DETAILED ACTION
Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status
This action is responsive to communication filed on 11/18/2025. Claim(s) 1, 5, 9, 13 & 17 are currently amended. Claim(s) 1-20 are currently pending examination. The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
Response to Amendment
The applicant filed amendment(s) to claim(s) on 11/18/2025 to remedy the rejection(s).
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments with respect to claim(s) 1-20 have been considered but are moot because the new ground of rejection does not rely on any reference applied in the prior rejection of record for any teaching or matter specifically challenged in the argument.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
The following is a quotation of the appropriate paragraphs of 35 U.S.C. 102 that form the basis for the rejections under this section made in this Office action:
A person shall be entitled to a patent unless –
(a)(2) the claimed invention was described in a patent issued under section 151, or in an application for patent published or deemed published under section 122(b), in which the patent or application, as the case may be, names another inventor and was effectively filed before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claim(s) 1-2, 4, 7-10, 12, 14-18 & 20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) as being anticipated by Hildebrand et al. (US 2020/0287718 A1).
Re Claim 1, 9 & 17, Hildebrand teaches a method implemented by a first apparatus, comprising:
sending a query request to a blockchain service device, (Hildebrand; FIG. 1-6; ¶ [0015]-[0044], [0049], [0120]; Sending a query request to a blockchain hosted on a cloud computing system (blockchain service device).)
wherein the query request is associated with a network identifier of a second apparatus; [[and]] (Hildebrand; FIG. 1-6; ¶ [0023]-[0043]; The query request is associated with a local object identifier, of a node (a network identifier of a second apparatus).)
receiving first blockchain information from the blockchain service device; and (Hildebrand; FIG. 1-6; ¶ [0015]-[0044], [0049], [0120]; The transmission of blockchain information throughout the system.)
sending a second query request to request data from a blockchain, using the first blockchain information, (Hildebrand; FIG. 1-6; ¶ [0023]-[0035]; The sending of node related queries (second query request) to request data from the blockchain, using the data form the first query, having first blockchain related data associated with the query.)
wherein the first blockchain information is associated with transaction data of the second apparatus and the transaction data is in a blockchain. (Hildebrand; FIG. 1-6; ¶ [0016]-[0045], [0053]-[0067]; The blockchain information is associated with transaction data of various nodes/devices and the transaction data is in a blockchain.)
Re Claim 2, 10 & 18, Hildebrand discloses the method according to claim 1, wherein the query request comprises the network identifier. (Hildebrand; FIG. 1-8; ¶ [0037]-[0041], [0058]-[0068]; Network identifier related to queries.)
Re Claim 4, 12 & 20, Hildebrand discloses the method according to claim 1, further comprising:
obtaining first authorization information provided by the second apparatus. (Hildebrand; FIG. 1-7; ¶ [0109]-[0112]; Permission level, authorization provided by nodes/device in the computing system.)
Re Claim 7 & 15, Hildebrand discloses the method according to claim 1, where the first blockchain information comprises a first blockchain identifier associated with the transaction data of the second apparatus. (Hildebrand; FIG. 1; ¶ [0023]-[0024], [0058]-[0060], [0084]-[0098]; Identifiers associated with transaction data.)
Re Claim 8 & 16, Hildebrand discloses the method according to claim 1, where the first blockchain information comprises a first blockchain identifier set including a blockchain identifier associated with the transaction data of the second apparatus. (Hildebrand; FIG. 1; ¶ [0023]-[0024], [0058]-[0060], [0084]-[0098]; Identifiers associated with transaction data.)
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.
Claim(s) 3, 11 & 19 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Hildebrand et al. (US 2020/0287718 A1) and further in view of Qiu (US 2019/0253252 A1).
Re Claim 3, 11 & 19, Hildebrand discloses the method according to claim 1, yet does not explicitly suggest where the network identifier comprises any one of: an Internet protocol (IP) address of the second apparatus, a media access control (MAC) address of the second apparatus, a network layer identifier of the second apparatus, a subscription permanent identifier (SUPI) of the second apparatus, a subscription concealed identifier (SUCI) of the second apparatus, a globally unique temporary user equipment identifier (GUTI) of the second apparatus, an international mobile equipment identity (IMEI) of the second apparatus, a public land mobile network identifier (PLMN ID) of the second apparatus, a public key hash value of the second apparatus, or domain name information of the second apparatus.
However, in analogous art, Qiu teaches where the network identifier comprises any one of:
an Internet protocol (IP) address of the second apparatus, (Qiu; FIG. 1-2; ¶ [0040]-[0044], [0053]-[0055]; A address similar to an IP address.)
a media access control (MAC) address of the second apparatus,
a network layer identifier of the second apparatus, a subscription permanent identifier (SUPI) of the second apparatus,
a subscription concealed identifier (SUCI) of the second apparatus,
a globally unique temporary user equipment identifier (GUTI) of the second apparatus,
an international mobile equipment identity (IMEI) of the second apparatus,
a public land mobile network identifier (PLMN ID) of the second apparatus,
a public key hash value of the second apparatus,
or
domain name information of the second apparatus.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention (AIA ) to modify Hildebrand in view of Qiu to include various types of network identifiers for the reasons of obtaining client blockchain data and associated unique identifiers. (Qiu Abstract)
Claim(s) 5 & 13 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Hildebrand et al. (US 2020/0287718 A1) and further in view of DAVIS (US 2016/0342989 A1).
Re Claim 5 & 13, Hildebrand discloses the method according to claim 1, yet does not explicitly suggest wherein the query request comprises first authorization information, wherein the first authorization information comprises one or more of: the network identifier of the second apparatus, a time range within which query is allowed, a network identifier of a sender of the query request, a first transaction identifier set, or a transaction identifier of the first transaction data.
However, in analogous art, DAVIS teaches wherein the query request comprises first authorization information, wherein the first authorization information comprises one or more of:
the network identifier of the second apparatus,
a time range within which query is allowed,
a network identifier of a sender of the query request,
a first transaction identifier set, (DAVIS; FIG. 1-13; Background, Summary, ¶ [0057]-[0064]; Authorization information such as transaction identifiers and transaction times.)
or
a transaction identifier of the first transaction data.
Claim(s) 6 & 14 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Hildebrand et al. (US 2020/0287718 A1) and further in view of LIN et al. (US 2020/0244439 A1).
Re Claim 6 & 14, Hildebrand discloses the method according to claim 1, yet does not explicitly suggest further comprising: storing a mapping relationship between the network identifier and the first blockchain information.
However, in analogous art, LIN teaches further comprising:
storing a mapping relationship between the network identifier and the first blockchain information. (LIN; FIG. 1-21; Background, Summary, ¶ [0050], [0071]-[0081], [0105], [0117]; Storing a mapping relationship between the network identifiers and information of the blockchain.)
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of invention (pre-AIA ) or before the effective filing date of the claimed invention (AIA ) to modify Hildebrand in view of LIN to map relationship between identifiers and blockchains for the reason of identifying accounts based on mapping relationships between transactions and account identifiers. (LIN Abstract)
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 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 CHRISTOPHER B ROBINSON whose telephone number is (571)270-0702. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 7:00-3:00 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, Nicholas R Taylor can be reached at 571-272-3889. 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.
/CHRISTOPHER B ROBINSON/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2443