further user involvement. The cited art describes authentication and consent in conventional interaction or data- use scenarios, but does not disclose a …verification step that conditions agent-to- agent communication, nor does it address authorization mechanisms that delegate execution authority to an autonomous agent operating within an ongoing service-execution workflow.
Examiner’s remarks
The generality of the claims do not prevent the prior art. The combination of prior art teaches the claimed limitations as disclosed in the Office Action.
Applicant’s remarks
Claims 5 and 15 recite that the decentralized data communication network is built using
a set of rules that dictate interactions within the network. In the present claims, these rules operate at the execution level to constrain how autonomous digital twins discover services, interact with other agents, and coordinate service execution. While rule-based systems are known generally, the cited references do not employ rule-governed interaction frameworks that control autonomous agent behavior during service discovery and execution within a
decentralized environment.
Examiner’s remarks
The generality of the claims do not prevent the prior art. The combination of prior art teaches the claimed limitations as disclosed in the Office Action.
Applicant’s remarks
Claims 7 and 17 specify that the second user is also implemented as a digital twin and
that communication between the digital twins of the first and second users is enabled only upon mutual verification of their respective digital identities. This establishes a peer-to-peer execution model in which both parties to a service transaction are represented by autonomous agents and are subject to reciprocal identity verification prior to service execution. The cited references instead rely on asymmetric or provider-centric interaction models and do not condition inter-agent communication on mutual identity verification
between autonomous digital twins.
Examiner’s remarks
The generality of the claims do not prevent the prior art. The combination of prior art teaches the claimed limitations as disclosed in the Office Action.
Applicant’s remarks
Claims 8 and 18 recite that the decentralized network employs adaptive data encryption
and data obfuscation processing operations selected based on parameters of a given service, such that security processing is dynamically selected in response to service context during execution rather than applied uniformly across the network. Claims 9 and 19 further specify that the adaptive security operations are selected based on operational factors such as execution rate or activity at a given node of the decentralized network, thereby imposing runtime, execution-dependent security adaptation tied to node-level operational conditions.
Examiner’s remarks
The generality of the claims do not prevent the prior art. The combination of prior art teaches the claimed limitations as disclosed in the Office Action.
Applicant’s remarks
Claims 10 and 20 further limit the adaptive security processing to include specific obfuscation techniques such as bit swapping, introduction of redundant data, and temporally randomized transmission times, defining concrete runtime data-protection operations that control how information is transmitted and obfuscated during service execution.
Examiner’s remarks
The generality of the claims do not prevent the prior art. The combination of prior art teaches the claimed limitations as disclosed in the Office Action.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
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.
Claim(s) 1, 5, 8-10, and 21 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Sheikh et al US 20190080393 (hereinafter Sheikh), in view of Vass et al US 20210124843 (hereinafter Vass), in further view of Nuki US 20230124530 (hereinafter Nuki), and in further view of Chikada WO 2020059865 English Machine Translation (hereinafter Chikada).
As to claim 1, Sheikh teaches a system for providing at least one service (abstract and paragraph 64 disclose a system using one or more autonomous economic agents for managing services), the system comprising:
at least one digital twin of a first user seeking the at least one service, wherein the at least one digital twin is an autonomous economic agent (paragraph 65 discloses the system includes a client autonomous economic agent for generating a service request), wherein the at least one digital twin is build using information pertaining to [plurality of client AEAs/thus a plurality of users] comprising at least one of: information mined from social media networks, information collected via a form, information mined from a user device (paragraphs 65, 73, and 75 reveal the client device mined information from user input details of his/her service requirements. Additionally, the client AEA also retrieve historical information from user satisfaction ratings. Paragraphs 73 and 75 further reveal the confidence score associated with the plurality of client AEAs includes historical information of services obtained using the client AEAs and/or a number of services obtained using the client AEAs. Paragraph 66 discloses each user is provided with an individual client AEA),
and wherein the autonomous economic agent comprises at least one hardware processing module integrated with a corresponding digital twin (paragraph 64 discloses the autonomous economic agents are associated with a digital environment referred to an open economic framework, which is a computing framework. The open economic framework is a computing framework implemented via use of a decentralized computing network that enables execution of tasks associated with various autonomous economic agents within the open economic framework. Paragraph 71 discloses the system relates to an arrangement of a plurality of computing devices that are communicably coupled with one another. Each of the plurality of computing devices can perform as either a client device and/or a service component. Paragraph 65 discloses that the client economic agent (AEA) is communicably coupled to a client device, and paragraph 66 disclose the client device can be a computer); and
at least one digital representation of a second user providing the at least one service (paragraph 69 discloses the system includes a plurality of service provider autonomous economic agents. Each service provider autonomous economic agent is configured to receive the service request, generate a service bid, and/or provide services), wherein the at least one digital twin of the first user and the at least digital representation of the second user are mutually interconnected with a decentralized data communication network (abstract and paragraph 64 disclose a system using one or more autonomous economic agents for managing services. The system includes an open economic framework implemented on a decentralized computing network, that utilizes one or more autonomous economic agents for requesting services, receiving service requests, providing services, and/or managing services for clients/users and/or service providers. See also paragraphs 12 and 66 which disclose each user is provided with an individual client autonomous economic agent);
wherein the hardware processing module is configured to (paragraphs 64-66 and 71):
employ at least one algorithm to automatically mine information pertaining to the [plurality of client AEAs/thus a plurality of users] (paragraphs 64 and 67 disclose the AEAs employ AI/machine learning algorithms to execute one or more tasks. Paragraphs 73 and 75 further reveal the confidence score associated with the plurality of client AEAs includes historical information of services obtained using the client AEAs and/or a number of services obtained using the client AEAs. The service provider AEA analyze the confidence score associated with the client AEA prior to generating the service bid. Paragraph 66 discloses each user is provided with an individual client AEA),
generate customized decisions in real-time for the plurality of users based on the mined information pertaining to the plurality of users (paragraph 76 discloses AEAs of the open economic frameworks are configured to select a service provider AEA for providing the service from the plurality of service provider AEA based upon the mined confidence scores (that is associated with historical information of services from a plurality of client AEA) and bids the plurality of service provider AEAs), and
employ at least one data processing algorithm to process information pertaining to the first user (paragraph 64 discloses the AEAs employ algorithms to execute one or more tasks within OEF. The OEF provides various tools, rules for the execution of tasks including processing of information between different AEAs of client/user associated with the OEF);
process the information pertaining to the first user to determine parameters of the at least one service (paragraphs 65-66 and 68 disclose the user specifies parameters via the interface of the client device relating to a service. The client AEA processes the parameter data and generates the service request. The client AEA use the parameters to provide maximum value for the user to obtain a service. Such a value is associated with an economic value associated with the service, a time associated with the service, and/or quality associated with the service);
identify patterns and recognize requirements of the first user based on the processed information (paragraphs 66-68 reveal the user inputs details of his/her service requirements which may include, for example, a type of service, a time constraint if any; a price associated with the service; a quality associated with the service; at least one preference associated with the service. The client AEA is configured to provide the user with a maximum value (determine parameters) based on the identified defined inputs or pattern, wherein the value is associated with an economic value associated with the service (such as, for enabling the user to obtain a most economical service), a time associated with the service (such as, enabling the user to obtain fastest service), a quality associated with the service (such as, enabling the user to obtain a highest quality of service) and/or a combination thereof. In one example embodiment, the client device includes a portable communication device);
determine the parameters of the at least one service based on the identified patterns and recognized requirements (paragraphs 66-68 reveal the client AEA is configured to provide the user with a maximum value (determine parameters) based on the identified defined inputs or pattern, wherein the value is associated with an economic value associated with the service (such as, for enabling the user to obtain a most economical service), a time associated with the service (such as, enabling the user to obtain fastest service), a quality associated with the service (such as, enabling the user to obtain a highest quality of service) and/or a combination thereof. In one example embodiment, the client device includes a portable communication device);
[extract], using a search algorithm, the decentralized data communication network to shortlist entries from a plurality of entries of services offered by at least one user, based on the determined parameters of the at least one service (paragraphs 64 and 67 disclose the AEAs employ AI/machine learning algorithms to execute one or more tasks. Paragraphs 40 and 65 disclose the client AEA broadcast the service request to a plurality of AEAs within the open economic framework (OEF). (The OEF is a computing network implemented via use of decentralized computing network, see paragraph 64). Paragraph 63 discloses the selection of the one or more service provider is made by an autonomous decision by the AEAs, wherein paragraph 76 discloses the OEF selects (and thus have scanned/searched) a service provider AEA for providing the service from the plurality of service providers AEAs based upon the confidence scores and services bids. The OEF compares characteristics of the confidence score and service ratings associated with the service providers. Paragraph 68 discloses the client AEA enables the user to obtain the service at a price within the minimum and maximum (thus, shortlist service entry is provided) prices specified by the user, thereby enabling maximum value to the provided to the user. In an example in paragraph 68, the service request includes a preference associated with the service, such as, to obtain an eco-friendly service. In such an instance, the client AEA enables the user to obtain the service from a service provider that utilizes eco-friendly sources of energy (and/or materials) for providing the service); and
perform at least one first action by selecting at least one first entry from the shortlisted entries, for attaining the at least one service for the first user (paragraph 63 discloses the AEA selects one or more service providers and providing the service to the client. The AEA performs the selection and managing the service process. Paragraph 76 also discloses the open economic framework (which is associated with the AEA), is configured to select a service provider AEA for providing the service. See also paragraph 92 which discloses a service provider autonomous economic agent is selected for providing service, and service is provided to the client), wherein the processing module is configured to perform intermediate steps related to availing the at least one service for the first user during execution of the at least one service, and wherein the intermediate steps includes performing security verification of payment information (paragraph 82 discloses various intermediate services, wherein one includes “performing security verification of payment information” in the recitation of generating agreements/smart contract that is self-verifying, self-enforcing, and self-fulfilling, and is automatically generated based on interaction between the service provider AEA and client AEA. The self-verifying, self-enforcing, and self-fulfilling agreement includes information such as price agreed by the service provider AEA and client AEA), …, and providing a review of the at least one service availed (paragraph 71 recites “ the decentralized computing network is optionally implemented as a decentralized structured P2P (peer-to-peer) network of devices; alternatively, multi-layer communication networks are employed, wherein communication devices are migrated between the layers depending upon their technical functionality, reliability, peer-review assessment and/or trustworthiness.” Therefore, there is peer review assessment that is taking place. Peer review assessment in P2P networks evaluates device/user reliability by tracking shared data quality, feedback honesty, and performance (like bandwidth/availability) to build trust, using techniques such as reputation scores, traffic log analysis, and reputation algorithms to identify good actors from malicious ones in decentralized systems, crucial for security and efficient resource sharing/providing services. In Sheikh this is done via confidence scores (paragraph 72). Thus, a confidence score is stored for each of the plurality of service provider AEAs which relates to the likelihood of a providing a successful service using a service provider AEA);
dynamically identify one or more additional services related to at least one service (paragraph 64 discloses additional services by reciting the one or more AEA request services. Figure 4, reference number 510 also disclose given user seeking to use system to procure one or more services from one or more service providers); and
perform at least one second action by selecting at least one second entry for attaining the one or more additional services while the first action is being performed, wherein the at least one service and the one or more additional service are performed autonomously (paragraph 64 discloses additional services by reciting the one or more AEA request services. Figure 4, reference number 510 also disclose given user seeking to use system to procure one or more services from one or more service providers; Figure 3B, step 350 and paragraphs 92 and 95-99 reveal the system dynamically identifies agents to perform one service and additional service (remaining portion of the service that relates to the one service) based on the confidence scores. Dynamically identifying/selecting is interpreted as choosing or filtering the service provider agents in real time based on the confidence scores of the service provider AEA). Paragraphs 95-99 further disclose at least one of the service bids provided by the plurality of service provider autonomous economic agents is a collective bid provided by multiple service provider autonomous economic agents, wherein the multiple service provider autonomous economic agents collectively provide the service to the client. Thus, an aggregation of services (additional services) for one service is provided/selected. One of the multiple service provider autonomous economic agents operates as a secondary client autonomous economic agent, wherein the secondary client autonomous economic agent is operable to execute a first portion of the service (first service selection), and generating a secondary service request for executing a remaining portion of the service (for the selection of the additional service). Thus, the system receives service bids from a second plurality of service provider autonomous economic agents, for executing at least a segment/part of the remaining portion of the service and determines/selects, from the second plurality of service provider autonomous economic agents, one or more service provider autonomous economic agents to collaborate with the secondary client autonomous economic agent to form multiple service provider autonomous economic agents collectively providing the service).
Sheikh does not teach employ a search algorithm to search the network to shortlist entries from the plurality of entries, based on the parameters of the at least one service and the system is configured to employ at least one machine learning algorithm to automatically mine information pertaining to the plurality of users; perform an intermediate steps related to availing the at least one service for the first user includes verifying a digital signature in a smart contract.
Vass teaches employ a search algorithm to search the network to shortlist entries from the plurality of entries, based on the parameters of the at least one service (paragraph 142 discloses the data custodians (behaving as an algorithm buyer) crawl the web and search and find and compare hundreds or thousands of products offers, and select and propose the products that best fit the customer’s interest or need based on the information gleaned from the customer’s data profile and information requested by the customer).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the teachings of Shiekh’s digital twin extracting shortlist entries with Vass’ teachings of searching the network to obtain shortlist entries to save time for the user/customer while providing services that best fit the user/customer’s interest or needs (paragraph 142 of Vass).
The combination of Sheikh in view of Vass does not teach the system is configured to employ at least one machine learning algorithm to automatically mine information pertaining to the plurality of users; perform an intermediate steps related to availing the at least one service for the first user includes verifying a digital signature in a smart contract.
Nuki teaches the system is configured to employ at least one algorithm to automatically mine information pertaining to the plurality of users (paragraph 36 discloses the digital persona is generated by the persona module in response to the user accessing a website, application, or online portal associated with providing goods or services, or in response to the user entering a certain geographical location. Paragraph 49 discloses the persona module obtains objective data from the user or obtain or access data associated with the user such as data stored in the user database. The objective data can include biographical information, biometric data associated with the user, user group information. Paragraph 52 discloses the persona module generates a persona for the user or group of users that is based on the subjective data, the objective data, and/or the context information for the user. Paragraphs 53 and 59 reveal the digital persona can be determined using a variety of mechanism such as various metrics (multi-factor metrics, a metric that acts as a vector or multi-dimensional (e.g., three-dimensional) point or area on a map associated with the goods or services to be provided to the use) which includes extracted data from social networks. In machine learning data is often represented as a multi-dimensional vector).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Shiekh’s digital twin in view of Vass’ teachings of searching the network with Nuki’s teachings of generating digital persona/twin to enhance and improve services between the users and entities that seek to sell, rent, lease, or provide goods and services to the users (paragraph 15 of Nuki).
The combination of Shiekh in view of Vass and Nuki does not teach but Chikada teaches perform an intermediate step related to availing the at least one service for the first user includes verifying a digital signature in a smart contract (page 5, paragraphs 10-12 disclose the service contract is a smart contract that executes a service performed by a service provider after the bridging contract confirms validity of the payment information (electronic/digital signature, payment amount). Page 10, paragraph 5 disclose the bridging contact verifies the electronic/digital signature included in the payment information transaction. Paragraph 7 of page 10, further discloses the bridging contract uses the information (public key, public key hash, etc.) necessary for signature verification. Thus, for service performed by a service provider, an intermediate step involves verification of the digital signature).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the intermediate step in Shiekh’s teachings of using a digital twin to provide a service in view of Vass’ teachings of searching the network and Nuki’s teachings of generating digital persona/twin with Chikada’s teachings of verifying the digital signature to provide improved reliability in the exchanged of information (page 3, first paragraph of Chikada).
As to claim 5, the combination of Sheikh in view of Vass, Nuki, and Chikada teaches wherein the decentralized data communication network is built using a set of rules which dictate interactions within the decentralized data communication network (Sheikh: paragraph 64 discloses the AEAs are associated with a digital environment (referred to herein later as “Open Economic Framework” or “OEF”). The OEF is a computing framework, implemented via use of a decentralized computing network, that enables execution of tasks associated with various AEAs within the OEF. Furthermore, the OEF provides various tools, security protocols, rules and suchlike for the execution of tasks including, but not limited to, communication, processing of information and so forth, between different AEAs associated with the OEF. For example, the OEF allows, when in operation, access to one or more AEAs to operate within the OEF based on a set of rules and/or security protocols. Similarly, the OEF may deny access to one or more AEAs to operate within the OEF upon determining that the AEAs do not comply with the set of rules and/or security protocols).
As to claim 8, the combination of Sheikh in view of Vass, Nuki, and Chikada teaches wherein the decentralized data communication network is configured to employ adaptive data encryption and data obfuscation processing operations depending upon one or more parameters of a given service, to provide a degree of data protection (Sheikh: paragraph 49 discloses the method includes implementing the decentralized computing network with a degree of data protection that employs adaptive data encryption and data obfuscation processing operations depending upon one or more parameters of a given service recorded on the open economic ledger. See also paragraph 64).
As to claim 9, the combination of Sheikh in view of Vass, Nuki, and Chikada teaches wherein when the decentralized data communication network is in operation, the adaptive data encryption and data obfuscation processing operations are selected depending upon at least one of: a temporal rate of execution of services via a given node of the decentralized data communication network, services being executed via a given node of the decentralized data communication network (Sheikh: paragraph 50 discloses when using the method, the decentralized computing network is in operation, the adaptive data encryption and data obfuscation processing operations are selected depending upon at least one of: a temporal rate of execution of services via a given node of the decentralized computing network, considerations associated with services being executed via a given node of the decentralized computing network).
As to claim 10, the combination of Sheikh in view of Vass, Nuki, and Chikada teaches wherein the adaptive data encryption and data obfuscation processing operations comprise a combination of following data protection processes: encryption, decryption, data obfuscation by swapping one or more bits of data bytes, addition of obfuscating redundant data temporally randomized transmission times for data within the decentralized data communication network (Sheikh: paragraph 51 discloses when using the method, the adaptive data encryption and data obfuscation processing operations employ a combination of following data protection processes: encryption, decryption, data obfuscation by swapping one or more bits of data bytes, addition of obfuscating redundant data (“data decoys”), temporally randomized transmission times for data within the decentralized computing network).
As to claim 21, the combination of Sheikh in view of Vass, Nuki, and Chikada teaches wherein the search algorithm comprises at least one of: a linear search algorithm, a binary search algorithm, a jump search algorithm, an interpolation search algorithm, an exponential search algorithm, a sub-list search algorithm, a Fibonacci search algorithm, or a ubiquitous binary search algorithm (Vass: paragraphs 120-121 disclose the bot/agent communicates with a predictor module that includes an artificial intelligence or machine learning algorithm. As will be appreciated, the machine learning algorithm may be applied to a dataset of customer information and, therefrom, learn knowledge in the form of data patterns correlating one or more input factors to one or more outcomes, with those correlations forming the basis of the interaction predictors. For example, the machine learning algorithm in the predictor module may extract such patterns based on monitored customer actions and associated outcomes. Once such knowledge is acquired, it may be put to use in the form of the present interaction predictors to predict outcomes when new inputs are encounters, such as those presented in an incoming interaction. Any one or more existing machine learning algorithms may be invoked to do such learning, including without limitation, linear regression, logistic regression, neural network, deep learning, Bayesian network, tree ensembles, and the like. For example, linear regression assumes that there is a linear relationship between input and output variables).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the teachings of Shiekh’s digital twin extracting shortlist entries in view of Nuki’s teachings of generating digital persona/twin and Chikada’s teachings of verifying the digital signature with Vass’ teachings of search algorithm, such that the search algorithm is implemented to provide services that best fit the user/customer’s interest or needs (paragraph 142 of Vass).
Claim(s) 3 and 7 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Sheikh et al US 20190080393 (hereinafter Sheikh), in view of Vass et al US 20210124843 (hereinafter Vass), in view of Nuki US 20230124530 (hereinafter Nuki), in further view of Chikada WO 2020059865English Machine Translation (hereinafter Chikada), and further in view of Benvenuti US 20220006658 (hereinafter Benvenuti).
As to claim 3, the combination of Sheikh in view of Vass, Nuki, and Chikada teaches all the limitations recited in claim 1 above and further teaches wherein the at least one digital twin of the first user comprises a digital identity which is a digital representation of a unique identity of the first user (Nuki: paragraph 35 discloses the digital persona is a digital identity, which can be information that represents a compatibility of the users to receive goods or services) and wherein hardware processing module is configured to allow data communication between the at least one digital twin of the first user and the at least one digital representation of the second user upon verification (Sheikh: paragraph 82 discloses a smart contract is generated by the open economic framework for the service to be provided to a given user using the client AEA by the service provider using the selected service provider AEA. Smart contracts as used herein relates to a contract that is implemented using computer protocols and is capable of performing activities such as verifying, enforcing, and fulfilling terms of a contract based on interacts between two or more AEAs/interactions between the service provider AEA (second user) and client AEA(first user. Paragraph 64 discloses the autonomous economic agents are associated with a digital environment referred to an open economic framework, which is a computing framework. The open economic framework is a computing framework implemented via use of a decentralized computing network that enables execution of tasks associated with various autonomous economic agents within the open economic framework. Paragraph 71 discloses the system relates to an arrangement of a plurality of computing devices that are communicably coupled with one another. Each of the plurality of computing devices can perform as either a client device and/or a service component. Paragraph 65 discloses that the client economic agent (AEA) is communicably coupled to a client device, and paragraph 66 disclose the client device can be a computer)). Motivation similar to the motivation presented in claim 1.
While the combination of Shiekh in view of Vass, Nuki, and Chikada discloses verification activities of a smart contract and the smart contract is generated based on interactions/communication of the client AEA(one digital twin of the first user) and the service provider AEA (the at least one digital representation of the second user) (Sheikh: paragraph 82 as disclosed above), the combination of Shiekh in view of Vass, Nuki, and Chikada does not teach wherein the verification involves the verification of the digital identity of the at least one digital twin of the first user, by the at least one digital representation of the second user.
Benvenuti teaches the system is configured to allow data communication between the at least one digital twin of the first user and the at least one digital representation of the second user upon verification of the digital identity of the at least one digital twin of the first user, by the at least one digital representation of the second user (paragraphs 14 and 25 disclose a transaction of digital information is authorized by authentication of the two users’ digital identity only if the digital identities of said two or more users are validated by the at least one certificatory entity).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Shiekh’s teachings of using a digital twin in view of Vass’ teachings of searching the network, Nuki’s teachings of generating digital persona/twin, and Chikada’s teachings of verifying the digital signature with Benvenuti’s teachings of verifying the digital identities of two users to provide a unique solution in authenticating user digital identities that is autonomously managed while allowing digital users to interact in different ways for different transactions (paragraph 8 of Benvenuti).
As to claim 7, the combination of Sheikh in view of Vass, Nuki, and Chikada teaches all the limitations recited in claim 1 above and further teaches wherein the at least one digital representation of the second user is implemented as at least one digital twin (Sheikh: paragraph 69 discloses service provider autonomous economic agent is able to perform/interchangeable with functions of client AEA. The client AEA maybe service provider AEA); wherein the at least one digital twin of the second user comprises a digital identity which is a digital representation of a unique identity of the second user (Nuki: paragraph 35 discloses the digital persona is a digital identity, which can be information that represents a compatibility of the users to receive goods or services), and wherein the hardware processing module is configured to allow data communication between the at least one digital twin of the first user and the at least one digital twin of the second user upon mutual verification (Sheikh: paragraph 82 discloses a smart contract is generated by the open economic framework for the service to be provided to a given user using the client AEA by the service provider using the selected service provider AEA. Smart contracts as used herein relates to a contract that is implemented using computer protocols and is capable of performing activities such as verifying, enforcing, and fulfilling terms of a contract based on interacts between two or more AEAs/interactions between the service provider AEA (second user) and client AEA(first user). paragraph 64 discloses the autonomous economic agents are associated with a digital environment referred to an open economic framework, which is a computing framework. The open economic framework is a computing framework implemented via use of a decentralized computing network that enables execution of tasks associated with various autonomous economic agents within the open economic framework. Paragraph 71 discloses the system relates to an arrangement of a plurality of computing devices that are communicably coupled with one another. Each of the plurality of computing devices can perform as either a client device and/or a service component. Paragraph 65 discloses that the client economic agent (AEA) is communicably coupled to a client device, and paragraph 66 disclose the client device can be a computer). Motivation similar to the motivation presented in claim 1.
The combination of Sheikh in view of Vass, Nuki, and Chikada does not teach wherein the mutual verification involves verification of the digital identities of the at least one digital twin of the first user and the at least one digital twin of the second user.
Benvenuti teaches the system is configured to allow data communication between the at least one digital twin of the first user and the at least one digital twin of the second user upon mutual verification of the digital identity of the at least one digital twin of the first user, by the at least one digital twin of the second user (paragraphs 14 and 25 disclose a transaction of digital information is authorized by authentication of the two users’ digital identity only if the digital identities of said two or more users are validated by the at least one certificatory entity).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Shiekh’s teachings of using a digital twin in view of Vass’ teachings of searching the network, Nuki’s teachings of generating digital persona/twin, and Chikada’s teachings of verifying the digital signature with Benvenuti’s teachings of verifying the digital identities of two users to provide unique solution in authenticating user digital identities that is autonomously managed while allowing digital users to interact in different ways with different transactions (paragraph 8 of Benvenuti).
Claim(s) 4 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Sheikh et al US 20190080393 (hereinafter Sheikh), in view of Nuki US 20230124530 (hereinafter Nuki), in view of Vass et al US 20210124843 (hereinafter Vass), in further view of Chikada WO 2020059865English Machine Translation (hereinafter Chikada), and in further view of Gasparini US 20200021438 (hereinafter Gasparini).
As to claim 4, the combination of Sheikh in view of Vass, Nuki, and Chikada teaches all the limitations recited in claim 1 above. The combination of Sheikh in view of Vass, Nuki, and Chikada does not teach wherein the at least one digital twin of the first user receives at least one user authorization from the first user via the user device, and wherein the at least one user authorization is of at least one form of: a verbal authorization, a written authorization, a haptic authorization, a pre-determined custom authorization.
Gasparini teaches wherein the at least one digital twin of the first user receives at least one user authorization from the first user via the user device, and wherein the at least one user authorization is of at least one form of: a verbal authorization, a written authorization, a haptic authorization, a pre-determined custom authorization (paragraphs 39 and 46 disclose that escrow system that maintains encrypted identity data representative of digital identity of the user receives user input of user authorization data. The escrow system may transmit a push notification to computing device that the user approves of escrow system sharing the user’s digital identity with service provider system. The authorization may be in the form of biometric input or third party verification services such as pre-determined custom authorization of username and password).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Shiekh’s teachings of using a digital twin in view of Vass’ teachings of searching the network, Nuki’s teachings of generating digital persona/twin, and Chikada’s teachings of verifying the digital signature with Gasparini’s teachings of providing authorization from the user to the escrow that maintains encrypted identity data representative of digital identity of the user to minimize risk of identity theft for the user, to reduce the time and effort required for a user to register for service, and to minimize the burden of managing sensitive user information by the service provider thereby improving an operation of computing devices utilized by the service provider and/or user and resulting in an improved user experience compared to conventional service processes (paragraph 12 of Gasparini).
Claim(s) 11, 15, and 18-20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Sheikh et al US 20190080393 (hereinafter Sheikh) in view of Vass et al US 20210124843 (hereinafter Vass), in further view of Nuki US 20230124530 (hereinafter Nuki), in further view of Chikada WO 2020059865English Machine Translation (hereinafter Chikada), and in further view of Shribman et al US 20220103525 (hereinafter Shribman).
As to claim 11, Sheikh teaches a method for providing at least one service (Figures 3A/3B reveal method of using one or more autonomous economic agents for managing services), the method comprising:
building a decentralized data communication network, wherein the decentralized data communication network comprises a plurality of users and a plurality of entries of services offered by at least one user (abstract and paragraph 64 disclose a system using one or more autonomous economic agents for managing services. The system includes an open economic framework implemented on a decentralized computing network, that utilizes one or more autonomous economic agents for requesting services, receiving service requests, providing services, and/or managing services for clients/users and/or service providers. See also paragraphs 12 and 66 which disclose each user is provided with an individual client autonomous economic agent);
building at least one digital twin of a first user seeking the at least one service, wherein the at least one digital twin is an autonomous economic agent (paragraph 65 discloses the system includes a client autonomous economic agent for generating a service request. Paragraph 64 discloses the autonomous economic agents are associated with a digital environment referred to as an open economic framework. The open economic framework is a computing framework implemented via use of a decentralized computing network that enables execution of tasks associated with various autonomous economic agents within the open economic framework), wherein the autonomous economic agent comprises at least one hardware processing module integrated with a corresponding digital twin (paragraph 64 discloses the autonomous economic agents are associated with a digital environment referred to an open economic framework, which is a computing framework. The open economic framework is a computing framework implemented via use of a decentralized computing network that enables execution of tasks associated with various autonomous economic agents within the open economic framework. Paragraph 71 discloses the system relates to an arrangement of a plurality of computing devices that are communicably coupled with one another. Each of the plurality of computing devices can perform as either a client device and/or a service component. Paragraph 65 discloses that the client economic agent (AEA) is communicably coupled to a client device, and paragraph 66 disclose the client device can be a computer);
building the at least one digital twin comprises using information pertaining to [plurality of client AEAs/ thus the plurality of users], such information being at least one of: information mined from social media networks, information collected via a form, information mined from a user device (paragraphs 65, 73, and 75 reveal the client device mined information from user input details of his/her service requirements. Additionally, the client AEA also retrieve historical information from user satisfaction ratings. Paragraphs 73 and 75 further reveal the confidence score associated with the plurality of client AEAs includes historical information of services obtained using the client AEAs and/or a number of services obtained using the client AEAs. Paragraph 66 discloses each user is provided with an individual client AEA),
building at least one digital representation of a second user providing the at least one service, wherein the at least one digital representation is mutually interconnected with the decentralized data communication network (paragraph 69 discloses the system includes a plurality of service provider autonomous economic agents. Each service provider autonomous economic agent is configured to receive the service request, generate a service bid, and/or provide services. Paragraph 64 discloses the autonomous economic agents are associated with a digital environment referred to as an open economic framework. The open economic framework is a computing framework implemented via use of a decentralized computing network that enables execution of tasks associated with various autonomous economic agents within the open economic framework);
employing, using the hardware processing module (paragraph 64 discloses the autonomous economic agents are associated with a digital environment referred to an open economic framework, which is a computing framework. The open economic framework is a computing framework implemented via use of a decentralized computing network that enables execution of tasks associated with various autonomous economic agents within the open economic framework. Paragraph 71 discloses the system relates to an arrangement of a plurality of computing devices that are communicably coupled with one another. Each of the plurality of computing devices can perform as either a client device and/or a service component. Paragraph 65 discloses that the client economic agent (AEA) is communicably coupled to a client device, and paragraph 66 disclose the client device can be a computer), at least one algorithm to automatically mine information pertaining to [plurality of client AEAs/thus a plurality of users] (paragraphs 64 and 67 disclose the AEAs employ AI/machine learning algorithms to execute one or more tasks. Paragraphs 73 and 75 further reveal the confidence score associated with the plurality of client AEAs includes historical information of services obtained using the client AEAs and/or a number of services obtained using the client AEAs. The service provider AEA analyze the confidence score associated with the client AEA prior to generating the service bid),
generating, using the hardware processing module (paragraph 64 discloses the autonomous economic agents are associated with a digital environment referred to an open economic framework, which is a computing framework. The open economic framework is a computing framework implemented via use of a decentralized computing network that enables execution of tasks associated with various autonomous economic agents within the open economic framework. Paragraph 71 discloses the system relates to an arrangement of a plurality of computing devices that are communicably coupled with one another. Each of the plurality of computing devices can perform as either a client device and/or a service component. Paragraph 65 discloses that the client economic agent (AEA) is communicably coupled to a client device, and paragraph 66 disclose the client device can be a computer), customized decisions in real-time for the plurality of users based on the mined information pertaining to the plurality of users (paragraph 76 discloses AEAs of the open economic frameworks are configured to select a service provider AEA for providing the service from the plurality of service provider AEA based upon the mined confidence scores (that is associated with historical information of services from a plurality of client AEA) and bids the plurality of service provider AEAs), and
employing, using the hardware processing module (paragraph 64 discloses the autonomous economic agents are associated with a digital environment referred to an open economic framework, which is a computing framework. The open economic framework is a computing framework implemented via use of a decentralized computing network that enables execution of tasks associated with various autonomous economic agents within the open economic framework. Paragraph 71 discloses the system relates to an arrangement of a plurality of computing devices that are communicably coupled with one another. Each of the plurality of computing devices can perform as either a client device and/or a service component. Paragraph 65 discloses that the client economic agent (AEA) is communicably coupled to a client device, and paragraph 66 disclose the client device can be a computer), at least one data processing algorithm to process information pertaining to the first user (paragraph 64 discloses the AEAs employ algorithms to execute one or more tasks within OEF. The OEF provides various tools, rules for the execution of tasks including processing of information between different AEAs of client/user associated with the OEF);
processing, using the hardware processing module (paragraph 64 discloses the autonomous economic agents are associated with a digital environment referred to an open economic framework, which is a computing framework. The open economic framework is a computing framework implemented via use of a decentralized computing network that enables execution of tasks associated with various autonomous economic agents within the open economic framework. Paragraph 71 discloses the system relates to an arrangement of a plurality of computing devices that are communicably coupled with one another. Each of the plurality of computing devices can perform as either a client device and/or a service component. Paragraph 65 discloses that the client economic agent (AEA) is communicably coupled to a client device, and paragraph 66 disclose the client device can be a computer), information pertaining to at least the first user to determine parameters of the at least one service (paragraphs 65-66 and 68 disclose the user specifies parameters via the interface of the client device relating to a service. The client AEA processes the parameter data and generates the service request. The client AEA use the parameters to provide maximum value for the user to obtain a service. Such a value is associated with an economic value associated with the service, a time associated with the service, and/or quality associated with the service);
identifying patterns and recognizing requirements, using the hardware processing module (paragraph 64 discloses the autonomous economic agents are associated with a digital environment referred to an open economic framework, which is a computing framework. The open economic framework is a computing framework implemented via use of a decentralized computing network that enables execution of tasks associated with various autonomous economic agents within the open economic framework. Paragraph 71 discloses the system relates to an arrangement of a plurality of computing devices that are communicably coupled with one another. Each of the plurality of computing devices can perform as either a client device and/or a service component. Paragraph 65 discloses that the client economic agent (AEA) is communicably coupled to a client device, and paragraph 66 disclose the client device can be a computer), of the first user based on the processed information (paragraphs 66-68 reveal the user inputs details of his/her service requirements which may include, for example, a type of service, a time constraint if any; a price associated with the service; a quality associated with the service; at least one preference associated with the service. The client AEA is configured to provide the user with a maximum value (determine parameters) based on the identified defined inputs or pattern, wherein the value is associated with an economic value associated with the service (such as, for enabling the user to obtain a most economical service), a time associated with the service (such as, enabling the user to obtain fastest service), a quality associated with the service (such as, enabling the user to obtain a highest quality of service) and/or a combination thereof. In one example embodiment, the client device includes a portable communication device);
determining, using the at least one hardware processing module (paragraph 64 discloses the autonomous economic agents are associated with a digital environment referred to an open economic framework, which is a computing framework. The open economic framework is a computing framework implemented via use of a decentralized computing network that enables execution of tasks associated with various autonomous economic agents within the open economic framework. Paragraph 71 discloses the system relates to an arrangement of a plurality of computing devices that are communicably coupled with one another. Each of the plurality of computing devices can perform as either a client device and/or a service component. Paragraph 65 discloses that the client economic agent (AEA) is communicably coupled to a client device, and paragraph 66 disclose the client device can be a computer), the parameters of the at least one service based on the identified patterns and recognized requirements (paragraph 64 discloses the autonomous economic agents are associated with a digital environment referred to an open economic framework, which is a computing framework. The open economic framework is a computing framework implemented via use of a decentralized computing network that enables execution of tasks associated with various autonomous economic agents within the open economic framework. Paragraph 71 discloses the system relates to an arrangement of a plurality of computing devices that are communicably coupled with one another. Each of the plurality of computing devices can perform as either a client device and/or a service component. Paragraph 65 discloses that the client economic agent (AEA) is communicably coupled to a client device, and paragraph 66 disclose the client device can be a computer), of the first user based on the processed information (paragraphs 66-68 reveal the user inputs details of his/her service requirements which may include, for example, a type of service, a time constraint if any; a price associated with the service; a quality associated with the service; at least one preference associated with the service. The client AEA is configured to provide the user with a maximum value (determine parameters) based on the identified defined inputs or pattern, wherein the value is associated with an economic value associated with the service (such as, for enabling the user to obtain a most economical service), a time associated with the service (such as, enabling the user to obtain fastest service), a quality associated with the service (such as, enabling the user to obtain a highest quality of service) and/or a combination thereof. In one example embodiment, the client device includes a portable communication device);
[employing an algorithm and extracting], using the hardware processing module(paragraph 64 discloses the autonomous economic agents are associated with a digital environment referred to an open economic framework, which is a computing framework. The open economic framework is a computing framework implemented via use of a decentralized computing network that enables execution of tasks associated with various autonomous economic agents within the open economic framework. Paragraph 71 discloses the system relates to an arrangement of a plurality of computing devices that are communicably coupled with one another. Each of the plurality of computing devices can perform as either a client device and/or a service component. Paragraph 65 discloses that the client economic agent (AEA) is communicably coupled to a client device, and paragraph 66 disclose the client device can be a computer), to search the decentralized data communication network to shortlist entries from the plurality of entries, based on the parameters of the at least one service (paragraphs 40 and 65 disclose the client AEA broadcast the service request to a plurality of AEAs within the open economic framework (OEF). (The OEF is a computing network implemented via use of decentralized computing network, see paragraph 64). Paragraph 63 discloses the selection of the one or more service provider is made by an autonomous decision by the AEAs, wherein paragraph 76 disclose the OEF selects (and thus search) a service provider AEA for providing the service from the plurality of service providers AEAs based upon the confidence scores and services bids. The OEF compares characteristics of the confidence score and service ratings associated with the service providers. Paragraph 68 discloses the client AEA enables the user to obtain the service at a price within the minimum and maximum (thus, shortlist service entry is provided) prices specified by the user, thereby enabling maximum value to the provided to the user. In an example in paragraph 68, the service request includes a preference associated with the service, such as, to obtain an eco-friendly service. In such an instance, the client AEA enables the user to obtain the service from a service provider that utilizes eco-friendly sources of energy (and/or materials) for providing the service); and
performing, using the hardware processing module (paragraph 64 discloses the autonomous economic agents are associated with a digital environment referred to an open economic framework, which is a computing framework. The open economic framework is a computing framework implemented via use of a decentralized computing network that enables execution of tasks associated with various autonomous economic agents within the open economic framework. Paragraph 71 discloses the system relates to an arrangement of a plurality of computing devices that are communicably coupled with one another. Each of the plurality of computing devices can perform as either a client device and/or a service component. Paragraph 65 discloses that the client economic agent (AEA) is communicably coupled to a client device, and paragraph 66 disclose the client device can be a computer), at least one first action by the at least one digital twin of the first user selecting at least one first entry from the shortlisted entries, for attaining the at least one service for the first user (paragraph 63 discloses the AEA selects one or more service providers and providing the service to the client. The AEA performs the selection and managing the service process. Paragraph 76 also discloses the open economic framework (which is associated with the AEA), is configured to select a service provider AEA for providing the service. See also paragraph 92 which discloses a service provider autonomous economic agent is selected for providing service, and service is provided to the client), wherein the processing module is configured to perform intermediate steps related to availing the at least one service for the first user during execution of the at least one service, and wherein the intermediate steps includes performing security verification of payment information (paragraph 82 discloses various intermediate services, wherein one includes “performing security verification of payment information” in the recitation of generating agreements/smart contract that is self-verifying, self-enforcing, and self-fulfilling, and is automatically generated based on interaction between the service provider AEA and client AEA. The self-verifying, self-enforcing, and self-fulfilling agreement includes information such as price agreed by the service provider AEA and client AEA),…,and providing a review of the at least one service availed (paragraph 71 recites “ the decentralized computing network is optionally implemented as a decentralized structured P2P (peer-to-peer) network of devices; alternatively, multi-layer communication networks are employed, wherein communication devices are migrated between the layers depending upon their technical functionality, reliability, peer-review assessment and/or trustworthiness.” Therefore, there is peer review assessment that is taking place. Peer review assessment in P2P networks evaluates device/user reliability by tracking shared data quality, feedback honesty, and performance (like bandwidth/availability) to build trust, using techniques such as reputation scores, traffic log analysis, and reputation algorithms to identify good actors from malicious ones in decentralized systems, crucial for security and efficient resource sharing/providing services. In Sheikh this is done via confidence scores (paragraph 72). Thus, a confidence score is stored for each of the plurality of service provider AEAs which relates to the likelihood of a providing a successful service using a service provider AEA),
dynamically identifying one or more additional services related to at least one service (paragraph 64 discloses additional services by reciting the one or more AEA request services. Figure 4, reference number 510 also disclose given user seeking to use system to procure one or more services from one or more service providers); and
performing at least one second action by selecting at least one second entry for attaining the one or more additional services while the first action is being performed, wherein the at least one service and the one or more additional service are performed autonomously (paragraph 64 discloses additional services by reciting the one or more AEA request services. Figure 4, reference number 510 also disclose given user seeking to use system to procure one or more services from one or more service providers; Figure 3B, step 350 and paragraphs 92 and 95-99 reveal the system dynamically identifies agents to perform one service and additional service (remaining portion of the service that relates to the one service) based on the confidence scores. Dynamically identifying/selecting is interpreted as choosing or filtering the service provider agents in real time based on the confidence scores of the service provider AEA). Paragraphs 95-99 further disclose at least one of the service bids provided by the plurality of service provider autonomous economic agents is a collective bid provided by multiple service provider autonomous economic agents, wherein the multiple service provider autonomous economic agents collectively provide the service to the client. Thus, an aggregation of services (additional services) for one service is provided/selected. One of the multiple service provider autonomous economic agents operates as a secondary client autonomous economic agent, wherein the secondary client autonomous economic agent is operable to execute a first portion of the service (first service selection), and generating a secondary service request for executing a remaining portion of the service (for the selection of the additional service). Thus, the system receives service bids from a second plurality of service provider autonomous economic agents, for executing at least a segment/part of the remaining portion of the service and determines/selects, from the second plurality of service provider autonomous economic agents, one or more service provider autonomous economic agents to collaborate with the secondary client autonomous economic agent to form multiple service provider autonomous economic agents collectively providing the service).
Sheikh does not teach employing a search algorithm to search the network to shortlist entries from the plurality of entries, based on the parameters of the at least one service and wherein the data processing algorithm is at least one of: a random walk algorithm, a distributed hash table algorithm, a streaming algorithm, a bulk synchronous processing algorithm, a MapReduce algorithm; perform an intermediate steps related to availing the at least one service for the first user includes verifying a digital signature in a smart contract; and the system is configured to employ at least one machine learning algorithm to automatically mine information pertaining to the plurality of users.
Vass teaches employing a search algorithm to search the network to shortlist entries from the plurality of entries, based on the parameters of the at least one service (paragraph 142 discloses the data custodians (behaving as an algorithm buyer) crawl the web and search and find and compare hundreds or thousands of products offers, and select and propose the products that best fit the customer’s interest or need based on the information gleaned from the customer’s data profile and information requested by the customer).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the teachings of Shiekh’s digital twin extracting shortlist entries with Vass’ teachings of searching the network to obtain shortlist entries to save time for the user/customer while providing services that best fit the user/customer’s interest or needs (paragraph 142 of Vass).
The combination of Shiekh in view of Vass does not teach wherein the data processing algorithm is at least one of: a random walk algorithm, a distributed hash table algorithm, a streaming algorithm, a bulk synchronous processing algorithm, a MapReduce algorithm; perform an intermediate steps related to availing the at least one service for the first user includes verifying a digital signature in a smart contract; and the system is configured to employ at least one machine learning algorithm to automatically mine information pertaining to the plurality of users.
Nuki teaches the system is configured to employ at least one machine learning algorithm to automatically mine information pertaining to the plurality of users (paragraph 36 discloses the digital persona is generated by the persona module in response to the user accessing a website, application, or online portal associated with providing goods or services, or in response to the user entering a certain geographical location. Paragraph 49 discloses the persona module obtains objective data from the user or obtain or access data associated with the user such as data stored in the user database. The objective data can include biographical information, biometric data associated with the user, user group information. Paragraph 52 discloses the persona module generates a persona for the user or group of users that is based on the subjective data, the objective data, and/or the context information for the user. Paragraphs 53 and 59 reveal the digital persona can be determined using a variety of mechanism such as various metrics (multi-factor metrics, a metric that acts as a vector or multi-dimensional (e.g., three-dimensional) point or area on a map associated with the goods or services to be provided to the use) which includes extracted data from social networks. In machine learning data is often represented as a multi-dimensional vector).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Shiekh’s digital twin in view of Vass’ teachings of searching the network with Nuki’s teachings of generating digital persona/twin to enhance and improve services between the users and entities that seek to sell, rent, lease, or provide goods and services to the users (paragraph 15 of Nuki).
The combination of Shiekh in view of Vass and Nuki does not teach perform an intermediate steps related to availing the at least one service for the first user includes verifying a digital signature in a smart contract ; and wherein the data processing algorithm is at least one of: a random walk algorithm, a distributed hash table algorithm, a streaming algorithm, a bulk synchronous processing algorithm, a MapReduce algorithm.
Chikara teaches perform an intermediate step related to availing the at least one service for the first user includes verifying a digital signature in a smart contract (page 5, paragraphs 10-12 disclose the service contract is a smart contract that executes a service performed by a service provider after the bridging contract confirms validity of the payment information (electronic signature, payment amount). Page 10, paragraph 5 disclose the bridging contact verifies the electronic signature included in the payment information transaction. Paragraph 7 of page 10, further discloses the bridging contract uses the information (public key, public key hash, etc.) necessary for signature verification. Thus, for service performed by a service provider, an intermediate step involves verification of the digital signature).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the intermediate step in Shiekh’s teachings of using a digital twin to provide a service in view of Vass’ teachings of searching the network and Nuki’s teachings of generating digital persona/twin with Chikada’s teachings of verifying the digital signature to provide reliability of exchanged information (page 3, first paragraph of Chikada).
The combination of Shiekh in view of Vass, Nuki, and Chikada does not teach, but Shribman teaches wherein the data processing algorithm is at least one of: a random walk algorithm, a distributed hash table algorithm, a streaming algorithm, a bulk synchronous processing algorithm, a MapReduce algorithm (paragraph 326 discloses using a has table in computer software processing).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the teachings of Shiekh’s teachings of using a digital twin extracting shortlist entries in view of Vass’ teachings of searching the network to obtain shortlist entries, Nuki’s teachings of generating digital persona/twin, and Chikada’s teachings of verifying the digital signature with Shribman’s teachings of hash table algorithm to provide rapid data lookup while detecting duplicate records in a large database or file (paragraph 326 of Shribman).
As to claim 15, the combination of Sheikh in view of Vass, Nuki, Chikada and Shribman teaches wherein the step of building the decentralized data communication network comprises using a set of rules which dictate interactions within the decentralized data communication network (Sheikh: paragraph 64 discloses the AEAs are associated with a digital environment (referred to herein later as “Open Economic Framework” or “OEF”). The OEF is a computing framework, implemented via use of a decentralized computing network, that enables execution of tasks associated with various AEAs within the OEF. Furthermore, the OEF provides various tools, security protocols, rules and suchlike for the execution of tasks including, but not limited to, communication, processing of information and so forth, between different AEAs associated with the OEF. For example, the OEF allows, when in operation, access to one or more AEAs to operate within the OEF based on a set of rules and/or security protocols. Similarly, the OEF may deny access to one or more AEAs to operate within the OEF upon determining that the AEAs do not comply with the set of rules and/or security protocols).
As to claim 18, the combination of Sheikh in view of Vass, Nuki, Chikada and Shribman teaches wherein the method further comprises employing, by the decentralized data communication network, adaptive data encryption and data obfuscation processing operations depending upon one or more parameters of a given service, to provide a degree of data protection (Sheikh: paragraph 49 discloses the method includes implementing the decentralized computing network with a degree of data protection that employs adaptive data encryption and data obfuscation processing operations depending upon one or more parameters of a given service recorded on the open economic ledger. See also paragraph 64).
As to claim 19, the combination of Sheikh in view of Vass, Nuki, Chikada and Shribman teaches wherein when the decentralized data communication network is in operation, the adaptive data encryption and data obfuscation processing operations are selected depending upon at least one of: a temporal rate of execution of services via a given node of the decentralized data communication network, services being executed via a given node of the decentralized data communication network (Sheikh: paragraph 50 discloses when using the method, the decentralized computing network is in operation, the adaptive data encryption and data obfuscation processing operations are selected depending upon at least one of: a temporal rate of execution of services via a given node of the decentralized computing network, considerations associated with services being executed via a given node of the decentralized computing network).
As to claim 20, the combination of Sheikh in view of Vass, Nuki, Chikada and Shribman teaches wherein the adaptive data encryption and data obfuscation processing operations employ a combination of following data protection processes: encryption, decryption, data obfuscation by swapping one or more bits of data bytes, addition of obfuscating redundant data, temporally randomized transmission times for data within the decentralized data communication network (Sheikh: paragraph 51 discloses when using the method, the adaptive data encryption and data obfuscation processing operations employ a combination of following data protection processes: encryption, decryption, data obfuscation by swapping one or more bits of data bytes, addition of obfuscating redundant data (“data decoys”), temporally randomized transmission times for data within the decentralized computing network).
Claim(s) 13 and 17 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Sheikh et al US 20190080393 (hereinafter Sheikh), in view of Vass et al US 20210124843 (hereinafter Vass), in further view of Nuki US 20230124530 (hereinafter Nuki), in further view of Chikada WO 2020059865English Machine Translation (hereinafter Chikada), in further view of Shribman et al US 20220103525 (hereinafter Shribman), and further in view of Benvenuti US 20220006658 (hereinafter Benvenuti).
As to claim 13, the combination of Sheikh in view of Vass, Nuki, Chikada and Shribman teaches all the limitations recited in claim 11 above and further teaches wherein the at least one digital twin of the first user comprises a digital identity which is a digital representation of a unique identity of the first user (Nuki: paragraph 35 discloses the digital persona is a digital identity, which can be information that represents a compatibility of the users to receive goods or services) and wherein the method further comprising allowing data communication between the at least one digital twin of the first user and the at least one digital representation of the second user upon verification (Sheikh: paragraph 82 discloses a smart contract is generated by the open economic framework for the service to be provided to a given user using the client AEA by the service provider using the selected service provider AEA. Smart contracts as used herein relates to a contract that is implemented using computer protocols and is capable of performing activities such as verifying, enforcing, and fulfilling terms of a contract based on interacts between two or more AEAs/interactions between the service provider AEA (second user) and client AEA(first user)). The motivation is similar to the motivation presented in claim 11.
While the combination of Shiekh in view of Vass, Nuki, Chikada and Shribman discloses verification activities of a smart contract and the smart contract is generated based on interactions/communication of the client AEA(one digital twin of the first user) and the service provider AEA (the at least one digital representation of the second user) (Shiekh: paragraph 82 as disclosed above), the combination of Sheikh in view of Vass, Nuki, Chikada and Shribman does not teach wherein the verification involves the verification of the digital identity of the at least one digital twin of the first user, by the at least one digital representation of the second user.
Benvenuti teaches the system is configured to allow data communication between the at least one digital twin of the first user and the at least one digital representation of the second user upon verification of the digital identity of the at least one digital twin of the first user, by the at least one digital representation of the second user (paragraphs 14 and 25 disclose a transaction of digital information is authorized by authentication of the two users’ digital identity only if the digital identities of said two or more users are validated by the at least one certificatory entity).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Shiekh’s teachings of using a digital twin in view of Vass’ teachings of searching the network, Shribman’s teachings of hash table algorithm, Nuki’s teachings of generating digital persona/twin, and Chikada’s teachings of verifying the digital signature with Benvenuti’s teachings of verifying the digital identities of two users to provide unique solution in authenticating user digital identities that is autonomously managed while allowing digital users to interact in different ways with different transactions (paragraph 8 of Benvenuti).
As to claim 17, the combination of Shiekh in view of Vass, Nuki, Chikada and Shribman teaches all the limitations recited in claim 11 above and further teaches wherein the at least one digital twin of the second user comprises a digital identity which is a digital representation of a unique identity of the second user (Nuki: paragraph 35 discloses the digital persona is a digital identity, which can be information that represents a compatibility of the users to receive goods or services) and wherein the at least one digital representation of the second user is implemented as at least one digital twin (Shiekh: paragraph 69 discloses service provider autonomous economic agent is able to perform/interchangeable with functions of client AEA. The client AEA maybe service provider AEA) and wherein the method further comprises allowing data communication between the at least one digital twin of the first user and the at least one digital twin of the second user upon mutual verification (Shiekh: paragraph 82 discloses a smart contract is generated by the open economic framework for the service to be provided to a given user using the client AEA by the service provider using the selected service provider AEA. Smart contracts as used herein relates to a contract that is implemented using computer protocols and is capable of performing activities such as verifying, enforcing, and fulfilling terms of a contract based on interacts between two or more AEAs/interactions between the service provider AEA (second user) and client AEA(first user)).
The combination of Sheikh in view of Vass, Nuki, Chikada, and Shribman does not teach wherein the mutual verification involves verification of the digital identities of the at least one digital twin of the first user and the at least one digital twin of the second user.
Benvenuti teaches wherein the method further comprises allowing data communication between the at least one digital twin of the first user and the at least one digital twin of the second user upon mutual verification of the digital identity of the at least one digital twin of the first user, by the at least one digital twin of the second user (paragraphs 14 and 25 disclose a transaction of digital information is authorized by authentication of the two users’ digital identity only if the digital identities of said two or more users are validated by the at least one certificatory entity).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Shiekh’s teachings of using a digital twin in view of Vass’ teachings of searching the network, Nuki’s teachings of generating digital persona/twin, Chikada’s teachings of verifying the digital signature, and Shribman’s teachings of hash table algorithm with Benvenuti’s teachings of verifying the digital identities of two users to provide unique solution in authenticating user digital identities that is autonomously managed while allowing digital users to interact in different ways with different transactions (paragraph 8 of Benvenuti).
Claim(s) 14 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Sheikh et al US 20190080393 (hereinafter Sheikh), in view of Vass et al US 20210124843 (hereinafter Vass), in further view of Nuki US 20230124530 (hereinafter Nuki), in further view of Chikada WO 2020059865English Machine Translation (hereinafter Chikada), in further view of Shribman et al US 20220103525 (hereinafter Shribman), and in further view of Gasparini US 20200021438 (hereinafter Gasparini).
As to claim 14, the combination of Sheikh in view of Vass, Nuki, Chikada and Shribman teaches all the limitations recited in claim 11 above. The combination of Sheikh in view of Vass, Nuki, Chikada and Shribman does not teach wherein the method comprises receiving at least one user authorization from the first user via the user device, by the at least one digital twin of the first user, prior to the step of processing information, and wherein the at least one user authorization is of at least one form of: a verbal authorization, a written authorization, a haptic authorization, a pre-determined custom authorization..
Gasparini teaches wherein the method comprises receiving at least one user authorization from the first user via the user device, by the at least one digital twin of the first user, prior to the step of processing information, and wherein the at least one user authorization is of at least one form of: a verbal authorization, a written authorization, a haptic authorization, a pre-determined custom authorization (paragraphs 39 and 46 disclose that escrow system that maintains encrypted identity data representative of digital identity of the user receives user input of user authorization data. The escrow system may transmit a push notification to computing device that the user approves of escrow system sharing the user’s digital identity with service provider system. The authorization may be in the form of biometric input or third party verification services such as pre-determined custom authorization of username and password).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Shiekh’s digital twin in view of Vass’ teachings of searching the network, Nuki’s teachings of generating digital persona/twin, Chikada’s teachings of verifying the digital signature, and Shribman’s teachings of hash table algorithm with Gasparini’s teachings of providing authorization from the user to the escrow that maintains encrypted identity data representative of digital identity of the user to minimize risk of identity theft for the user, to reduce the time and effort required for a user to register for service, and to minimize the burden of managing sensitive user information by the service provider thereby improving an operation of computing devices utilized by the service provider and/or user and resulting in an improved user experience compared to conventional service processes (paragraph 12 of Gasparini).
Claim(s) 22 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Sheikh et al US 20190080393 (hereinafter Sheikh), in view of Vass et al US 20210124843 (hereinafter Vass), in further view of Nuki US 20230124530 (hereinafter Nuki), in further view of Chikada WO 2020059865English Machine Translation (hereinafter Chikada), and in further view of Takayama KR 20060022734 English Machine Translation (hereinafter Takayama).
As to claim 22, the combination of Sheikh in view of Vass, Nuki, and Chikada teaches all the limitations recited in claim 1 above, and further disclosed intermediate steps (see rejection for claim 1). The combination of Sheikh in view of Vass, Nuki, and Chikada does not teach, but Takayama teaches wherein the intermediate steps further include running a credit check for the first user (page 235, third paragraph discloses the intermediate step for the payment request involves user’s credit check).
It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify Shiekh’s digital twin in view of Vass’ teachings of searching the network, Nuki’s teachings of generating digital persona/twin, and Chikada’s teachings of verifying the digital signature with Takayama’s credit check to prevent fraudulent claims to a retailer and provided improvement to payment/transaction system (page 3, third paragraph of Takayama ).
Conclusion
Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP § 706.07(a). Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a).
A shortened statutory period for reply to this final action is set to expire THREE MONTHS from the mailing date of this action. In the event a first reply is filed within TWO MONTHS of the mailing date of this final action and the advisory action is not mailed until after the end of the THREE-MONTH shortened statutory period, then the shortened statutory period will expire on the date the advisory action is mailed, and any nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) 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.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to FELICIA FARROW whose telephone number is (571)272-1856. The examiner can normally be reached M - F 7:30am-4:00pm (EST).
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, Alexander Lagor can be reached at (571)270-5143. 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.
/F.F/Examiner, Art Unit 2437
/BENJAMIN E LANIER/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2437
Prosecution Insights