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 Amendment
This Office action has been issued in response to amendment filed on 12/06/2025
Claims 1-20 pending. Applicants' arguments have been carefully and respectfully considered and addressed. Accordingly, this action has been made FINAL necessitated by amendment.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments regarding the amended claims were fully considered. Claims 1-8.
Claims 9 and 15 are distinct from claim 1 and recite a broader scope and Yang read on the claim language.
The cited reference in 892 also read on the argued limitation.
WO2020240296: Fig. 8 and pages 42-43, 48, 52 and 63.
Allowance
Claims 1-8 are allowable.
Reason for Allowance
Independent claim 1 is allowable because the cited arts of record do not explicitly disclose, teach, or suggest the following limitations content management (in combination with all other features in the claim),
obtaining a blockchain uniform resource indicator (BURI) character string comprising one or more Merkle proof portions and a transaction identifier portion separated by delimiter characters; parsing the BURI character string to identify delimiter characters therein, and thereby extracting the one or more Merkle proof portions and the transaction identifier portion separated by the delimiter characters, the one or more Merkle proof portions for verifying that the identified transaction belongs to an identified block; using at least part of the BURI to obtain a Merkle root hash; and using the one or more Merkle proof portions to determine whether the transaction identifier portion is valid against the Merkle root hash, thereby verifying the identified transaction using the BURI character string, without accessing a payload of the identified block.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
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 the appropriate paragraphs of 35 U.S.C. 102 that form the basis for the rejections under this section made in this Office action:
A person shall be entitled to a patent unless –
(a)(1) the claimed invention was patented, described in a printed publication, or in public use, on sale, or otherwise available to the public before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claims 9-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Xinying Yang (hereinafter Yang) US Publication No 20210184837.
As per claim 9, Yang teaches:
A method of generating a referencing blockchain transaction, the method comprising:
referencing blockchain transaction comprising, providing, in an output at a first index of the referencing blockchain transaction, a blockchain uniform resource indicator (BUR) character string for referencing an identified transaction previously stored on the blockchain in an identified block, the BUR comprising a transaction identifier portion and a further portion, the transaction identifier portion and the further portion being separated by at least one delimiter character, the further portion being a hierarchical component for further defining the identified transaction;
(Fig. 2-4 and Abstract and paragraphs ([0006]-[0008], [0034], [0054]-[0055], [0064 and [0067], wherein the marking character separating of transaction hash/ID I from the concealment is the delimiter)
and providing the referencing blockchain transaction to one or more nodes of a blockchain network.
(Fig. 2-4 and Abstract and paragraphs ( [0102] and [0106] and [0113])
As per claim 10, Yang teaches:
The method of claim 9, wherein the further portion comprises one or more Merkle proof portions, separated from the transaction identifier portion by at least one delimiter character.
(Fig. 1 and Paragraphs [0033]-[0037])
As per claim 11, Yang teaches:
The method of claim 10, wherein the one or more Merkle proof portions comprises a Merkle index of the identified transaction in the identified block.
(Fig. 1 and Paragraphs [0033]-[0037])
As per claim 12, Yang teaches:
The method of claim 11, wherein the one or more Merkle proof portions further comprises a subset of Merkle proof hashes required to determine whether the identified transaction is verified by a Merkle root hash of the identified block.
(Fig. 1 and Paragraph [0033])
As per claim 13, Yang teaches:
The method of claim 11, wherein the Merkle index is in binary form.
(Fig. 1 and paragraphs [0035]-[0036])
As per claim 14, Wu and Thompson teach:
The method of claim 12, wherein each binary digit of the Merkle index is prepended to a corresponding hash of an ordered list of hashes.
(Fig. 1 and paragraphs [0035]-[0036])
As per claim 15, Yang teaches:
The method of claim 9, wherein a block identity portion of the identified block is a block number of the identified block.
(Paragraph [0060])
As per claim 16, Yang teaches:
The method of claim 9, wherein identity portion of the identified block is a block header hash of the identified block.
(Paragraph [0031]-[0032] and [0035])
As per claim 17, Yang teaches:
The method of claim 10, wherein the BURI further comprises a block identifying portion, separated from the transaction identifier portion and the one or more Merkle proof portion by at least one delimiter character.
(Fig. 2-4 and Abstract and paragraphs ([0006]-[0008], [0034], [0054]-[0055], [0064 and [0067], wherein the marking character separating of transaction hash/ID I from the concealment is the delimiter)
As per claim 18, Yang teaches:
The method of claim 9, wherein the BURI further comprises a fragment portion for identifying a fragment of the identified transaction.
(Fig. 2-4 and Abstract and paragraphs ([0006]-[0008], [0034], [0054]-[0055], [0064 and [0067], wherein the marking character separating of transaction hash/ID I from the concealment is the delimiter)
As per claim 19, Yang teaches:
A computer implemented method of communicating data stored in an identified transaction to a verifying entity, the method comprising:
generating a blockchain uniform resource indicator (BURI) character string comprising one or more Merkle proof portions and a transaction identifier portion separated by a delimiter character the one or more Merkle proof portions for verifying that the identified transaction belongs to the an identified block;
(Fig. 1-4 and Abstract and paragraphs ([0031-[0035], [0054]-[0055], [0064 and [0067], wherein the marking character separating of transaction hash/ID I from the concealment is the delimiter)
and rendering the BURI available to the verifying entity for accessing the data.
(Paragraphs [0033] and [0051])
As per claim 20, Yang teaches:
The computer implemented method of claim 19, wherein the step of rendering the BURI available comprises storing the BURI in a transaction of a blockchain.
(Abstract and paragraphs [0053] and [0086])
Conclusion
As necessitated by amendment, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. 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 extension fee pursuant to 37 CFR 1.136(a) will be calculated from the mailing date of
the advisory action. In no event, however, will the statutory period for reply expire later than SIX MONTHS from the mailing date of this final action.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Tarek Chbouki whose telephone number is 571-2703154. The examiner can normally be reached on Mon-Fri 9 am to 6:00 pm EST. If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Aleksandr Kerzhner can be reached at 571-2701760. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300.
Information regarding the status of an application may be obtained from the Patent Application Information Retrieval (PAIR) system. Status information for published applications may be obtained from either Private PAIR or Public PAIR. Status information for unpublished applications is available through Private PAIR only. For more information about the PAIR system, see http://pair-direct.uspto.gov. Should you have questions on access to the Private PAIR system, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative or access to the automated information system, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000.
/TAREK CHBOUKI/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2165 3/4/2026