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 .
Election/Restrictions
In the response, dated 1/13/2026, an election was made of Invention I (Claims 1-7, 11-17 and 19) without traverse. Claims 8-10, 18 and 20 are withdrawn from further consideration by the examiner, 37 CFR 1.142(b), as being drawn to a non-elected invention.
Claim Objections
Claims 4 and 14 are objected to because of the following informalities: The claims recite an acronym (ID) without first defining it within the claim language (i.e., “identification”) . Appropriate correction is required.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(b):
(b) CONCLUSION.—The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph:
The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the applicant regards as his invention.
Claims 1-7, 11-17 and 19 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor (or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the applicant), regards as the invention.
Regarding claims 1 and 11, the claims are generally narrative and indefinite, failing to conform with current U.S. practice. They appear to be a literal translation into English from a foreign document and are replete with grammatical and idiomatic errors. For example, the applicant recites “in a built in manner,” which is unclear as to what or how “in a built in manner” refers back to or how it is quantified. It is not clear how a data set or a program is “in a built in manner.” Likewise, the applicant recites that the trusted execution program is “invisible to the data user,” but does not elaborate or explain how this is done. Does that mean the program is running in the background unbeknownst to the user or does this mean the program is executed on a different device?
Regarding claims 6 and 16, the applicant recites “applying…” but the limitation does not recite what is being applied, it just recites conditions of the application. It is unclear to the examiner what is being applied.
Dependent claims 2-7, 12-17 and 19 are rejected under the same rationale as they do not cure the deficiencies of independent claims 1 or 11.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 103 which forms the basis for all obviousness rejections set forth in this Office action:
A patent for a claimed invention may not be obtained, notwithstanding that the claimed invention is not identically disclosed as set forth in section 102, if the differences between the claimed invention and the prior art are such that the claimed invention as a whole would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which the claimed invention pertains. Patentability shall not be negated by the manner in which the invention was made.
Claim(s) 1-7, 11-17 and 19 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Bursell (US 2021/0374234) in view of Bessonov et al (US 2020/0084046).
Regarding claims 1, 11 and 19, Bursell discloses a data sharing method, an electronic device, comprising: a processor; and a memory, configured to store processor-executable instructions, wherein the processor is configured to perform the data sharing method and a non-transitory computer-readable storage medium, on which computer executable instructions are stored, wherein when the executable instructions are executed by a processor, the data sharing method comprising [0129-0136, fig 12]:
acquiring encrypted data to be analyzed, selected by a data user, in a data sharing platform [0042] (data may be received for decryption);
decrypting, by using a trusted execution program, the encrypted data to be analyzed to obtain decrypted data, and performing, by using the trusted execution program, data analysis on the decrypted data, to obtain a data analysis result of the encrypted data to be analyzed [0042, 0021, 0097] (the data may be decrypted and the code may be analyzed for verification);
However, Bursell does not expressly disclose but Bessono et al discloses:
wherein the trusted execution program is provided with identity authentication information of the data user set in a built-in manner, and an execution process of the trusted execution program is invisible to the data user [0090, 0094, 0089] (user data being shared is achieved via the use of an immutable ledger such that data is pre-certified).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at to create the invention as claimed for the following reasons. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the teachings of Bursell by implementing identity identification, for the purpose of verification, based upon the beneficial teachings provided by Bessono et al, see for example [0089]. These modifications would result in ease of use and increased security, both of which are obvious benefits to the skilled artisan. Additionally, the cited references are in the field of computer security, as is the current application, and thus, are in analogous arts.
Regarding claims 2 and 12, Bursell and Bessono et al disclose all the limitations of independent claims 1, 11 and 19. Bursell additionally discloses wherein the trusted execution program is generated by compiling, by the data sharing platform, the identity authentication information of the data user, a service code selected by the data user and an encryption-decryption function, the data sharing platform stores a variety of service codes for selection by the data user, and each service code in the variety of service codes is a code that has been reviewed by a consortium blockchain member and is used to analyze data [0021] (data attestation is performed so that source code is verified).
Regarding claims 3 and 13, Bursell and Bessono et al disclose all the limitations of independent claims 1, 11 and 19. Bursell additionally discloses wherein the encrypted data to be analyzed is obtained based on a search of metadata stored in the data sharing platform and meeting a preset data standard, and the metadata comprises description information of encrypted data [0034-0035] (data may be encrypted with standard cryptographic algorithms such that the quantity of keys in the subset may need to satisfy a minimum threshold number to enable the cryptographic operation to complete successfully).
Regarding claims 4 and 14, Bursell and Bessono et al disclose all the limitations of independent claims 1, 11 and 19. Bursell additionally discloses acquiring data list information, in the data sharing platform, corresponding to the encrypted data to be analyzed, wherein the data list information comprises data ID information of the encrypted data to be analyzed; wherein the acquiring encrypted data to be analyzed, selected by a data user, in a data sharing platform comprises: acquiring, based on the data ID information of the encrypted data to be analyzed, the encrypted data to be analyzed by using the trusted execution program [0063-0064, 0068] (attestation of the computing device may be performed).
Regarding claims 5 and 15, Bursell and Bessono et al disclose all the limitations of independent claims 1, 11 and 19. Bursell additionally discloses acquiring data list information, in the data sharing platform, corresponding to the encrypted data to be analyzed, wherein the data list information comprises data summary information about the encrypted data to be analyzed; and performing, according to the data summary information about the encrypted data to be analyzed, data summary verification by using the trusted execution program [0063-0064, 0068] (attestation of the computing device may be performed).
Regarding claims 6 and 16, Bursell and Bessono et al disclose all the limitations of independent claims 1, 11 and 19. Bursell additionally discloses acquiring data list information, in the data sharing platform, corresponding to the encrypted data to be analyzed, wherein the data list information comprises information of a data contributor of the encrypted data to be analyzed; applying, by using the trusted execution program, to a data contributor client for a decryption key of the encrypted data to be analyzed based on the information of the data contributor; and receiving the decryption key returned by the data contributor client, wherein the decrypting, by using a trusted execution program, the encrypted data to be analyzed to obtain decrypted data, and performing, by using the trusted execution program, data analysis on the decrypted data comprises :decrypting the encrypted data to be analyzed according to the decryption key returned by the data contributor client, and performing data analysis on the decrypted data [0063-0064, 0068] (attestation of the computing device may be performed).
Regarding claims 7 and 17, Bursell and Bessono et al disclose all the limitations of independent claims 1, 11 and 19. Bursell does not expressly disclose but Bessono et al additionally discloses calling a smart contract by using the trusted execution program, to implement point transfer and ledger update [0013, 0045-0048] (a smart contract may be utilized).
The motivation to combine is the same as disclosed in point (14) above.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Yu et al (WO 2020/119258A1) (US 2021/0152343-being used as a translation): discloses a data processing method and apparatus. A method performed by a data provider includes: obtaining first encrypted data of first plaintext data, a first key used to decrypt the first encrypted data, and authorization information about the first plaintext data; sending a verification request to a data manager, the data manager including a first trusted execution environment; receiving authentication information from the data manager, and performing verification based on the authentication information; when the verification succeeds, securely transmitting the first key and the authorization information to the first trusted execution environment; and providing the first encrypted data to the data manager.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to KENDALL DOLLY whose telephone number is (571)270-1948. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 7am-3pm (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, Shewaye Gelagay can be reached at (571)272-4219. 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.
/KENDALL DOLLY/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2436