CTNF 18/329,013 CTNF 83747 DETAILED ACTION Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status 07-03-aia AIA 15-10-aia The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA. Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102 07-06 AIA 15-10-15 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. 07-07-aia AIA 07-07 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 – 07-08-aia AIA (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. 07-15-aia AIA Claim(s) 1 and 20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102 (a)(1) as being anticipated by RICCI (US 2017/0136889 A1, hereinafter RICCI) . Regarding claims 1 and 20 (claim 1 is considered representative for limitation matching purposes), RICCI discloses a power transfer system comprising: a smart road having a first power line, a second power line, and a plurality of wireless smart road power receive components (See Fig.13, and Par.106, discloses a charging segment subsystem on a charging roadway. The charging segment subsystem comprising a first power line from the primary coil 128 to the inverter 124 and a second power line from the secondary coil 908 to the rectifier 108. This is a subsystem meaning there are a plurality of similar subsystem along the road [i.e. plurality of power-receive components 908]. Par.72 further discloses the charging segment Fig.1, Item#128, comprising a plurality of power lines); a plurality of electric vehicles (EVs) traveling on the smart road (See Fig.1, Item#100, discloses a vehicle on the road segment 128 and Par.31, discloses the roadway segments allow a plurality of vehicles to charge while in motion), each of the EVs having a wireless EV power transfer component (See Fig.12, Items#904+124 and Par.101) and a wireless EV power receive component (See Fig.12, Items#112+108 and Par.101); and a power grid electrically connected to the first and second power lines of the smart road to receive power from the plurality of EVs as the plurality of EVs travel on the smart road (See Fig.13, discloses Grid 124 connected to the power lines from inverter 124 and rectifier 108. Pars.31 and 74 disclose vehicles charge from the grid and discharge to the grid while in motion) . Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103 07-20-aia AIA 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. 07-23-aia AIA The factual inquiries for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized as follows: 1. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art. 2. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue. 3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art. 4. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness. 07-21-aia AIA Claim (s) 11 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over RICCI in view of MOGHE et al. (US 2019/0039470 A1, hereinafter MOGHE) . Regarding claim 11, RICCI discloses a power transfer system comprising: a smart road having a plurality of wireless smart road power receive components See Fig.13, and Par.106, discloses a charging segment subsystem on a charging roadway. The charging segment subsystem comprising a first power line from the primary coil 128 to the inverter 124 and a second power line from the secondary coil 908 to the rectifier 108. This is a subsystem meaning there are a plurality of similar subsystem along the road [i.e. plurality of power-receive components 908]); a plurality of electric vehicles (EVs) traveling on the smart road (See Fig.1, Item#100, discloses a vehicle on the road segment 128 and Par.31, discloses the roadway segments allow a plurality of vehicles to charge while in motion), each of the EVs capable of transferring battery power to the wireless smart road power receive components of the smart road (See Fig.12, Items#904+124 and Par.101, disclose the vehicle comprising a primary coil and an inverter connected to the vehicle battery to transfer power from the vehicle to the road charge receiving element); and a power grid electrically connected to the smart road such that clusters of EVs moving on the smart road voluntarily transfer battery power to the smart road (See Fig.13, discloses Grid 124 connected to the power line from secondary coil 908 and rectifier 108. Pars.31 and 74 disclose vehicles charge from the grid and discharge to the grid while in motion). However, RICCI does not disclose power is transferred from the cluster of vehicles maintain proper isolation between the EVs to avoid induction interference. MOGHE discloses a vehicle wireless charging system for charging vehicles while in motion on smart road, power is exchanged between the cluster of vehicles and the smart road in a way to maintain proper isolation between the EVs to avoid induction interference (See Pars.87 and 93, disclose the system can control the speed, spacing, and/or positions of the vehicles, to control the duty cycles of the ground-based charging coils, thereby optimizing the power transfer process. Also Par.91, discloses the WPT system may be able to maintain tighter spacing and higher overall traffic speed by interleaving charging vehicles (e.g., vehicles 160a-160b) with non-charging vehicles (e.g., vehicle 168) such that the duty cycle for the charging system is satisfied as desired, by maintaining an effective spacing gap and achieving a high traffic density. This clearly indicates that maintaining the vehicles within a distance threshold optimizes the power transfer process). RICCI and MOGHE are analogous art since they both deal with vehicle wireless energy transfer between vehicles and a smart road while in motion. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify the invention disclosed by RICCI with the teachings of MOGHE by controlling the spacing between the vehicles to optimize the power transfer process (The examiner explains that maintaining the spacing between the vehicles while exchanging power with the smart road -including interleaving a vehicle that is not participating in the power transfer process in between participant vehicles [MOGHE, Fig.6 and Par.91]- is interpreted to provide proper isolation and avoiding induction interference between the vehicles as evidence by applicant’s specification Pars.29 and 41 which discuss mitigating interference by controlling the distance between vehicles) . 07-21-aia AIA Claim (s) 2-6 and 8 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over RICCI in view of UYEKI (US 2016/0126732 A1, hereinafter UYEKI) . Regarding claim 2, RICCI discloses the power transfer system of claim 1, wherein consumption points within a geographic area communicate with the power grid to request additional power (See Par.24+89-90 and Fig.3 Grid load availability evaluator: determines amount of grid power available to charge the vehicle; can be dependent upon one or more of current power consumption levels by grid users other than rechargeable electric vehicles, historical power consumption levels by rechargeable electric vehicles and/or other grid users, and number of rechargeable electric vehicles currently on the transportation network. The amount of charge available to provide to consumers takes into account the charge amount that may be provided/consumed by vehicles [See Par.26-27]) and controlling vehicles to discharge to the smart road during peak (demand-response times) (See Par.93). However, RICCI does not disclose the power grid generates a geo-fence surrounding all the consumption points. UYEKI discloses a system for aggregating electric vehicle loads for demand response events comprising consumption points within a geographic area communicate with the power grid to request additional power (See Fig.1, discloses first OEM server 122, second OEM server 132, third OEM server 1316 and fourth OEM server 140, in communication with third party aggregation server 130. Par.35, discloses that each OEM server shares vehicle charging data from vehicles with the aggregate server, the data indicates each vehicle charge amount, i.e. needed charge amount) and the power grid generates a geo-fence surrounding all the consumption points (See Pars.35-37 and 54 and Fig.2, steps#206, 210-245, disclose the aggregate server receives a demand response request specifying service area one and generates a query for service area one. Par.40-42 discloses the query includes OEMs 2 and 3. The geo-fenced area is the consumer area that is received by the aggregation server 130 from the utility server 128 in the demand response request and includes OEMs 1-3). RICCI and UYEKI are analogous art since they both deal with utility power peak mitigation systems. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify the invention disclosed by RICCI with the teachings of UYEKI by communicating with consumers and drawing a geo-fence around surrounding all the consumption points for the benefit of providing a demand response event which provides peak mitigation equal to that required by the utility company by controlling vehicles on a charging road within the geo-fenced area to discharge power to the grid during peak times (See RICCI, Par.93). Regarding claim 3, RICCI and UYEKI, disclose the power transfer system of claim 2 as discussed above, wherein, after the geo-fence is generated around all the consumption points, the power grid transmits power requirement notifications to EVs of the plurality of EVs within the geo-fence (See RICCI, Pars.93 and 127-128, discloses the load balance mechanism 308 can, at the request of the evaluator 300, request, via the notification module 316 and communication interface 328, REV users to contribute power to the grid 120 via wireless power transfers during periods of peak non-REV power usage). Regarding claim 4, RICCI and UYEKI disclose the power transfer system of claim 13 as discussed above, However, RICC and UYEKI as applied to claim 3 do not disclose wherein the EVs of the plurality of EVs within the geo-fence are permitted to respond to the power requirement notifications transmitted from the power grid. UYEKI further discloses the EVs of the plurality of EVs within the geo-fence are permitted to respond to the power requirement notifications transmitted from the power grid (See Pars.44-46, disclose a confirmation request is sent to each vehicle in the demand response area and a response is received to confirm participation or decline it). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify the invention disclosed by RICCI and UYEKI as applied to claim 3 with the further teachings of UYEKI such that the EVs of the plurality of EVs within the geo-fence are permitted to respond to the power requirement notifications transmitted from the power grid for the benefit of allowing the user to approve or decline participation in the demand response program. Regarding claim 5, RICCI and UYEKI disclose the power transfer system of claim 4 as discussed above, wherein the EVs of the plurality of EVs within the geo-fence that opt-in to the power requirement notifications transfer battery power to the smart road, which in turn transfers the battery power to the power grid, which in turn transfers the battery power to the consumption points within the geo-fence (Opting in is disclosed by UYEKI in claim 4 rejection. RICCI, Par.115 and Fig.13, discloses that vehicle battery power is used to “fund” the grid during peak hours. The power is then transferred from the grid to electric consumers that are connected to the grid). Regarding claim 6, RICCI and UYEKI disclose the power transfer system of claim 5 as discussed above, wherein the power grid monitors how much battery power is transferred from each of the EVs of the plurality of EVs within the geo-fence that opt-in to the power requirement notifications and how much power is transferred to each of the EVs of the plurality of EVs within the geo-fence from the smart road to establish whether boundary adjustments to the geo-fence are necessary to provide for adequate power levels (See UYEKI, Pars.35-37 and 54 and Fig.2, steps#206, 210-245 discloses the aggregate server receives a request for a demand response from the utility company, the request comprising the service area of the utility company, the aggregate server then queries the first OEM to determine if curtailing the consumption of the first OEM satisfies the demand response amount [Fig.2, Step#214]. If YES, [Fig.2, Step#214, Yes branch]. Then the geographic area “geo-fence” is set as the first OEM. If the first OEM cannot satisfy the demand response event [Fig.2, Step#214, No branch], then additional OEMs are queried and vehicles assigned to each of OEMs 2 and 3 are added until the aggregate DR event load meets the DR event request [Fig.2, Step#214, Yes branch]. This is interpreted to mean that the OEM is limited to OEM1 or expanded to add OEMs 2 and 3 in order to meet the DR requirement). Regarding claim 8, RICCI discloses the power transfer system of claim 1 as discussed above, However RICCI does not disclose wherein the power grid keeps track of each EV of the plurality of EVs that has participated in transferring battery power to the power grid via the smart road. UYEKI discloses a system for aggregating electric vehicle loads for demand response events comprising keeping track of each EV of the plurality of EVs that has participated in transferring battery power to the power grid via the smart road (See Par.33, discloses keeping track of V2g history in order to determine which vehicles may receive the V2G request). RICCI and UYEKI are analogous art since they both deal with utility power peak mitigation systems. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify the invention disclosed by RICCI with the teachings of UYEKI by keeping track of each EV of the plurality of EVs that has participated in transferring battery power to the power grid via the smart road for the benefit of increasing the probability of securing the required vehicle discharge amount during peak times by assigning higher priority to send the participation request to vehicles with participation history . 07-21-aia AIA Claim (s) 2-16 and 18 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over RICCI in view of MOGHE and in further view of UYEKI . Regarding claim 12, RICCI and MOGHE disclose the power transfer system of claim 11 as discussed above, wherein consumption points within a geographic area communicate with the power grid to request additional power (See RICCI, Par.24+89-90 and Fig.3 Grid load availability evaluator: determines amount of grid power available to charge the vehicle; can be dependent upon one or more of current power consumption levels by grid users other than rechargeable electric vehicles, historical power consumption levels by rechargeable electric vehicles and/or other grid users, and number of rechargeable electric vehicles currently on the transportation network. The amount of charge available to provide to consumers takes into account the charge amount that may be provided/consumed by vehicles [See Par.26-27]) and controlling vehicles to discharge to the smart road during peak (demand-response times) (See Par.93). However, RICCI does not disclose the power grid generates a geo-fence surrounding all the consumption points. UYEKI discloses a system for aggregating electric vehicle loads for demand response events comprising consumption points within a geographic area communicate with the power grid to request additional power (See Fig.1, discloses first OEM server 122, second OEM server 132, third OEM server 1316 and fourth OEM server 140, in communication with third party aggregation server 130. Par.35, discloses that each OEM server shares vehicle charging data from vehicles with the aggregate server, the data indicates each vehicle charge amount, i.e. needed charge amount) and the power grid generates a geo-fence surrounding all the consumption points (See Pars.35-37 and 54 and Fig.2, steps#206, 210-245, disclose the aggregate server receives a demand response request specifying service area one and generates a query for service area one. Par.40-42 discloses the query includes OEMs 2 and 3. The geo-fenced area is the consumer area that is received by the aggregation server 130 from the utility server 128 in the demand response request and includes OEMs 1-3). RICCI, MOGHE and UYEKI are analogous art since they both all deal with charging system control. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify the invention disclosed by RICCI and MOGHE with the teachings of UYEKI by communicating with consumers and drawing a geo-fence around surrounding all the consumption points for the benefit of providing a demand response event which provides peak mitigation equal to that required by the utility company by controlling vehicles on a charging road within the geo-fenced area to discharge power to the grid during peak times (See RICCI, Par.93). Regarding claim 13, RICCI, MOGHE and UYEKI disclose the power transfer system of claim 12 as discussed above, wherein, after the geo-fence is generated around all the consumption points, the power grid transmits power requirement notifications to EVs of the plurality of EVs within the geo-fence (See RICCI, Pars.93 and 127-128, discloses the load balance mechanism 308 can, at the request of the evaluator 300, request, via the notification module 316 and communication interface 328, REV users to contribute power to the grid 120 via wireless power transfers during periods of peak non-REV power usage). Regarding claim 14, RICCI, MOGHE and UYEKI disclose the power transfer system of claim 13 as discussed above, However, RICCI, MOGHE and UYEKI as applied to claim 13 do not disclose wherein the EVs of the plurality of EVs within the geo-fence are permitted to respond to the power requirement notifications transmitted from the power grid. UYEKI further discloses the EVs of the plurality of EVs within the geo-fence are permitted to respond to the power requirement notifications transmitted from the power grid (See Pars.44-46, disclose a confirmation request is sent to each vehicle in the demand response area and a response is received to confirm participation or decline it). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify the invention disclosed by RICCI, MOGHE and UYEKI as applied to claim 13 with the further teachings of UYEKI such that the EVs of the plurality of EVs within the geo-fence are permitted to respond to the power requirement notifications transmitted from the power grid for the benefit of allowing the user to approve or decline participation in the demand response program. Regarding claim 15, RICCI, MOGHE and UYEKI disclose the power transfer system of claim 4, wherein the EVs of the plurality of EVs within the geo-fence that opt-in to the power requirement notifications transfer battery power to the smart road, which in turn transfers the battery power to the power grid, which in turn transfers the battery power to the consumption points within the geo-fence. (Opting in is disclosed by UYEKI in claim 4 rejection. RICCI, Par.115 and Fig.13, discloses that vehicle battery power is used to “fund” the grid during peak hours. The power is then transferred from the grid to electric consumers that are connected to the grid). Regarding claim 16, RICCI, MOGHE and UYEKI disclose the power transfer system of claim 15 as discussed above, wherein the power grid monitors how much battery power is transferred from each of the EVs of the plurality of EVs within the geo-fence that opt-in to the power requirement notifications and how much power is transferred to each of the EVs of the plurality of EVs within the geo-fence from the smart road to establish whether boundary adjustments to the geo-fence are necessary to provide for adequate power levels (See UYEKI, Pars.35-37 and 54 and Fig.2, steps#206, 210-245 discloses the aggregate server receives a request for a demand response from the utility company, the request comprising the service area of the utility company, the aggregate server then queries the first OEM to determine if curtailing the consumption of the first OEM satisfies the demand response amount [Fig.2, Step#214]. If YES, [Fig.2, Step#214, Yes branch]. Then the geographic area “geo-fence” is set as the first OEM. If the first OEM cannot satisfy the demand response event [Fig.2, Step#214, No branch], then additional OEMs are queried and vehicles assigned to each of OEMs 2 and 3 are added until the aggregate DR event load meets the DR event request [Fig.2, Step#214, Yes branch]. This is interpreted to mean that the OEM is limited to OEM1 or expanded to add OEMs 2 and 3 in order to meet the DR requirement). Regarding claim 18, RICCI and MOGHE disclose the power transfer system of claim 11 as discussed above, However RICCI and MOGHE do not disclose wherein the power grid keeps track of each EV of the plurality of EVs that has participated in transferring battery power to the power grid via the smart road. UYEKI discloses a system for aggregating electric vehicle loads for demand response events comprising keeping track of each EV of the plurality of EVs that has participated in transferring battery power to the power grid via the smart road (See Par.33, discloses keeping track of V2g history in order to determine which vehicles may receive the V2G request). RICCI, MOGHE and UYEKI are analogous art since they all deal with charging system control. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify the invention disclosed by RICCI and MOGHE with the teachings of UYEKI by keeping track of each EV of the plurality of EVs that has participated in transferring battery power to the power grid via the smart road for the benefit of increasing the probability of securing the required vehicle discharge amount during peak times by assigning higher priority to send the participation request to vehicles with participation history . 07-21-aia AIA Claim (s) 7 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over RICCI in view of SHIN (US 2023/0152109 A1, hereinafter SHIN) . Regarding claim 7, RICCI discloses the power transfer system of claim 1 as discussed above, However RICCI does not disclose wherein each EV of the plurality of EVs notifies a driver of the respective EV with an amount of battery power available for transfer to the smart road. SHIN discloses a vehicle comprising a display which notified the driver of the vehicle with an amount of battery power available for transfer (See Pars.160 and 194 and Fig.5-6, disclose displaying an amount of power that is available to discharge from the vehicle to an external source). RICCI and SHIN are analogous art are analogous art since they both deal with vehicle charge/discharge control. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify the invention disclosed by RICCI with the teachings of SHIN by notifying the user with the amount of battery power available for transfer to the smart road for the benefit of providing the user with control by alerting the user with the amount of discharge setting and allowing the user to accept or decline the proposal . 07-21-aia AIA Claim (s) 9 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over RICCI in view of CRONIE et al. (US 2017/0355271 A1, hereinafter CRONIE) . Regarding claim 9, RICCI discloses the power transfer system of claim 1 as discussed above, wherein the power grid identifies how much aggregated battery power is needed by a cluster of EVs of the plurality of EVs (See Par.28: determine the amount of energy that will be needed by the vehicles from the grid during a selected window based on a lot of data of current consumption levels and historical values). However, RICCI does not disclose power sharing between EVs in the cluster of EVs is enabled to meet battery power demands of the cluster of EVs. CRONIE discloses a system for power sharing between EVs in the cluster of EVs is enabled to meet battery power demands of the cluster of EVs (See Fig.3A and 5 and Par.64, discloses a power sharing system between vehicles in a cluster based on the power needs of each vehicle by transferring power from one vehicle to another to meet the needs of the vehicles of the cluster). RICCI and CRONIE are analogous art since they both deal with systems to control charging and discharging of vehicles while in motion. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify the invention disclosed by RICCI with the teachings of CRONIE by allowing power sharing between EVs in the cluster of EVs is enabled to meet battery power demands of the cluster of EVs for the benefit of extending the range of the vehicles in the absence of a smart road segment . 07-21-aia AIA Claim (s) 17 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over RICCI, MOGHE and in further view of SHIN . Regarding claim 17, RICCI discloses the power transfer system of claim 11 as discussed above, However RICCI and MOGHE do not disclose wherein each EV of the plurality of EVs notifies a driver of the respective EV with an amount of battery power available for transfer to the smart road. SHIN discloses a vehicle comprising a display which notified the driver of the vehicle with an amount of battery power available for transfer (See Pars.160 and 194 and Fig.5-6, disclose displaying an amount of power that is available to discharge from the vehicle to an external source). RICCI, MOGHE and SHIN are analogous art are analogous art since they all deal with vehicle charge/discharge control. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify the invention disclosed by RICCI and MOGHE with the teachings of SHIN by notifying the user with the amount of battery power available for transfer to the smart road for the benefit of providing the user with control by alerting the user with the amount of discharge setting and allowing the user to accept or decline the proposal . 07-21-aia AIA Claim (s) 10 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over RICCI in view of ISHIDA et al. (US 2024/0092213 A1, hereinafter ISHIDA) . Regarding claim 10, RICCI discloses the power transfer system of claim 1 as discussed above, However RICCI does not disclose wherein the plurality of EVs are implemented in a blockchain configuration to capture at least a rate of power transfer, an amount of power transfer, a location of power transfer, and power trading data between the plurality of EVs. ISHIDA discloses a charging/discharging system for an electric vehicle comprising blockchain configuration to capture a rate of power transfer, an amount of power transfer, a location of power transfer, and power trading data between the plurality of EVs (See Pars. 46 and 67, discloses charging amount, time and location, Par.28, discloses considering trade amount price and Par.96 discloses using a blockchain technology for the transaction). RICCI and ISHIDA are analogous art since they both deal with vehicle power transfer to an external client. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify the invention disclosed by RICCI with the teaching of ISHIDA by using a blockchain configuration to perform the transaction for the benefit of increasing trust by using a secure and immutable ledger that cannot be altered once a transaction is recorded . 07-21-aia AIA Claim (s) 19 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over RICCI in MOGHE and in further view of ISHIDA . Regarding claim 19, RICCI and MOGHE disclose the power transfer system of claim 11 as discussed above, However RICCI and MOGHE do not disclose wherein the plurality of EVs are implemented in a blockchain configuration to capture at least a rate of power transfer, an amount of power transfer, a location of power transfer, and power trading data between the plurality of EVs. ISHIDA discloses a charging/discharging system for an electric vehicle comprising blockchain configuration to capture a rate of power transfer, an amount of power transfer, a location of power transfer, and power trading data between the plurality of EVs (See Pars. 46 and 67, discloses charging amount, time and location, Par.28, discloses considering trade amount price and Par.96 discloses using a blockchain technology for the transaction). RICCI, MOGHE and ISHIDA are analogous art since they all deal with vehicle charging and discharging. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify the invention disclosed by RICCI and MMOGHE with the teaching of ISHIDA by using a blockchain configuration to perform the transaction for the benefit of increasing trust by using a secure and immutable ledger that cannot be altered once a transaction is recorded. Conclusion Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to AHMED H OMAR whose telephone number is (571)270-7165. The examiner can normally be reached 10:00 am -7:00 PM 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, Drew Dunn can be reached at 571-272-2312. 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. /AHMED H OMAR/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2859 Application/Control Number: 18/329,013 Page 2 Art Unit: 2859 Application/Control Number: 18/329,013 Page 3 Art Unit: 2859 Application/Control Number: 18/329,013 Page 4 Art Unit: 2859 Application/Control Number: 18/329,013 Page 5 Art Unit: 2859 Application/Control Number: 18/329,013 Page 6 Art Unit: 2859 Application/Control Number: 18/329,013 Page 7 Art Unit: 2859 Application/Control Number: 18/329,013 Page 8 Art Unit: 2859 Application/Control Number: 18/329,013 Page 9 Art Unit: 2859 Application/Control Number: 18/329,013 Page 10 Art Unit: 2859 Application/Control Number: 18/329,013 Page 11 Art Unit: 2859 Application/Control Number: 18/329,013 Page 12 Art Unit: 2859 Application/Control Number: 18/329,013 Page 13 Art Unit: 2859 Application/Control Number: 18/329,013 Page 14 Art Unit: 2859 Application/Control Number: 18/329,013 Page 15 Art Unit: 2859 Application/Control Number: 18/329,013 Page 16 Art Unit: 2859 Application/Control Number: 18/329,013 Page 17 Art Unit: 2859 Application/Control Number: 18/329,013 Page 19 Art Unit: 2859 Application/Control Number: 18/329,013 Page 20 Art Unit: 2859
Prosecution Insights