Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status
1. The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
Continued Examination Under 37 CFR 1.114
2. A request for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, including the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e), was filed in this application after final rejection. Since this application is eligible for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114. Applicant's submission filed on 03/04/2026 has been entered.
Information Disclosure Statement
3. The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted on 04/01/2026 was filed after the mailing date of the Final Rejection on 12/05/2025. The submission is in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statement is being considered by the examiner.
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.
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.
4. Claims 1, 4, 6, 9, 12, 14, 15, 18, 22-25, 27-29, and 31-33 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over U.S. Publication No. 20190236560 hereinafter Song in view of U.S. Publication No. 20180316510 hereinafter Rai.
As per claim 1, Song discloses:
A method of managing vouchers (para 0027 "In accordance with still yet another aspect of the present disclosure, there is provided a method for settling one or more specific electronic vouchers by at least one specific seller."), the method comprising:
identifying an occurrence of a voucher revocation event for a voucher of
the vouchers (para 0032 " In accordance with still yet another aspect of the present disclosure, there is provided a method for revocating at least one specific electronic voucher by at least one specific issuer, including steps of: (a) a server, if (i) specific revocating data including a PrivTxid corresponding to the specific electronic voucher expired with partly unused amount beforehand.” );
identifying a stage of deployment of the voucher (Fig. 1, 0071 “The server 100 may acquire or support another device to acquire a request, i.e., request(issue TrxA), for issuing the electronic voucher, from a specific issuer via the communication part 101, including (i) specific issuing data, (ii) a public key of the specific issuer, and (iii) a signature value of the specific issuer generated by signing a voucher function value of the specific issuing data or a value including the voucher function value of the specific issuing data with a private key of the specific issuer, at a step of S10")
performing the voucher revocation action set to prevent undesired use of the voucher (Fig. 6, para 0141 “ As one example, a voucher-revocating transaction TrxA for revocating the electronic voucher may include 1. a type (revocating), 2. the PrivTxid or the Txid corresponding to the expired electronic voucher partly unused beforehand, 3. the public key of the specific issuer who is the receiver of the electronic voucher””)
the voucher revocation action set comprises: generating an antitoken that specifies that an orchestrator associated with the voucher revocation event is not authorized to obtain the voucher (Fig. 7, para 0141 “4. revocation value information of the electronic voucher, 5. the issuer ID of the electronic voucher, 6. the public key of the specific issuer, and 7. a signature value SigPrivA(1:2:3:4:5:6) of 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, and 6 signed with the private key of the specific issuer.”);
and deploying the antitoken to a voucher management service that manages the voucher to deny use of a token that authorizes the orchestrator to obtain the voucher from the voucher management service (para 0142 “Then, the server 100 may determine whether (i) the acquired specific revocating data, (ii) the acquired public key of the specific issuer, and (iii) the acquired signature value of the specific issuer, at a step of S601. Further, the server 100 may determine whether the format of the specific revocating data is valid.” Para 0143 “If the specific revocating data, the public key of the specific issuer, and the signature value of the specific issuer are determined as valid, the server 100 may perform or support another device to perform processes of recording the voucher-revocating transaction, i.e., the voucher-revocating transaction (TrxA) for the electronic voucher, including (i) the specific revocating data, (ii) the public key of the specific issuer, and (iii) the signature value of the specific issuer in the private blockchain network and notifying the specific issuer 110 of a fact that a registration including the PrivTxid which represents location information of the voucher-revocating transaction on the private blockchain network was successful, at a step of S613.”).
Song does not disclose:
selecting a voucher revocation action set based on the stage of the
deployment of the voucher; and
performing the voucher revocation action set to prevent undesired use of
the voucher to prevent undesired use of the voucher
Rai discloses:
selecting a voucher revocation action set based on the stage of the
deployment of the voucher and performing the voucher revocation action set to
prevent undesired use of the voucher (para 0061 "In 504, certificate manager
121 can be configured to determine the one or more certificates to be revoked.
According to some embodiments, certificate manager 121 can store a mapping
between the client devices and/or users of the client devices and the certificates
in, for example, database 127. By storing the mapping, certificate manager 121
can be configured to track the certificates and the client devices (and/or users of
client devices) that use the certificates. When certificate manager 121 receives
information that a client device's certificate is to be revoked (for example, the
device is lost, the user of the device is leaving the enterprise, etc.) certificate
manager 121 can use the stored mapping (e.g., stored in database 127) to
determine the certificate(s). For example, when client manager 121 receives
information that a user is leaving the enterprise, client manager 121, using the
mapping, can determine client devices that the user leaving the enterprise uses."
Para 0062 "In 506, certificate manager 121 revokes the determined certificate(s).
In one example, certificate manager 121 can revoke the certificate by deleting it.
Additionally or alternatively, certificate manager 121 can revoke the certificate by
changing its expiration date/time to a date/time that has already passed.
Additionally or alternatively, certificate manager 121 can revoke the certificate by
marking the certificate as revoked. However, it is noted that certificate manager
121 can use other techniques to revoke the certificate. Optionally, when the
certificate(s) is revoked, certificate manager 121 can send an acknowledgment to
one or more of the entity that requested the revocation, the client devices
affected, certificate authority 141, etc." The certificate acts as a voucher which
provides a digital record, like a public key based on a hash, that proves
ownership of the device)
Therefore, 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 method for settling one or more specific electronic vouchers of Song to include selecting a voucher revocation action set based on the stage of the deployment of the voucher and performing the voucher revocation action set to prevent undesired use of the voucher, as taught by Rai.
The motivation would have been to properly track and revoke certificates
to properly authorize or remove access to devices.
As per claim 4, Song in view of Rai discloses:
wherein generating the antitoken comprises: adding a designated point in time, the designated point in time indicating that the orchestrator is not authorized to obtain instances of the voucher created prior to the point in time (para 0147 “That is, the server 100 may perform or support another device to perform processes of registering the valid voucher-revocating transaction TrxA in the public blockchain network, acquiring the transaction ID Txid which represents the location of registration of the voucher-revocating transaction TrxA, and transmitting the acquired transaction ID to the specific issuer. Herein, the PrivTxid described above, i.e., the PrivTxid corresponding to the expired electronic voucher partly unused beforehand in the voucher-revocating transaction, may be replaceable with the Txid, i.e., the TxID corresponding to the expired electronic voucher partly unused beforehand registered in the public blockchain network.”).
As per claim 6, Song in view of Rai discloses:
The method of claim 1, wherein the voucher revocation action set
comprises: issuing a deletion request to an orchestrator associated with the
voucher revocation event that is not authorized to obtain the voucher, the
deletion request being for a token that authorizes the orchestrator to obtain the
voucher from a voucher management service that manages the voucher (Rai,
para 0062 "Though Smith discloses deleting the voucher, Rai discloses
certificate manager to revoke by providing various steps of deleting a
certificate/voucher and sending an acknowledgment that to an entity being for a
certificate the authorizes a device to obtain a certificate, The motivation would
have been to properly track and revoke certificates to properly authorize or
remove access to devices).
As per claim 9, the implementation of the method of claim 1 will execute the
non-transitory machine-readable medium (Song paragraph 0151) of claim
9. The claim is analyzed with respect to claim 1.
As per claim 12, the claim is analyzed with respect to claim 4.
As per claim 14, the claim is analyzed with respect to claim 6.
As per claim 15, the implementation of the method of claim 1 will execute
the data processing system of claim 15. The claim is analyzed with respect
to claim 1.
As per claim 18, the claim is analyzed with respect to claim 2.
As per claim 22, the claim is analyzed with respect to claim 6.
As per claim 23, Song in view of Rai discloses:
The method of claim 1, wherein the voucher revocation action set is selected based on identifying that the stage of deployment of the voucher is a stage where the voucher has not yet been deployed (Rai para 0061 "In 504, certificate manager 121 can be configured to determine the one or more certificates to be revoked. According to some embodiments, certificate manager 121 can store a mapping between the client devices and/or users of the client devices and the certificates in, for example, database 127. By storing the mapping, certificate manager 121 can be configured to track the certificates and the client devices (and/or users of client devices) that use the certificates. When certificate manager 121 receives information that a client device's certificate is to be revoked (for example, the device is lost, the user of the device is leaving the enterprise, etc.) certificate manager 121 can use the stored mapping (e.g., stored in database 127) to determine the certificate(s). For example, when client manager 121 receives information that a user is leaving the enterprise, client manager 121, using the mapping, can determine client devices that the user leaving the enterprise uses." Para 0062 "In 506, certificate manager 121 revokes the determined certificate(s). In one example, certificate manager 121 can revoke the certificate by deleting it. Additionally or alternatively, certificate manager 121 can revoke the certificate by changing its expiration date/time to a date/time that has already passed. Additionally or alternatively, certificate manager 121 can revoke the certificate by marking the certificate as revoked. However, it is noted that certificate manager 121 can use other techniques to revoke the certificate. Optionally, when the certificate(s) is revoked, certificate manager 121 can send an acknowledgment to one or more of the entity that requested the revocation, the client devices affected, certificate authority 141, etc." The certificate acts as a voucher which provides a digital record, like a public key based on a hash, that proves ownership of the device. "Though Song discloses voucher revocation, Rai discloses wherein the voucher revocation action set is selected based on identifying that the stage of deployment of the voucher is a stage where the voucher has not yet been deployed. The motivation would
have been to properly track and revoke certificates to properly authorize or
remove access to devices)
As per claim 24, Song in view of Rai discloses:
The method of claim 1, wherein the voucher revocation event specifies indicates that the orchestrator is not authorized to obtain the voucher (Song para 0141-0147).
As per claim 25, Song in view of Rai discloses:
The method of claim 1, wherein the occurrence of the voucher revocation event is identified based on a voucher revocation notification transmitted by an entity associated with the voucher (Song para 0143 “If the specific revocating data, the public key of the specific issuer, and the signature value of the specific issuer are determined as valid, the server 100 may perform or support another device to perform processes of recording the voucher-revocating transaction, i.e., the voucher-revocating transaction (TrxA) for the electronic voucher, including (i) the specific revocating data, (ii) the public key of the specific issuer, and (iii) the signature value of the specific issuer in the private blockchain network and notifying the specific issuer 110 of a fact that a registration including the PrivTxid which represents location information of the voucher-revocating transaction on the private blockchain network was successful, at a step of S613.).
As per claim 27, the claim is analyzed with respect to claim 23.
As per claim 28, the claim is analyzed with respect to claim 24.
As per claim 29, the claim is analyzed with respect to claim 25.
As per claim 31, the claim is analyzed with respect to claim 23.
As per claim 32, the claim is analyzed with respect to claim 24.
As per claim 33, the claim is analyzed with respect to claim 25.
5. Claims 26 and 30 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over
Song in view of Rai, and further in view of U.S. Publication
No. 20220393883 hereinafter Panchamia.
As per claim 26, Song in view of Rai discloses:
The method of claim 1, wherein the token that authorizes the orchestrator to obtain the voucher from the voucher management service is issued by a first entity that no longer has authority over the voucher after the authority over the voucher (Song para 0078 and 0141-0147)
Song in view of Rai does not disclose:
token has been transferred from the first entity to a second entity
Panchamia discloses:
token has been transferred from the first entity to a second entity
(para 0060 "The operation 210 transfers the ownership of an IoT device from a seller to a buyer. In some examples, the device manufacturer transfers the ownership certificate from the buyer to the seller, or devices associated with the buyer and seller, and record the transfer on the distributed ledger. In one example, the device manufacturer revokes the old ownership certificate and reissues a new ownership certificate, and records the chain in the chain of custody on the distributed ledger. In other examples, the transfer of ownership from a buyer to a seller is done by the current owner of the device. The operation 210, in some examples, can be done by any device which is a trust anchor for the Ica device. Typically, recording the transfer of ownership on the distributed ledger is done to create a chain of ownership for the device. An example system 800 and method 900 for transferring ownership is illustrated and described in reference to FIGS. 8 and 9. " Para 0096 “The operation 910 sends credential offer for ownership certificate to the buyer. After marking the ownership of the seller as revoked on the distributed ledger the anchor device sends a credential offer for an ownership certificate to the buyer.”)
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art
before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify e method for settling one or more specific electronic vouchers of Song in view of Rai to include token has been transferred from the first entity to a second entity, as taught by Panchamia.
The motivation would have been to transfer a credential to another entity once an ownership certificate is revoked.
As per claim 30, the claim is analyzed with respect to claim 26.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to GARY S GRACIA whose telephone number is (571)270-5192. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 9am-6pm.
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, Philip Chea can be reached at 5712723951. 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.
/GARY S GRACIA/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2499
Prosecution Insights