DETAILED ACTION
Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status
The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
Response to Arguments
The present action is responsive to communications that was filed on 06/02/2025. Claims 1,5, 7, 9, 13, 15, 17, and 21 have been amended. Claims 1-24 are currently pending. Applicant’s amendments to the claim and arguments have overcome each and every objection and rejections that were previously set forth in the Final Office Action mailed 02/07/2025.
Applicant’s arguments, filed on 06/02/2025, with respect to the rejection of claims 1-7, 9-15, and 17-23 under 35 USC 103 over Simu et al. (US PG Pub No. 20220210061-A1) in view of Seifert et al. (US PGPub No. 20240250931-A1) have been fully considered and are persuasive, specifically with the amended limitation of a blockchain identity provided by a user to log in to an account of an application of a different user providing the digital content, as seen in pages 10-15. Therefore, the rejection has been withdrawn. However, upon further consideration, a new grounds of rejection is made in view of Jayachandran et al. (US PGPub No. 20190028277-A1), Bacon et al. (US PGPub No. 20240013202-A1), Giordano et al. (US PGPub No. 20170300627-A1), Collen et al. (US PGPub No.20220294630-A1 ), and Staples et al. (US PGPub No. 20190199531-A1 ).
The office action has been updated reflecting the claims as currently presented.
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.
In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status.
Claims 1, 3, 5-9, 11, 13-17, 19, and 21-24 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Jayachandran et al. (US PGPub No. 20190028277-A1) in view of Bacon et al. (US PGPub No. 20240013202-A1) and Giordano et al. (US PGPub No. 20170300627-A1).
With respect to claim 1, Jayachandran teaches a method (¶0015: Thus, the following detailed description of the embodiments of at least one of a method, apparatus, non-transitory computer readable medium and system, as represented in the attached figures, is not intended to limit the scope of the application as claimed, but is merely representative of selected embodiments.) of controlling access to digital content comprising: receiving, via at least one processor, a blockchain identity provided by a user to log in to an account of an application of a different user providing the digital content, (¶0038-0041: Figure 4A, illustrates a flow diagram of an example method of managing access via a blockchain, according to example embodiments. Referring to Figure 4A, the method 400 may provide storing a user profile in a blockchain by an authorized member of the blockchain 412, receiving a request by another authorized member of the blockchain to access the user profile 414 (log in to an account of an application of a different user providing digital content) , identifying the request for the user profile is from the another authorized member of the blockchain 416, creating a signed message including consent to share the user profile with the another authorized member of the blockchain 418, and transmitting the signed message to that other authorized member of the blockchain, and the exchanging of the user profile between the blockchain members is performed without revealing blockchain member identities of the authorized member of the blockchain and the another authorized member of the blockchain to any of the blockchain members 422.);
Jayachandran does not disclose:
wherein the blockchain identity indicates a non-fungible token of the user;
verifying, via the at least one processor, the blockchain identity is associated with the user, wherein an access control policy controlling access to the account of the application and the digital content of the different user indicates blockchain identities of one or more users, permitted digital content of the different user for access for each of the blockchain identities, and one or more permitted actions on the permitted digital content for each of the blockchain identities; verifying, via the at least one processor, the user against the access control policy by identifying the blockchain identity of the user within the access control policy;
However, Bacon teaches wherein the blockchain identity indicates a non-fungible token of the user; (¶0034: Alternatively, the system may obtain blockchain data detailing the wallet addresses that hold a particular NFT or set of NFTs and may determine whether the wallet address provided by the user device matches one of those obtained in the blockchain data. In this manner, the system is able to determine that user device is associated with the wallet address ,validate using the blockchain which tokens with the wallet address holds, and determine those tokens satisfy the access condition).
verifying, via the at least one processor, the blockchain identity is associated with the user, (¶0046-0047: The wallet application, this example may include NFT data with regard to one or more NFTs associated with the wallet address. The NFT data may include, in some cases, an NFT identifier, a public key associated with the wallet (e.g., a wallet identifier or address), a transaction identifier associated with ownership of the NFT, an NFT collection identifier, a smart contract identifier, or other such data regarding the NFT and/or its ownership by the wallet address and stored at the user device. The wallet application is configured such that it is able to securely provide wallet address and/or NFT data to the e-commerce system regarding NFTs purportedly owner by the user device, and/or to authenticate the user devices’ ownership of certain public keys associated with particular wallet addresses.).
wherein an access control policy controlling access to the account of the application and the digital content of the different user indicates blockchain identities of one or more users, permitted digital content of the different user for access for each of the blockchain identities, and one or more permitted actions on the permitted digital content for each of the blockchain identities; (¶0048-0055: As seen in Figure 1, the access controller 1024 may be configured to control access to one or more of the product records 1012 based upon access control rules 1026. Each access control rule 1026 may specify one or more product records 1012, or a class of product records 1012, to which it applies. Each access control rule 1026 may be associated with a specified one of the merchant accounts. The access control rule may include in the access condition that an NFT only satisfies the condition if has been used for access control fewer than a maximum number of times. The maximum may be 1 or more. . In some cases, the condition may specify that the use counted against the maximum is only use in connection with certain merchants, classes of merchants, certain products or services or classes of products or services, or other such usage details. )
verifying, via the at least one processor, the user against the access control policy by identifying the blockchain identity of the user within the access control policy; and (¶0049-0055: the e-commerce 1004 and, in particular, the access controller 1024 may be configured to verify, in response to a request from the user device 1002, that is associated wallet address provided by the user device 1002 meets an access condition within an access control rule 1026. The access controller 1024 may be triggered to verify an access condition is satisfied if a restricted access product record is requested during a first phase of a user session, such as during product browsing or product search. The e-commerce may include a blockchain network API configured to obtain blockchain data from blockchain network, such as ownership data regarding a particular wallet address. The blockchain network API may receive a request for a token information from the access controller, which may provide one or more wallet addresses. The blockchain network API may then query the blockchain network for token ownership with respect to the wallet addresses and may receive data specifying tokens owner by each of the respective addresses according to the blockchain.);
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to utilize the teachings of Bacon with regards to the blockchain identity indicating a non-fungible token of the user to the method of Jayachandran in order to allow a user to control access to a resource in an efficient manner while preventing unauthorized access (Bacon: ¶0031-0032).
Jayachandran in view of Bacon does not disclose:
one or more permitted actions on the permitted digital content for each of the blockchain identities;
granting to the user, via the at least one processor, access to the account of the application of the different user and controlling access to the digital content of the different user in accordance with the permitted digital content and the one or more permitted actions indicated for the blockchain identity of the user in the access control policy.
The prior art of Bacon does disclose using an access control policy against the different user for access for each of the blockchain identities, but the prior art does not explicitly disclose one or more permitted actions on the permitted digital content for each of the blockchain identity rather the prior art discloses how many uses per different user is to access the digital content. However, Giordano teaches one or more permitted actions on the permitted digital content for each of the blockchain identities; (¶0063: As seen in Figure 2, the network is generally arranged to facilitate secure maintenance, access, and sharing of medical records among appropriate parties. Automated actors- generally smart contracts – are represented by scrolls in network 200. The automated actors represents what can be done in the network and the way data may be stored in the distributed ledger 22 (one or more permitted actions on the permitted digital content for each of the blockchain identities) Some, but not all, smart contracts may be linked to a user having a strong identity in the real world and may be called by users to invoke a medical record management event such as adding a medical record to a patient’s medical history or granting permissions to one or more users to access records in the patient’s medical history (one or more actions on the permitted digital content for each blockchain identities)).
granting to the user, via the at least one processor, access to the account of the application of the different user and controlling access to the digital content of the different user in accordance with the permitted digital content and the one or more permitted actions indicated for the blockchain identity of the user in the access control policy. (¶0070: The rights manager smart contract 206 is generally configured to check the validity of transaction and calls made on network by verifying compliance with a set of rules. In some implementations, the rights manager 206 may check validity verifying that all parties to the transaction or calls are authorized to be party to the transaction or call. For example, if a user issues a transaction to the network to add a medical record to a patient’s smart contract. The rights manager 206 may verify that the issuer of the transaction is a doctor or another user that has the rights to add a medical record to the patient’s smart contract. If the issuer has such rights, then rights manager 206 may approve the transaction and the transaction is complete by adding the new medical record to patient’s smart contract (permitted actions indicated for the block chain identity of the user in the access control policy).);
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to utilize the teachings of Giordano with regards to permitted actions on the permitted digital content to the method of Jayachandran in view of Bacon in order to provide reliable and efficient access controls that protect digital content from unauthorized use, while also facilitating efficient sharing of digital content among authorized users (Giordano: ¶0039).
With respect to claim 3, the combination of Jayachandran in view of Bacon and Giordano teaches the method of claim 1 (see rejection of claim 1 above) wherein verifying the blockchain identity comprises: sending a message to a blockchain address of a blockchain associated with the blockchain identity; and detecting signing of the message by the user. (Bacon ¶0034: The system may challenge the user device may provide the system with a wallet address and a digital signature over the message that evidences possession by the user device of the private key that corresponds to a public key associated with the wallet address. The system may cryptographically verify that the digital signature corresponds to the wallet address, for example ownership data detailing the fungible or non-fungible tokens held by the wallet address. Further ¶0050 shows an example of the process of the access controller 1024 may be configured to obtain a wallet address and digital signature from one or more user devices 1002, and to validate the digital signature confirms ownership of a public key corresponding to the wallet address. It may further be configured to store the wallet address, digital signature, and/or message signed by the digital signature in association with the user session. ).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to utilize the teachings of Bacon with regards to verifying the blockchain identity of the user to the method of Jayachandran in view of Giordano in order to prove ownership of digital contents such as tokens held by the wallet (Bacon: ¶0034).
With respect to claim 5, the combination of Jayachandran in view of Bacon and Giordano teaches the method of claim 1 (see rejection of claim 1 above) wherein granting to the user controlling access to the digital content of the different user comprises: restricting access of the user to performing the one or more permitted actions on the permitted digital content of the different user indicated for the blockchain identity of the user in the access control policy. (Giordano ¶0019: Participants in the healthcare network may be restricting from invoking medical management based on respective roles assigned to the participants (restricting access of the user indicated for the blockchain identity of the user).)
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to utilize the teachings of Giordano with regards to restricting access to the method of Jayachandran in view of Bacon in order to ensure a strong identity of users that participate in the network (Giordano ¶0041).
With respect to claim 6, the combination of Jayachandran in view of Bacon and Giordano teaches the method of claim 5 (see rejection of claim 5 above) wherein the one or more permitted actions are determined based on a verification of an identity of the user. (Giordano ¶0050-0051: However, smart contracts may be permissioned such that certain operations in a given smart contract are performed only if it is verified that the caller of the contract (e.g., a particular node or user) has rights to execute that smart contract. In some implementations, a smart contract assigned to a particular user can be programmed to automatically call the rights manager smart contract to verify whether the user that called the smart contract has rights to call that contract. For example, a patient that calls his personal patient's smart contract may cause the smart contract to execute. Before the patient's smart contract performs substantive operations according to the patient's request (e.g., accessing a medical record), the patient's smart contract may itself call the rights manager smart contract and pass the identity of the user that called the patient's smart contract. )
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to utilize the teachings of Giordano with regards to the permitted actions to the method of Jayachandran in view of Bacon in order to ensure a strong identity of users that participate in the network (Giordano ¶0041).
With respect to claim 7, the combination of Jayachandran in view of Bacon and Giordano teaches the method of claim 1 (see rejection of claim 1 above) wherein the access control policy further indicates a condition for the user, and verifying the user against the access control policy comprises: determining that the user satisfies the condition. (Bacon ¶0034-0035: In this manner, the system is able to determine that user device is associated with the wallet address, validate using the blockchain which tokens the wallet address holds, and determine that the user device is associated with the wallet address, validate using the blockchain which tokens satisfy the access condition. In some cases, the access conditions set from accessing a restricted based on token-gating may indicate that a particular NFT or set of NFTs may only be used for a maximum number of times of satisfy the access condition.).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to utilize the teachings of Bacon with regards to the condition to the method of Jayachandran in order to allow a user to control access to a resource in an efficient manner while preventing unauthorized access (Bacon: ¶0031-0032).
With respect to claim 8, the combination of Jayachandran in view of Bacon and Giordano teaches the method of claim 7 (see rejection of claim 7 above) wherein the condition includes a threshold level of activity on a blockchain by the user. (Bacon ¶0035-0036: In some cases, the access conditions set for accessing a restricted resource based on token-gating may indicate that a particular NFT or set of NFTs may only be used a maximum number of times to satisfy the access condition (threshold of activity on a blockchain by the user). Other variations may be used in which the access condition imposes a maximum number of times (one or more) that the NFT(s) may have been used to satisfy other gating conditions before the NFT(s) are “exhausted” for that purpose and will no longer be considered to satisfy the access condition. ¶0081 further in demonstrated in Figure 5, based on prior usage information obtained from the second blockchain, the server may assess in operations 512, whether the NFT is “exhausted”. Exhaustion of an NFT may be based on a maximum number of uses set in condition. ).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to utilize the teachings of Bacon with regards to the condition to the method of Jayachandran in order to allow a user to control access to a resource in an efficient manner while preventing unauthorized access (Bacon: ¶0031-0032).
With respect to claim 9, Jayachandran teaches a system for controlling access to digital content comprising: one or more memories; and at least one processor coupled to the one or more memories, the at least one processor configured to: (¶0015-0019: Thus, the following detailed description of the embodiments of at least one of a method, apparatus, non-transitory computer readable medium and system, as represented in the attached figures, is not intended to limit the scope of the application as claimed, but is merely representative of selected embodiments. Referring to an example in ¶0048 wherein a module may also be at least partially implemented in software for execution by various types of processors. An identified unit of executable code may, for instance, comprise one or more physical or logical blocks of computer instructions that may, for instance, be organized as an object, procedure, or function.) . receive a blockchain identity provided by a user to log in to an account of an application of a different user providing the digital content, (¶0038-0041: Figure 4A, illustrates a flow diagram of an example method of managing access via a blockchain, according to example embodiments. Referring to Figure 4A, the method 400 may provide storing a user profile in a blockchain by an authorized member of the blockchain 412, receiving a request by another authorized member of the blockchain to access the user profile 414 (log in to an account of an application of a different user providing digital content) , identifying the request for the user profile is from the another authorized member of the blockchain 416, creating a signed message including consent to share the user profile with the another authorized member of the blockchain 418, and transmitting the signed message to that other authorized member of the blockchain, and the exchanging of the user profile between the blockchain members is performed without revealing blockchain member identities of the authorized member of the blockchain and the another authorized member of the blockchain to any of the blockchain members 422.);
Jayachandran does not disclose:
wherein the blockchain identity indicates a non-fungible token of the user;
verify the blockchain identity is associated with the user, wherein an access control policy controlling access to the account of the application and the digital content of the different user indicates blockchain identities of one or more users, permitted digital content of the different user for access for each of the blockchain identities, and one or more permitted actions on the permitted digital content for each of the blockchain identities; verify the user against the access control policy by identifying the blockchain identity of the user within the access control policy; and
However, Bacon teaches wherein the blockchain identity indicates a non-fungible token of the user; (¶0034: Alternatively, the system may obtain blockchain data detailing the wallet addresses that hold a particular NFT or set of NFTs and may determine whether the wallet address provided by the user device matches one of those obtained in the blockchain data. In this manner, the system is able to determine that user device is associated with the wallet address ,validate using the blockchain which tokens with the wallet address holds, and determine those tokens satisfy the access condition).
verify the blockchain identity is associated with the user, (¶0046-0047: The wallet application, this example may include NFT data with regard to one or more NFTs associated with the wallet address. The NFT data may include, in some cases, an NFT identifier, a public key associated with the wallet (e.g., a wallet identifier or address), a transaction identifier associated with ownership of the NFT, an NFT collection identifier, a smart contract identifier, or other such data regarding the NFT and/or its ownership by the wallet address and stored at the user device. The wallet application is configured such that it is able to securely provide wallet address and/or NFT data to the e-commerce system regarding NFTs purportedly owner by the user device, and/or to authenticate the user devices’ ownership of certain public keys associated with particular wallet addresses.);
wherein an access control policy controlling access to the account of the application and the digital content of the different user indicates blockchain identities of one or more users, permitted digital content of the different user for access for each of the blockchain identities, and one or more permitted actions on the permitted digital content for each of the blockchain identities; (¶0048-0055: As seen in Figure 1, the access controller 1024 may be configured to control access to one or more of the product records 1012 based upon access control rules 1026. Each access control rule 1026 may specify one or more product records 1012, or a class of product records 1012, to which it applies. Each access control rule 1026 may be associated with a specified one of the merchant accounts. The access control rule may include in the access condition that an NFT only satisfies the condition if has been used for access control fewer than a maximum number of times. The maximum may be 1 or more. . In some cases, the condition may specify that the use counted against the maximum is only use in connection with certain merchants, classes of merchants, certain products or services or classes of products or services, or other such usage details. )
verify the user against the access control policy by identifying the blockchain identity of the user within the access control policy; and (¶0049-0055: the e-commerce 1004 and, in particular, the access controller 1024 may be configured to verify, in response to a request from the user device 1002, that is associated wallet address provided by the user device 1002 meets an access condition within an access control rule 1026. The access controller 1024 may be triggered to verify an access condition is satisfied if a restricted access product record is requested during a first phase of a user session, such as during product browsing or product search. The e-commerce may include a blockchain network API configured to obtain blockchain data from blockchain network, such as ownership data regarding a particular wallet address. The blockchain network API may receive a request for a token information from the access controller, which may provide one or more wallet addresses. The blockchain network API may then query the blockchain network for token ownership with respect to the wallet addresses and may receive data specifying tokens owner by each of the respective addresses according to the blockchain.);
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to utilize the teachings of Bacon with regards to the blockchain identity indicating a non-fungible token of the user to the method of Jayachandran in order to allow a user to control access to a resource in an efficient manner while preventing unauthorized access (Bacon: ¶0031-0032).
Jayachandran in view of Bacon does not disclose:
one or more permitted actions on the permitted digital content for each of the blockchain identities;
grant to the user access to the account of the application of the different user and control access to the digital content of the different user in accordance with the permitted digital content and the one or more permitted actions indicated for the blockchain identity of the user in the access control policy.
The prior art of Bacon does disclose using an access control policy against the different user for access for each of the blockchain identities, but the prior art does not explicitly disclose one or more permitted actions on the permitted digital content for each of the blockchain identity rather the prior art discloses how many uses per different user is to access the digital content. However, Giordano teaches one or more permitted actions on the permitted digital content for each of the blockchain identities; (¶0063: As seen in Figure 2, the network is generally arranged to facilitate secure maintenance, access, and sharing of medical records among appropriate parties. Automated actors- generally smart contracts – are represented by scrolls in network 200. The automated actors represents what can be done in the network and the way data may be stored in the distributed ledger 22 (one or more permitted actions on the permitted digital content for each of the blockchain identities) Some, but not all, smart contracts may be linked to a user having a strong identity in the real world and may be called by users to invoke a medical record management event such as adding a medical record to a patient’s medical history or granting permissions to one or more users to access records in the patient’s medical history (one or more actions on the permitted digital content for each blockchain identities)).
grant to the user access to the account of the application of the different user and control access to the digital content of the different user in accordance with the permitted digital content and the one or more permitted actions indicated for the blockchain identity of the user in the access control policy. (¶0070: The rights manager smart contract 206 is generally configured to check the validity of transaction and calls made on network by verifying compliance with a set of rules. In some implementations, the rights manager 206 may check validity verifying that all parties to the transaction or calls are authorized to be party to the transaction or call. For example, if a user issues a transaction to the network to add a medical record to a patient’s smart contract. The rights manager 206 may verify that the issuer of the transaction is a doctor or another user that has the rights to add a medical record to the patient’s smart contract. If the issuer has such rights, then rights manager 206 may approve the transaction and the transaction is complete by adding the new medical record to patient’s smart contract (permitted actions indicated for the block chain identity of the user in the access control policy).);
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to utilize the teachings of Giordano with regards to permitted actions on the permitted digital content to the method of Jayachandran in view of Bacon in order to provide reliable and efficient access controls that protect digital content from unauthorized use, while also facilitating efficient sharing of digital content among authorized users (Giordano: ¶0039).
With respect to claim 11, the combination in view of Jayachandran in view of Bacon and Giordano teaches the system of claim 9 (see rejection of claim 9 above) wherein verifying the blockchain identity comprises: sending a message to a blockchain address of a blockchain associated with the blockchain identity; and detecting signing of the message by the user. (Bacon ¶0034: The system may challenge the user device may provide the system with a wallet address and a digital signature over the message that evidences possession by the user device of the private key that corresponds to a public key associated with the wallet address. The system may cryptographically verify that the digital signature corresponds to the wallet address, for example ownership data detailing the fungible or non-fungible tokens held by the wallet address. Further ¶0050 shows an example of the process of the access controller 1024 may be configured to obtain a wallet address and digital signature from one or more user devices 1002, and to validate the digital signature confirms ownership of a public key corresponding to the wallet address. It may further be configured to store the wallet address, digital signature, and/or message signed by the digital signature in association with the user session. ).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to utilize the teachings of Bacon with regards to verifying the blockchain identity of the user to the method of Jayachandran in view of Giordano in order to prove ownership of digital contents such as tokens held by the wallet (Bacon: ¶0034).
With respect to claim 13, the combination in view of Jayachandran in view of Bacon and Giordano teaches the system of claim 9 (see rejection of claim 9 above) wherein granting to the user controlling access to the digital content of the different user comprises: restricting access of the user to performing the one or more permitted actions on the permitted digital content of the different user indicated for the blockchain identity of the user in the access control policy. (Giordano ¶0019: Participants in the healthcare network may be restricting from invoking medical management based on respective roles assigned to the participants (restricting access of the user indicated for the blockchain identity of the user).)
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to utilize the teachings of Giordano with regards to restricting access to the method of Jayachandran in view of Bacon in order to ensure a strong identity of users that participate in the network (Giordano ¶0041).
With respect to claim 14, the combination in view of Jayachandran in view of Bacon and Giordano teaches the system of claim 13 (see rejection of claim 13 above) wherein the one or more permitted actions are determined based on a verification of an identity of the user. (Giordano ¶0050-0051: However, smart contracts may be permissioned such that certain operations in a given smart contract are performed only if it is verified that the caller of the contract (e.g., a particular node or user) has rights to execute that smart contract. In some implementations, a smart contract assigned to a particular user can be programmed to automatically call the rights manager smart contract to verify whether the user that called the smart contract has rights to call that contract. For example, a patient that calls his personal patient's smart contract may cause the smart contract to execute. Before the patient's smart contract performs substantive operations according to the patient's request (e.g., accessing a medical record), the patient's smart contract may itself call the rights manager smart contract and pass the identity of the user that called the patient's smart contract. )
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to utilize the teachings of Giordano with regards to the permitted actions to the method of Jayachandran in view of Bacon in order to ensure a strong identity of users that participate in the network (Giordano ¶0041).
With respect to claim 15, the combination in view of Jayachandran in view of Bacon and Giordano teaches the system of claim 9 (see rejection of claim 9 above) wherein the access control policy further indicates a condition for the user, and verifying the user against the access control policy comprises: determining that the user satisfies the condition. (Bacon ¶0034-0035: In this manner, the system is able to determine that user device is associated with the wallet address, validate using the blockchain which tokens the wallet address holds, and determine that the user device is associated with the wallet address, validate using the blockchain which tokens satisfy the access condition. In some cases, the access conditions set from accessing a restricted based on token-gating may indicate that a particular NFT or set of NFTs may only be used for a maximum number of times of satisfy the access condition.).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to utilize the teachings of Bacon with regards to the condition to the method of Jayachandran in order to allow a user to control access to a resource in an efficient manner while preventing unauthorized access (Bacon: ¶0031-0032).
With respect to claim 16, the combination in view of Jayachandran in view of Bacon and Giordano teaches the system of claim 15 (see rejection of claim 15 above) wherein the condition includes a threshold level of activity on a blockchain by the user. (Bacon ¶0035-0036: In some cases, the access conditions set for accessing a restricted resource based on token-gating may indicate that a particular NFT or set of NFTs may only be used a maximum number of times to satisfy the access condition (threshold of activity on a blockchain by the user). Other variations may be used in which the access condition imposes a maximum number of times (one or more) that the NFT(s) may have been used to satisfy other gating conditions before the NFT(s) are “exhausted” for that purpose and will no longer be considered to satisfy the access condition. ¶0081 further in demonstrated in Figure 5, based on prior usage information obtained from the second blockchain, the server may assess in operations 512, whether the NFT is “exhausted”. Exhaustion of an NFT may be based on a maximum number of uses set in condition. ).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to utilize the teachings of Bacon with regards to the condition to the method of Jayachandran in order to allow a user to control access to a resource in an efficient manner while preventing unauthorized access (Bacon: ¶0031-0032).
With respect to claim 17, Jayachandran teaches a computer program product for controlling access to digital content, the computer program product comprising one or more non-transitory computer readable media having instructions stored thereon, the instructions executable by at least one processor to cause the at least one processor to: (¶0044-0044 :The above embodiments may be implemented in hardware, in a computer program executed by a processor, in firmware, or in a combination of the above. A computer program may be embodied on a computer readable medium, such as a storage medium. In Figure 5 further depicts a memory 510 and a processor 520 may be discrete components of a network entity 500 that are used to execute an application or set of operations as described herein. The application may be coded in software in a computer language understood by the processor 520, and stored in a computer readable medium, such as, a memory 510. The computer readable medium may be a non-transitory computer readable medium that includes tangible hardware components, such as memory, that can store software. );
receive a blockchain identity provided by a user to log in to an account of an application of a different user providing the digital content, (¶0038-0041: Figure 4A, illustrates a flow diagram of an example method of managing access via a blockchain, according to example embodiments. Referring to Figure 4A, the method 400 may provide storing a user profile in a blockchain by an authorized member of the blockchain 412, receiving a request by another authorized member of the blockchain to access the user profile 414 (log in to an account of an application of a different user providing digital content) , identifying the request for the user profile is from the another authorized member of the blockchain 416, creating a signed message including consent to share the user profile with the another authorized member of the blockchain 418, and transmitting the signed message to that other authorized member of the blockchain, and the exchanging of the user profile between the blockchain members is performed without revealing blockchain member identities of the authorized member of the blockchain and the another authorized member of the blockchain to any of the blockchain members 422.);
Jayachandran does not disclose:
wherein the blockchain identity indicates a non- fungible token of the user; verify the blockchain identity is associated with the user, wherein an access control policy controlling access to the account of the application and the digital content of the different user indicates blockchain identities of one or more users, permitted digital content of the different user for access for each of the blockchain identities, and one or more permitted actions on the permitted digital content for each of the blockchain identities; verify the user against the access control policy by identifying the blockchain identity of the user within the access control policy; and
However, Bacon teaches wherein the blockchain identity indicates a non- fungible token of the user; (¶0034: Alternatively, the system may obtain blockchain data detailing the wallet addresses that hold a particular NFT or set of NFTs and may determine whether the wallet address provided by the user device matches one of those obtained in the blockchain data. In this manner, the system is able to determine that user device is associated with the wallet address ,validate using the blockchain which tokens with the wallet address holds, and determine those tokens satisfy the access condition).
verify the blockchain identity is associated with the user, (¶0046-0047: The wallet application, this example may include NFT data with regard to one or more NFTs associated with the wallet address. The NFT data may include, in some cases, an NFT identifier, a public key associated with the wallet (e.g., a wallet identifier or address), a transaction identifier associated with ownership of the NFT, an NFT collection identifier, a smart contract identifier, or other such data regarding the NFT and/or its ownership by the wallet address and stored at the user device. The wallet application is configured such that it is able to securely provide wallet address and/or NFT data to the e-commerce system regarding NFTs purportedly owner by the user device, and/or to authenticate the user devices’ ownership of certain public keys associated with particular wallet addresses.).
wherein an access control policy controlling access to the account of the application and the digital content of the different user indicates blockchain identities of one or more users, permitted digital content of the different user for access for each of the blockchain identities, and one or more permitted actions on the permitted digital content for each of the blockchain identities; (¶0048-0055: As seen in Figure 1, the access controller 1024 may be configured to control access to one or more of the product records 1012 based upon access control rules 1026. Each access control rule 1026 may specify one or more product records 1012, or a class of product records 1012, to which it applies. Each access control rule 1026 may be associated with a specified one of the merchant accounts. The access control rule may include in the access condition that an NFT only satisfies the condition if has been used for access control fewer than a maximum number of times. The maximum may be 1 or more. . In some cases, the condition may specify that the use counted against the maximum is only use in connection with certain merchants, classes of merchants, certain products or services or classes of products or services, or other such usage details. )
verify the user against the access control policy by identifying the blockchain identity of the user within the access control policy; and (¶0049-0055: the e-commerce 1004 and, in particular, the access controller 1024 may be configured to verify, in response to a request from the user device 1002, that is associated wallet address provided by the user device 1002 meets an access condition within an access control rule 1026. The access controller 1024 may be triggered to verify an access condition is satisfied if a restricted access product record is requested during a first phase of a user session, such as during product browsing or product search. The e-commerce may include a blockchain network API configured to obtain blockchain data from blockchain network, such as ownership data regarding a particular wallet address. The blockchain network API may receive a request for a token information from the access controller, which may provide one or more wallet addresses. The blockchain network API may then query the blockchain network for token ownership with respect to the wallet addresses and may receive data specifying tokens owner by each of the respective addresses according to the blockchain.);
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to utilize the teachings of Bacon with regards to the blockchain identity indicating a non-fungible token of the user to the method of Jayachandran in order to allow a user to control access to a resource in an efficient manner while preventing unauthorized access (Bacon: ¶0031-0032).
Jayachandran in view of Bacon does not disclose:
one or more permitted actions on the permitted digital content for each of the blockchain identities;
grant to the user access to the account of the application of the different user and control access to the digital content of the different user in accordance with the permitted digital content and the one or more permitted actions indicated for the blockchain identity of the user in the access control policy.
The prior art of Bacon does disclose using an access control policy against the different user for access for each of the blockchain identities, but the prior art does not explicitly disclose one or more permitted actions on the permitted digital content for each of the blockchain identity rather the prior art discloses how many uses per different user is to access the digital content. However, Giordano teaches one or more permitted actions on the permitted digital content for each of the blockchain identities; (¶0063: As seen in Figure 2, the network is generally arranged to facilitate secure maintenance, access, and sharing of medical records among appropriate parties. Automated actors- generally smart contracts – are represented by scrolls in network 200. The automated actors represents what can be done in the network and the way data may be stored in the distributed ledger 22 (one or more permitted actions on the permitted digital content for each of the blockchain identities) Some, but not all, smart contracts may be linked to a user having a strong identity in the real world and may be called by users to invoke a medical record management event such as adding a medical record to a patient’s medical history or granting permissions to one or more users to access records in the patient’s medical history (one or more actions on the permitted digital content for each blockchain identities)).
grant to the user access to the account of the application of the different user and control access to the digital content of the different user in accordance with the permitted digital content and the one or more permitted actions indicated for the blockchain identity of the user in the access control policy. (¶0070: The rights manager smart contract 206 is generally configured to check the validity of transaction and calls made on network by verifying compliance with a set of rules. In some implementations, the rights manager 206 may check validity verifying that all parties to the transaction or calls are authorized to be party to the transaction or call. For example, if a user issues a transaction to the network to add a medical record to a patient’s smart contract. The rights manager 206 may verify that the issuer of the transaction is a doctor or another user that has the rights to add a medical record to the patient’s smart contract. If the issuer has such rights, then rights manager 206 may approve the transaction and the transaction is complete by adding the new medical record to patient’s smart contract (permitted actions indicated for the block chain identity of the user in the access control policy).);
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to utilize the teachings of Giordano with regards to permitted actions on the permitted digital content to the method of Jayachandran in view of Bacon in order to provide reliable and efficient access controls that protect digital content from unauthorized use, while also facilitating efficient sharing of digital content among authorized users (Giordano: ¶0039).
With respect to claim 19, the combination of Jayachandran in view of Bacon and Giordano teaches the computer program product of claim 17 (see rejection of claim 17 above) wherein verifying the blockchain identity comprises: sending a message to a blockchain address of a blockchain associated with the blockchain identity; and detecting signing of the message by the user. (Bacon ¶0034: The system may challenge the user device may provide the system with a wallet address and a digital signature over the message that evidences possession by the user device of the private key that corresponds to a public key associated with the wallet address. The system may cryptographically verify that the digital signature corresponds to the wallet address, for example ownership data detailing the fungible or non-fungible tokens held