DETAILED ACTION
Acknowledgements
This Office Action is in response to Applicant’s response/application filed on 01/02/2026.
The Examiner notes that citations to United States Patent Application Publication paragraphs are formatted as [####], #### representing the paragraph number.
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 .
Status of Claims
Claims 1-154 have been cancelled.
Claim 155 has been amended.
No claims have been added.
Claims 155-174 are currently pending and have been examined.
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 set forth in Graham v. John Deere Co., 383 U.S. 1, 148 USPQ 459 (1966), that are applied for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103(a) 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.
Claim(s) 155, 157, 170 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Xu (CN 109976868 A), in view of Georgiadis (US 20180137512).
Regarding claim(s) 155, Xu discloses:
at least one processor (]0082] of Xu);
a tangible, non-transient memory storing instructions that, when executed by the at least one processor (]0082] of Xu), cause the system to provide:
a set of tools for developing, deploying, and managing dApps within a P2P network; and a user interface for discovering and interacting with dApps;
(By disclosing, “the user terminal receives the target user interface template sent by the background management terminal [(tools for deploying dApps)], and according to the target user interface template to generate the DApp operation interface. DApp customization method provided by the embodiment of the invention, is user interface template of pre-selected corresponding different user defined by background management, firstly determining the target user class to which the user belongs, then the target user interface template corresponding to the target user type to send to the user terminal, the user terminal according to the target user interface template to generate a DApp operation interface [(user interface)], such that a user DApp operation interface to perform the corresponding operation [(tools for developing dApps)]. Because the user interface template is predefined, it can according to the different user classes for presetting the user belongs, so as to realize DApp can be customized [(tools for managing dApps)], the user according to the scene of the customization performing function of DApp, satisfy different user for the customized requirement of the DApp. DApp pre-defined template in one possible embodiment, background management terminal for receiving developing and customizing terminal sent wherein the predefined DApp template comprises a user data, behavioral data, scene data and scene relation data” ([0052]-[0054] of Xu)).
Xu does not disclose, but Georgiadis teaches:
a security protocol for dApp authentication and authorization based on biometric binding and Hardware Root of Trust (By disclosing, “A secure hardware trusted computing environment [(security protocol)] (e.g., a trusted or secure network or secure channel in an untrusted or insecure network) can be used to ensure that the credential and additional information sent to the CRA is encrypted and signed using one or more keys and/or certificates connected to or derived from a hardware root of trust [(authentication and authorization)] (e.g., the user device). Leveraging the hardware root of trust (e.g., an unmodifieable unique identifier or characteristic of the user device or derivative thereof) and the secure hardware trusted computing environment can ensure security, authenticity, tamper resistance, and deter theft of any and all information sent to the CRA. The leverage can be done, for example, by using (without limitation) a CPUID (e.g., an unmodifiable unique identifier associated with a central processing unit), International Mobile Equipment Identity (“IMEI”) number, SIMID (or International Mobile Subscriber Identity), Network ID (e.g., a portion of the TCP/IP address that is used to identify individuals or devices on a secure or unsecured network (such as a local area network or the Internet)), username/password, personal identification information, biometrics, validation of biometrics (such as from a system like TouchID) and others. The information can be used alone, as a digital signature, to generate a unique digital key or certificate, and/or as an input to an encryption algorithm to encrypt selected sensitive information.” ([0100] of Georgiadis)).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the effective filing date of the present application to modify the invention of Xu in view of Georgiadis to include a security protocol for dApp authentication and authorization based on biometric binding and Hardware Root of Trust. Doing so would result in an improved invention because this would improve the security of the invention.
Regarding claim(s) 157, Xu discloses:
wherein the set of tools includes a graphical user interface builder, enabling developers to design user interfaces without extensive coding.
(By disclosing, “the user terminal receives the target user interface template sent by the background management terminal, and according to the target user interface template to generate the DApp operation interface.
DApp customization method provided by the embodiment of the invention, is user interface template of pre-selected corresponding different user defined by background management, firstly determining the target user class to which the user belongs, then the target user interface template corresponding to the target user type to send to the user terminal, the user terminal according to the target user interface template to generate a DApp operation interface, such that a user DApp operation interface to perform the corresponding operation. Because the user interface template is predefined, it can according to the different user classes for presetting the user belongs, so as to realize DApp can be customized, the user according to the scene of the customization performing function of DApp, satisfy different user for the customized requirement of the DApp. DApp pre-defined template in one possible embodiment, background management terminal for receiving developing and customizing terminal sent wherein the predefined DApp template comprises a user data, behavioral data, scene data and scene relation data”, and “administrator may add user U in developing and customizing end, scene S, P and scene parameter relationship (by arrow association), finally generating a scene graph, ..” ([0052]-[0054], [0062] of Xu)).
Regarding claim(s) 170, Xu does not disclose, but Georgiadis teaches:
wherein the security protocol includes an encryption layer that employs end-to-end encryption for all application communications, ensuring data privacy and integrity (By disclosing, “A secure hardware trusted computing environment (e.g., a trusted or secure network or secure channel in an untrusted or insecure network) can be used to ensure that the credential and additional information sent to the CRA is encrypted and signed using one or more keys and/or certificates connected to or derived from a hardware root of trust (e.g., the user device).” ([0100] of Georgiadis)).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the effective filing date of the present application to modify the invention of Xu in view of Georgiadis to include an encryption layer that employs end-to-end encryption for all application communications, ensuring data privacy and integrity. Doing so would result in an improved invention because this would improve the security of the invention.
Claim(s) 156 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Xu (CN 109976868 A), in view of Georgiadis (US 20180137512), further in view of Wylie (US 20210201318).
Regarding claim(s) 156, Xu does not disclose, but Wylie teaches:
a library of pre-built smart contracts for common dApp functionalities, simplifying the development process (By disclosing, “The smart contract configuration application 157 may be a decentralized application downloaded to a mobile device or computing device to generate a smart contract.” ([0024] of Wylie); and “the smart contract configuration component 144 may receive from the instance of the smart contract configuration application instance, such as 141A executing on the first user's computing device 101A, a selection of a smart contract from the smart contract library 145. In some examples, the selected smart contract, such as 146, may include sections. Each section may be modifiable and may have a set of contract attributes and settings for the respective section.” ([0026], [0018], [0020] of Wylie)).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the effective filing date of the present application to modify the combination of Xu and Georgiadis, in view of Wylie to include a library of pre-built smart contracts for common dApp functionalities, simplifying the development process. Doing so would result in an improved invention because this would simplify the smart contract configuration process.
Claim(s) 158 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Xu (CN 109976868 A), in view of Georgiadis (US 20180137512), further in view of Tan (CN 109040195 B).
Regarding claim(s) 158, Xu does not disclose, but Tan teaches:
a performance monitoring tool for analyzing the efficiency and scalability of dApps on the P2P network (By disclosing, “for DAPP with higher score can be allowed to write more data into the block chain, or providing higher-efficiency priority higher signature processing and so on” ([0060]-[0062] of Tan)).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the effective filing date of the present application to modify the combination of Xu and Georgiadis, in view of Tan to include a performance monitoring tool for analyzing the efficiency and scalability of dApps on the P2P network. Doing so would result in an improved invention because this would help the user to select a better DApp by reviewing the performance data.
Claim(s) 159 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Xu (CN 109976868 A), in view of Georgiadis (US 20180137512), further in view of Tidd (US 11609747).
Regarding claim(s) 159, Xu does not disclose, but Tidd teaches:
wherein the set of tools includes tools that provide integration with existing code repositories, thereby facilitating code sharing and collaboration among dApp developers (By disclosing, “The agent may use the library criteria 123 along with cell selection criteria 134 and cell identifiers 133 of respective library manifests 132 to select, among a number of library cells 135, a particular library cell suitable for use in generating the application 120” (Col 4 lines 17-26, Abstract of Tidd)).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the effective filing date of the present application to modify the combination of Xu and Georgiadis, in view of Tidd to include tools that provide integration with existing code repositories, thereby facilitating code sharing and collaboration among dApp developers. Doing so would result in an improved invention because this would help the user to select a better DApp code for deploying the application.
Claim(s) 160 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Xu (CN 109976868 A), in view of Georgiadis (US 20180137512), further in view of Bharthulwar (US 20180210709).
Regarding claim(s) 160, Xu does not disclose, but Bharthulwar teaches:
a documentation generator which assists developers in creating user guides and technical documentation for their applications (By disclosing, “The system provides the ability to automatically generate a Data Dictionary (data model requirement specification document) from the Data Model Requirements specification” ([0414] of Bharthulwar); and “The system provides the ability to automatically generate a detailed User Guide for the software application.” ([0420] of Bharthulwar)).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the effective filing date of the present application to modify the combination of Xu and Georgiadis, in view of Bharthulwar to include a documentation generator which assists developers in creating user guides and technical documentation for their applications. Doing so would result in an improved invention because this would allow these technical documents and user guide to be generated automatically for the developers.
Claim(s) 161 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Xu (CN 109976868 A), in view of Georgiadis (US 20180137512), further in view of Sun (CA 3098240 A1).
Regarding claim(s) 161, Xu does not disclose, but Sun teaches:
a blockchain simulation tool that allows developers to test dApps in a virtualized blockchain environment before deployment (By disclosing, “In some embodiments, the IDE may provide one or more simulators for client-side applications and one or more simulators for blockchain contracts. The simulators may be used to simulate the execution of the decentralized application and to test the functioning of the decentralized application, such as the mutual invocation between the
client-side application and the blockchain contract. In some embodiments, the
IDE may provide one or more simulators for testing the blockchain contract or the
client-side application and execute the client-side application or the blockchain contract using the one or more simulators to identify one or more issues associated with the client-side application or the blockchain contract. After appropriate testing, the IDE may prepare the client-side application for deployment.” ([0078] of Sun)).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the effective filing date of the present application to modify the combination of Xu and Georgiadis, in view of Sun to include a blockchain simulation tool that allows developers to test dApps in a virtualized blockchain environment before deployment. Doing so would result in an improved invention because this would decrease the number of bugs of the DApp before deployment.
.
Claim(s) 162, 163 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Xu (CN 109976868 A), in view of Georgiadis (US 20180137512), further in view of Mo (WO 2019235736).
Regarding claim(s) 162, Xu does not disclose, but Mo teaches:
wherein the user interface includes personalized dApp recommendations based on the previous interactions and preferences of a user within the network. (By disclosing, “In addition to the services for recommending and connecting dApps, the market includes a function for recommending an application (App) related to the content to the user or recommending an application (App) related to the advertisement or SNS that the user is viewing.” ([0080] of Mo)).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the effective filing date of the present application to modify the combination of Xu and Georgiadis, in view of Mo to include personalized dApp recommendations based on the previous interactions and preferences of a user within the network. Doing so would result in an improved invention because this would help the user to select a more suitable DApp.
Regarding claim(s) 163, Xu does not disclose, but Mo teaches:
a search functionality within the user interface which allows users to find dApps based on keywords, categories, or developer names.
(By disclosing, “Users can search or recommend distributed applications (dApps) developed in the blockchain form by clicking on the canvas button, and provide services for searching and recommending dApps used in other blockchain protocols through the provided market platform. I can receive it. In addition, it may provide a service for searching and recommending apps by interworking with a platform serving an app such as a Google store or an app store.” ([142] of Mo)).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the effective filing date of the present application to modify the combination of Xu and Georgiadis, in view of Mo to include a search functionality within the user interface which allows users to find dApps based on keywords, categories, or developer names. Doing so would result in an improved invention because this would help the user to find a familiar dApp.
Claim(s) 164 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Xu (CN 109976868 A), in view of Georgiadis (US 20180137512), further in view of Gobaud (WO 2019232259).
Regarding claim(s) 164, Xu does not disclose, but Gobaud teaches:
a rating and review system that allows users to provide feedback on dApps they have used (By disclosing, “Blockchain ecosystems are merging, such as application or decentralized applications (DApp) stores. Given the fact that many of these ecosystems are at least in part open source, it is relatively easy for nefarious users to manipulate these systems, particularly in the case of providing feedback or voting for certain issues, such as improvements to the system, rating DApps, and so on.” ([0004] of Gobaud)).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the effective filing date of the present application to modify the combination of Xu and Georgiadis, in view of Gobaud to include a rating and review system that allows users to provide feedback on dApps they have used. Doing so would result in an improved invention because this would allow the users to provide feedbacks for the Dapps.
Claim(s) 165 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Xu (CN 109976868 A), in view of Georgiadis (US 20180137512), further in view of Li (CN 112381119 A), and Shawon (“DIUcerts DApp: A Blockchain-based Solution for Verification of Educational Certificates”, Shahriar Karim Shawon, 2021).
Regarding claim(s) 165, Xu does not disclose, but Li teaches:
wherein the user interface includes an interactive tutorial for new users on navigating the dApp ecosystem (By disclosing, “browsing activity and 88 kinds of user behaviour, and the behaviour comprises opening the DApps, browsing the market, viewing the detailed information, attention, submitting the application form, searching, viewing the user home page, viewing the activity in DApps; adding shopping trolley, watching video, comment, viewing DApps introduction…” ([0048] of Li)).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the effective filing date of the present application to modify the combination of Xu and Georgiadis, in view of Li to include an interactive tutorial for new users on navigating the dApp ecosystem. Doing so would result in an improved invention because this would allow the users to have a better understanding of the DApps.
Xu does not disclose, but Shawon teaches:
an interactive tutorial for new users for understanding Web3 concepts (By disclosing, there is an information icon for the injected Web3 (Fig. 6 of Shawon)).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the effective filing date of the present application to modify the combination of Xu, Georgiadis, and Li, in view of Shawon to include an interactive tutorial for new users for understanding Web3 concepts. Doing so would result in an improved invention because this would allow the users to have a better understanding of the Web3 protocol.
Claim(s) 166, 167, 168 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Xu (CN 109976868 A), in view of Georgiadis (US 20180137512), further in view of Burke (US 20210042830).
Regarding claim(s) 166, Xu does not disclose, but Burke teaches:
wherein the user interface includes a tracking feature for users to track their transaction history and interactions with dApps (By disclosing, “FIG. 142 illustrates a feature of the digital media system that tracks the node path and financial transactions associated with a currency transfer such as charitable donations according to some embodiments.” ([0125] of Burke); and “In some embodiments, artificial intelligence image recognition can monitor what people are saying about a brand without the need for text. In some embodiments, brands can track their social communications, and without users needing to type the company name, will be able to tap into their own online coverage solely through artificial intelligence recognized identifiers.” ([0314] of Burke)).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the effective filing date of the present application to modify the combination of Xu and Georgiadis, in view of Burke to include a tracking feature for users to track their transaction history and interactions with dApps. Doing so would result in an improved invention because this would allow the users verify transaction information after the transaction is done.
Regarding claim(s) 167, Xu does not disclose, but Burke teaches:
wherein the user interface further comprises a social sharing feature which enables users to share dApps or dApp achievements with a network (By disclosing, “In some embodiments, a user can set a status. In some embodiments, the system can enable a user to set a specific status that can be used to share a user's mood, what users are doing, or to share important information with all a user's contacts at once.” ([0145] of Burke)).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the effective filing date of the present application to modify the combination of Xu and Georgiadis, in view of Burke to include a social sharing feature which enables users to share dApps or dApp achievements with a network. Doing so would result in an improved invention because this would increase user interest in joining the system.
Regarding claim(s) 168, Xu does not disclose, but Burke teaches:
wherein the user interface integrates a notification system to alert users about updates or events related to their installed or followed dApps (By disclosing, “In some embodiments, the system application can enable token holders to use system rewards to “subscribe” to weekly “therapist” agent text messages within premium chat service area. In some embodiments, the system application can enable token holders to use system rewards to “subscribe” to weekly “romantic” agent text messages within premium chat service area. In some embodiments, the system application can enable token holders to use system rewards to “subscribe” to weekly “financial” agent text messages within premium chat service area. In some embodiments, the system application can enable token holders to use system rewards to “subscribe” to weekly “happy” agent text messages within premium chat service area.” ([0220] of Burke)).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the effective filing date of the present application to modify the combination of Xu and Georgiadis, in view of Burke to include a notification system to alert users about updates or events related to their installed or followed dApps. Doing so would result in an improved invention because this would increase user convenience.
Claim(s) 169 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Xu (CN 109976868 A), in view of Georgiadis (US 20180137512), further in view of White (US 7685629).
Regarding claim(s) 169, Xu does not disclose, but White teaches:
wherein the security protocol includes a dynamic risk assessment mechanism to adjust authentication requirements based on the transaction's context and perceived security risk (By disclosing, “It should be understood that the policy 70 is generated such that each level of risk adjustment 74 is associated with an appropriate one of the risk factors 72 and such that when one of the risk factors 72 is encountered, the level of risk 64 associated with the transaction 62 is adjusted according to the level of risk adjustment 74, prior to determining the biometric authentication data requirement 68. For example, when a user attempts to conduct a transaction accessing the active accounts data after normal business hours, the level of risk adjustment 74 requires increasing the level of risk 64 by one level of risk, that is, from lowest to low. As another example, when a user is located less than or equal to a distance of ten miles from a home address and attempts to conduct a transaction accessing the account balances data 62, the level of risk adjustment 74 requires decreasing the level of risk 64 by one level of risk, that is, from low to lowest….” (Col 16 lines 34-67 of White)).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the effective filing date of the present application to modify the combination of Xu and Georgiadis, in view of White to include a dynamic risk assessment mechanism to adjust authentication requirements based on the transaction's context and perceived security risk. Doing so would result in an improved invention because this would improve the security of the claimed invention.
Claim(s) 171 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Xu (CN 109976868 A), in view of Georgiadis (US 20180137512), further in view of Rezlan (US 20130347125).
Regarding claim(s) 171, Xu does not disclose, but Rezlan teaches:
wherein the security protocol includes a monitoring feature for real-time monitoring of authentication attempts, and wherein said monitoring feature flags and mitigates potential unauthorized access or brute force attacks (By disclosing, “One object of the present invention is to provide a system, based on different in house developed systems/software, that applies in the area of data security to identify threats in real-time, including but not limited to identity theft, inappropriate communication to competitors, unauthorized data access, and unauthorized physical access, and provide alerts via email, SMS, and Phone calls to the owner of the information. The system performs a secondary background authorization that is transparent to the requester to verify or flag unauthorized access to systems, data or company offices being requested.” ([0015] of Rezlan)).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the effective filing date of the present application to modify the combination of Xu and Georgiadis, in view of Rezlan to include a monitoring feature for real-time monitoring of authentication attempts, and wherein said monitoring feature flags and mitigates potential unauthorized access or brute force attacks. Doing so would result in an improved invention because this would improve the security of the claimed invention.
Claim(s) 172 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Xu (CN 109976868 A), in view of Georgiadis (US 20180137512), further in view of Kaplan (US 20020146129).
Regarding claim(s) 172, Xu does not disclose, but Kaplan teaches:
wherein the security protocol includes a session management mechanism that automatically logs out users after a period of inactivity or upon detecting anomalies in user behavior (By disclosing, “After a certain amount of idle time or inactivity, which might be specified by the user, the wireless device will automatically log out from the WDMS.” ([0011] of Kaplan)).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the effective filing date of the present application to modify the combination of Xu and Georgiadis, in view of Kaplan to include a session management mechanism that automatically logs out users after a period of inactivity or upon detecting anomalies in user behavior. Doing so would result in an improved invention because this would improve the security of the claimed invention.
Claim(s) 173 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Xu (CN 109976868 A), in view of Georgiadis (US 20180137512), further in view of Chen (US 10469484).
Regarding claim(s) 173, Xu does not disclose, but Chen teaches:
wherein the security protocol further comprises a dApp management mechanism that allows users to manage and revoke dApp permissions, thereby enhancing user control over their data and privacy (By disclosing, “A user can revoke permission for any specific third-party application or all third-party applications” (Col 4 lines 15-24 of Chen)).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the effective filing date of the present application to modify the combination of Xu and Georgiadis, in view of Chen to include a dApp management mechanism that allows users to manage and revoke dApp permissions, thereby enhancing user control over their data and privacy. Doing so would result in an improved invention because this would improve the security of the claimed invention.
Claim(s) 174 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Xu (CN 109976868 A), in view of Georgiadis (US 20180137512), further in view of Schipperheijn (US 20170039566).
Regarding claim(s) 174, Xu does not disclose, but Schipperheijn teaches:
wherein the security protocol includes a data sharing feature that allows for the secure sharing of biometric data across devices owned by the same user, thereby facilitating seamless multi-device authentication (By disclosing, “In one embodiment, multiple devices may be associated with the same master transactional account number. For example, a credit card, a laptop, and a mobile phone may be linked to the same transactional account. …. Alternatively, the multiple devices may share the same concealed portion, PIN, biometric verification module, and/or PIN generator.” ([0186] of Schipperheijn)).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the effective filing date of the present application to modify the combination of Xu and Georgiadis, in view of Schipperheijn to include a data sharing feature that allows for the secure sharing of biometric data across devices owned by the same user, thereby facilitating seamless multi-device authentication. Doing so would result in an improved invention because this would improve the overall user convenience.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments with regard to the 35 U.S.C. § 101 rejection have been fully considered but are persuasive. The 35 U.S.C. § 101 rejection has been withdrawn.
Applicant’s arguments with regard to the 35 U.S.C. § 103 rejection of claim 155 has been fully considered but are not persuasive.
The Applicant argues that the cited prior art does not disclose the recited limitations. The Examiner, respectfully disagrees. The Examiner notes that the primary reference Xu discloses a set of tools for developing, deploying, and managing dApps within a P2P network; and a user interface for discovering and interacting with dApps (By disclosing, “the user terminal receives the target user interface template sent by the background management terminal [(tools for deploying dApps)], and according to the target user interface template to generate the DApp operation interface. DApp customization method provided by the embodiment of the invention, is user interface template of pre-selected corresponding different user defined by background management, firstly determining the target user class to which the user belongs, then the target user interface template corresponding to the target user type to send to the user terminal, the user terminal according to the target user interface template to generate a DApp operation interface [(user interface)], such that a user DApp operation interface to perform the corresponding operation [(tools for developing dApps)]. Because the user interface template is predefined, it can according to the different user classes for presetting the user belongs, so as to realize DApp can be customized [(tools for managing dApps)], the user according to the scene of the customization performing function of DApp, satisfy different user for the customized requirement of the DApp. DApp pre-defined template in one possible embodiment, background management terminal for receiving developing and customizing terminal sent wherein the predefined DApp template comprises a user data, behavioral data, scene data and scene relation data” ([0052]-[0054] of Xu)).
Xu does not disclose, but Georgiadis teaches:
a security protocol for dApp authentication and authorization based on biometric binding and Hardware Root of Trust (By disclosing, “A secure hardware trusted computing environment [(security protocol)] (e.g., a trusted or secure network or secure channel in an untrusted or insecure network) can be used to ensure that the credential and additional information sent to the CRA is encrypted and signed using one or more keys and/or certificates connected to or derived from a hardware root of trust [(authentication and authorization)] (e.g., the user device). Leveraging the hardware root of trust (e.g., an unmodifieable unique identifier or characteristic of the user device or derivative thereof) and the secure hardware trusted computing environment can ensure security, authenticity, tamper resistance, and deter theft of any and all information sent to the CRA. The leverage can be done, for example, by using (without limitation) a CPUID (e.g., an unmodifiable unique identifier associated with a central processing unit), International Mobile Equipment Identity (“IMEI”) number, SIMID (or International Mobile Subscriber Identity), Network ID (e.g., a portion of the TCP/IP address that is used to identify individuals or devices on a secure or unsecured network (such as a local area network or the Internet)), username/password, personal identification information, biometrics, validation of biometrics (such as from a system like TouchID) and others. The information can be used alone, as a digital signature, to generate a unique digital key or certificate, and/or as an input to an encryption algorithm to encrypt selected sensitive information.” ([0100] of Georgiadis)).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the effective filing date of the present application to modify the invention of Xu in view of Georgiadis to include a security protocol for dApp authentication and authorization based on biometric binding and Hardware Root of Trust. Doing so would result in an improved invention because this would improve the security of the invention.
Applicant’s arguments with regard to the 35 U.S.C. § 103 rejection of claims 156-184 have been fully considered but are not persuasive. Please refer to the office action for the respective claims for detailed mappings.
Accordingly, the 35 U.S.C. § 103 rejection will be maintained.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
WO 2020035090 to Sun for disclosing:
Methods, systems, and apparatus, including computer programs encoded on computer storage media, for supporting blockchain-based decentralized applications, are provided. One of the systems includes: one or more blockchain nodes configured to manage a blockchain; one or more computing devices associated with a file system that is configured to store a plurality of resources associated with a client-side application and to provide one or more of the plurality of resources to the client-side application, wherein the client-side application is associated with a first blockchain contract on the blockchain; a database server configured to query a database storing data from the blockchain to obtain data associated with the first blockchain contract and to send the obtained data to the client-side application; and an application server configured to execute a blockchain-based program based on one or more requests from the client-side application.
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 nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) 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 DUAN ZHANG whose telephone number is (571)272-4642. The examiner can normally be reached Mon - Fri 10 AM-5 PM.
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, Neha Patel can be reached at 571-270-1492. 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.
/DUAN ZHANG/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3699