DETAILED ACTION
The present application is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA . 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 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.
This Office Action is in response Applicant communication filed on 9/11/2025.
Claims
Claims 1, 7, 13, 14, and 16-19 have been amended.
Claims 8-12 have been cancelled.
Claims 1-7 and 13-20 are currently pending in the application.
Response to Arguments
103
In Applicant’s arguments with respect to claim 1 have been considered but are moot because new reference US 20190123895 A1 to Blake has been added to teach the claim amendments that the applicant’s arguments are directed to.
112
The examiner withdraws the previous 112(b) rejections due to the claim amendments.
Rejections under 35 § U.S.C. 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 of this title, 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.
This application currently names joint inventors. In considering patentability of the claims the examiner presumes that the subject matter of the various claims was commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the claimed invention(s) absent any evidence to the contrary. Applicant is advised of the obligation under 37 CFR 1.56 to point out the inventor and effective filing dates of each claim that was not commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the later invention in order for the examiner to consider the applicability of 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(C) for any potential 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) prior art against the later invention.
Claims 1-4, 6-8, and 13-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over US 20190318353 A1 (“Castinado”) and US 20190123895 A1 (“Blake”).
Per claims 1 and 13, Castinado discloses:
a communication circuit (e.g. The one or more processing components 14 use the one or more communication components 12 to communicate with the network 2 and other components on the network 2, such as, but not limited to, the components of the user computer systems 20, real-time interaction hub 30, or other financial institution systems 40. As such, the one or more communication components 12 generally comprise a wireless transceiver, modem, server, electrical connection, electrical circuit, or other component for communicating with other components on the network 2. The one or more communication components 12 may further include an interface that accepts one or more network interface cards, ports for connection of network components, Universal Serial Bus (USB) connectors and the like) (Section [0041]);
memory configured to store a partial ledger including a part of a full ledger for a blockchain network or the full ledger (e.g. One node in the block chain may have a complete or partial copy of the entire ledger or set of transactions or smart contracts and/or blocks on the block chain. Transactions are initiated at a node of a block chain and communicated to the various nodes of the block chain) (Section [0054] and [0061]);
a processor electrically connected to the communication circuit and the memory (e.g. As used herein, the term “processing component” generally includes circuitry used for implementing the communication and/or logic functions of a particular system. For example, a processing component 14 may include a digital signal processor component, a microprocessor component, and various analog-to-digital converters, digital-to-analog converters, and other support circuits and/or combinations of the foregoing) (Section [0040] and [0041]);
wherein the full ledger comprises at least one block corresponding to each of at least one transaction in which the electronic device participates in a consensus (e.g. “Block chain” as used herein refers to a decentralized electronic ledger of data records which are authenticated by a federated consensus protocol. Multiple computer systems within the block chain, referred to herein as “nodes” or “compute nodes,” each comprise a copy of the entire ledger of records. Nodes may write a data “block” to the block chain, the block comprising data regarding a transaction. In some embodiments, only miner nodes may write transactions to the block chain. In other embodiments, all nodes have the ability to write to the block chain) (Section [0054] and [0061]);
generate a first transaction using a smart contract including shared data of the electronic device and information on an external user to receive the shared data (e.g. As shown in block 510, the system receives, at a node of the blockchain distributed network, a smart contract associated with a resources-on-delivery interaction. The smart contract may be an agreement between a first entity and a second entity associated with purchase of good or products. For example, the first entity may be a restaurant and a second entity may be a product distributor. A user (employees, contractors, sub-contractors, or the like) associated with the first entity or the second entity may initiate a smart contract associated with sale/purchase of product) (Section [0068]);
verify a second transaction based on receiving the second transaction including a request for provision of the shared data from the blockchain network (e.g. As shown in block 540, the system determines, from the distributed ledger, that the interaction request meets one or more conditions of the smart contract. As discussed above, the one or more conditions may be rules executing the smart contract) (Section [0070]-[0074]);
execute the smart contract based on identifying reliability of the second transaction (e.g. As shown in block 550, the processes the interaction request by executing the smart contract based on determining that interaction request meets the one or more conditions of the smart contract. Executing the smart contract comprises initiating an interaction (transaction) based on the interaction information present in the smart contract) (Section [0070]-[0074]);
create a second block corresponding to the second transaction (e.g. Transactions are initiated at a node of a block chain and communicated to the various nodes of the block chain. Any of the nodes can validate a transaction, add the transaction to its copy of the block chain, and/or broadcast the transaction, its validation (in the form of a block) and/or other data to other nodes) (Section [0061] and [0070]-[0074]).
Although Castinado discloses a blockchain system that generates a smart contract associated with a transaction, verifies second transaction information, and then transmits data from a first user to a second user by executing the smart contract when the second transaction information is verified, Castinado does not specifically disclose:
request to transmit the first transaction to the blockchain network;
verify the first transaction using a node, included within the electronic device, the node creating at least one block corresponding to each of at least one transaction in which the electronic device participates in a consensus;
transmit the first transaction to the blockchain network based on identifying reliability of the first transaction, and create a first block corresponding to the first transaction;
perform the verification of the second transaction by using the node included within the electronic device.
However Blake, in analogous art of blockchain smart contract transactions, discloses:
request to transmit the first transaction to the blockchain network (e.g. Software running on the communication device 118 generates a message including first data that is indicative of the committed change of authorisation state of the first authorisation agent.) (e.g. the message is transmitted 122 by the communication device 118 to the first blockchain node 100) (Section [0071], [0074], [0143], and Figs 1 and 4);
verify the first transaction using a node, included within the electronic device, the node creating at least one block corresponding to each of at least one transaction in which the electronic device participates in a consensus (e.g. The first blockchain node 100 authenticates 124 the message using the public key and the digital signature. This form of authentication is well understood by the skilled person, and so will not be described in more detail here) (e.g. Once the message is authenticated, the first blockchain node 100 adds 126 a new block to the blockchain ledger based on the message) (Section [0074], [0075], [0143], [0144], and Figs 1 and 4));
transmit the first transaction to the blockchain network based on identifying reliability of the first transaction, and create a first block corresponding to the first transaction (e.g. By adding the block to the blockchain ledger, a new blockchain ledger is generated. The new blockchain ledger records the change of authorisation state of the first authorisation agent) (e.g. the first blockchain node 100 transmits 128 a copy of the new blockchain ledger to the second blockchain node 102. The second blockchain node 192 uses the digital signature in the new block to confirm that no changes have been made to previous blocks in the blockchain ledger. Once verified, the new blockchain ledger replaces the previous copy of the blockchain ledger in the second blockchain node 102) (Section [0096]-[0098], [0144], [0145], and Figs 1 and 4));
perform the verification of the second transaction by using the node included within the electronic device (e.g. The first blockchain node 100 authenticates 124 the message using the public key and the digital signature. This form of authentication is well understood by the skilled person, and so will not be described in more detail here) (Sections [0071], [0074], [0142]-[0144]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art as of the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the transaction smart contract of Castinado to include verification of the transactions, as taught by Blake, in order to achieve the predictable result of increasing the security and integrity of the smart contract.
Note: Although Blake discloses both a “communication device” that generates the blockchain transaction message and a “node” that receives the transaction message, verifies it, creates a new block, and transmits it to the blockchain network, Blake fails to explicitly disclose that they are part of the same physical device. Blake in section [0188] discloses that both the “communication device” and “node” can take the form of a mobile telephone, laptop computer, tablet computer, or personal digital assistant. It would have been an obvious matter of design choice to integrate the “communication device” and the “node” into a single computing device, and it appears that Rule would perform equally well with a single computing device. Such a modification would have achieved predictable benefits from economies of scale in addition to offering increased security, improved data management, fast response, and room for expansion while reducing both operating and capital costs. It is the examiner’s position that when the difference between the claimed invention and the prior art is that the prior art does not disclose particular elements as integral, as a matter of law, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art to make the elements integral. See MPEP §2144.04 V. B. and In re Larson, 340 F.2d 965, 968, 144 USPQ 347, 349 (CCPA 1965).
Per claims 2 and 14, Castinado/Blake discloses all the limitations of claims 1 and 13 above. Castinado further discloses:
wherein the node is configured to: verify the second block (e.g. “Miner node” as used herein refers to a networked computer system that authenticates and verifies the integrity of pending transactions on the block chain. The miner node ensures that the sum of the outputs of the transaction within the block matches the sum of the inputs. In some embodiments, a pending transaction may require validation by a threshold number of miner nodes. Once the threshold number of miners has validated the transaction, the block becomes an authenticated part of the block chain) (Section [0055]);
record on the blockchain network based on verification of the second block (e.g. “Miner node” as used herein refers to a networked computer system that authenticates and verifies the integrity of pending transactions on the block chain. The miner node ensures that the sum of the outputs of the transaction within the block matches the sum of the inputs. In some embodiments, a pending transaction may require validation by a threshold number of miner nodes. Once the threshold number of miners has validated the transaction, the block becomes an authenticated part of the block chain) (Section [0055]).
Per claims 3 and 15, Castinado/Blake discloses all the limitations of claims 1 and 13 above. Castinado further discloses:
wherein the processor is further configured to request to update a ledger of each node participating in the blockchain network using the communication circuit based on completion of a transaction consensus between an external device and the blockchain network (e.g. Transactions are initiated at a node of a block chain and communicated to the various nodes of the block chain. Any of the nodes can validate a transaction, add the transaction to its copy of the block chain, and/or broadcast the transaction, its validation (in the form of a block) and/or other data to other nodes. This other data may include time-stamping, such as is used in cryptocurrency block chains. Similarly, any of the nodes can validate smart contracts, add smart contracts to the block chain, broadcast the smart contract and its execution to other nodes) (Section [0061]).
Per claims 4 and 16, Castinado/Blake discloses all the limitations of claims 3 and 15 above. Castinado further discloses:
wherein the processor is further configured to identify whether the smart contract is executed using the ledger in the blockchain network and whether shared data of the electronic device is shared (e.g. Transactions are initiated at a node of a block chain and communicated to the various nodes of the block chain. Any of the nodes can validate a transaction, add the transaction to its copy of the block chain, and/or broadcast the transaction, its validation (in the form of a block) and/or other data to other nodes. This other data may include time-stamping, such as is used in cryptocurrency block chains. Similarly, any of the nodes can validate smart contracts, add smart contracts to the block chain, broadcast the smart contract and its execution to other nodes) (Section [0061]).
Per claim 6, Castinado/Blake discloses all the limitations of claim 1 above. Castinado further discloses:
wherein the processor is further configured to control a display to output a configuration screen capable of configuring shared data of the electronic device and information on an external user to receive the shared data (e.g. In one embodiment of the present invention, the real-time interaction application in the user computer systems 20, the other financial institution systems 40, and the financial institution systems 10 may comprise a special interaction interface to display information associated with the one or more distributed ledgers, the balances of accounts, the process steps discussed herein and the automatic actions that may be taken in response to the interaction processes discussed herein. Such information may be displayed to the user and the interface may receive information associated with the rules and/or the one or more distributed ledgers or otherwise from the user) (Section [0048] and [0070]).
Per claims 7 and 17, Castinado/Blake discloses all the limitations of claims 1 and 13 above. Castinado further discloses:
wherein the node is configured to: execute the second transaction based on information on the external user to receive the shared data in the second transaction matching the information on the external user to receive the shared data recorded in the smart contract (e.g. As shown in block 560, the system, in response to executing the smart contract, completes an interaction associated with the interaction request in real-time. The system completes the interaction by transferring, in real-time, resources from a first account of a first financial institution associated with the first entity to a second account of a second financial institution associated with the second entity via the real-time interaction hub 30) (Section [0070]-[0074]).
create a block including information indicating that the shared data has been transmitted to an external device (e.g. Transactions are initiated at a node of a block chain and communicated to the various nodes of the block chain. Any of the nodes can validate a transaction, add the transaction to its copy of the block chain, and/or broadcast the transaction, its validation (in the form of a block) and/or other data to other nodes. This other data may include time-stamping, such as is used in cryptocurrency block chains. Similarly, any of the nodes can validate smart contracts, add smart contracts to the block chain, broadcast the smart contract and its execution to other nodes) (Section [0061] and [0074]).
Per claim 18, Castinado/Blake discloses all the limitations of claims 1 and 13 above. Castinado further discloses:
wherein the node being configured for: verify the second transaction (e.g. As shown in block 540, the system determines, from the distributed ledger, that the interaction request meets one or more conditions of the smart contract. As discussed above, the one or more conditions may be rules executing the smart contract) (Section [0070]-[0074]).
execute the second transaction based on reliability of the second transaction being verified (e.g. As shown in block 550, the processes the interaction request by executing the smart contract based on determining that interaction request meets the one or more conditions of the smart contract. Executing the smart contract comprises initiating an interaction (transaction) based on the interaction information present in the smart contract) (Section [0070]-[0074]).
Per claim 19, Castinado/Blake discloses all the limitations of claim 14 above. Castinado further discloses:
wherein the recording on the blockchain network further comprises: recording the first block corresponding to the first transaction on the blockchain network based on completion of verification of the first transaction from a first node (e.g. One node in the block chain may have a complete or partial copy of the entire ledger or set of transactions or smart contracts and/or blocks on the block chain. Transactions are initiated at a node of a block chain and communicated to the various nodes of the block chain. Any of the nodes can validate a transaction, add the transaction to its copy of the block chain, and/or broadcast the transaction, its validation (in the form of a block) and/or other data to other nodes. This other data may include time-stamping, such as is used in cryptocurrency block chains. Similarly, any of the nodes can validate smart contracts, add smart contracts to the block chain, broadcast the smart contract and its execution to other nodes) (Section [0061], [0068], and [0069]).
Per claim 20, Castinado/Blake discloses all the limitations of claim 19 above. Castinado further discloses:
wherein the recording on the blockchain network further comprises: recording the second block corresponding to the second transaction on the blockchain network based on completion of verification of the second transaction from the first node (e.g. One node in the block chain may have a complete or partial copy of the entire ledger or set of transactions or smart contracts and/or blocks on the block chain. Transactions are initiated at a node of a block chain and communicated to the various nodes of the block chain. Any of the nodes can validate a transaction, add the transaction to its copy of the block chain, and/or broadcast the transaction, its validation (in the form of a block) and/or other data to other nodes. This other data may include time-stamping, such as is used in cryptocurrency block chains. Similarly, any of the nodes can validate smart contracts, add smart contracts to the block chain, broadcast the smart contract and its execution to other nodes) (Section [0061] and [0070]-[0074]).
Claim 5 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Castinado/Blake, as applied to claim 1 above, in further view of US 20210328831 A1 (“Zeng”).
Per claim 5, Castinado/Blake discloses all the limitations of claim 1 above. Castinado further discloses:
wherein the electronic device and an external device are mobile nodes (e.g. Furthermore, as used herein, the term “user computing device” or “mobile device” may refer to mobile phones, personal computing devices, tablet computers, wearable devices, smart devices and/or any portable electronic device capable of receiving and/or storing data therein) (Section [0026], [0038], [0043], and [0062]).
Although Castinado/Blake disclose user mobile devices acting as nodes of a blockchain network, Castinado/Blake do not specifically disclose:
wherein the processor is further configured to communicate with the external device through a relay node in the blockchain network.
However Zeng, in analogous art of blockchain communication, discloses:
wherein the processor is further configured to communicate with the external device through a relay node in the blockchain network (e.g. The relay node pertaining to the blockchain relay communication network can receive a message packet from a blockchain node connected to the relay node. The message content of the message to be transmitted can be partitioned into different message packets. Each message packet records a partial message content of the message to be transmitted) (Section [0046]-[0048]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art as of the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the blockchain communication network of Castinado/Blake to include the use of relay nodes, as taught by Zeng, in order to achieve the predictable result of reducing the time it takes to transmit data between nodes on the blockchain.
Conclusion
Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP § 706.07(a). 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 date of this final action.
Any inquiry of a general nature or relating to the status of this application or concerning this communication or earlier communications from the Examiner should be directed to TIMOTHY SAX whose telephone number is 571-272-2935. The Examiner can normally be reached on M-F 8-4:30. If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the Examiner’s supervisor, Patrick McAtee can be reached at (571) 272-7575.
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.
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.
/TS/
Examiner, Art Unit 3698
/PATRICK MCATEE/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3698