DETAILED ACTION
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 .
2. The amendment of claims 1-20, filed on 1/12/2026, is acknowledged and considered for examination.
Claims 1,8, and 15 are independent claims. Claims 1-20 are pending.
Response to Arguments
3. 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.
The arguments are directed towards the new limitations submitted with the amendment. Thus, the arguments are moot as claims 1-20 are now rejected under Osborn and Quirk combination.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status.
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. Claim(s) 1-20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Osborn, et al. [US 20240250820] further in view of Quirk, et al. [US 20230421399].
As per claim 1: Osborn, et al. teaches a system for encryption-aware verification in a decentralized network, the system comprising:
at least one non-transitory storage device; and [Osborn: para 0068]
at least one processing device coupled to the at least one non-transitory storage device, wherein the at least one processing device is configured to: [Osborn: para 0068]
encrypt a message at a first node; [Osborn: para 0079; Computing devices may then encrypt a message using an intended receiver's public key]
generate a first encryption-aware verification token (“EAT”) associated with encrypted message [Osborn: para 0026; The cryptographic token may be associated with encrypted verification data encrypted using a public key associated with the cryptography-based storage application], wherein the first EAT comprises a nonfungible token recorded on a distributed ledger maintained on at least one authorized node [Osborn: para 0023; proving ownership/control of a particular cryptographic token (e.g., a non-fungible token) on a computer or another suitable user device (e.g., a smartphone, electronic tablet, etc.). A cryptographic token may be a token storing digital information (e.g., drawings, etc.) or value (e.g., monetary value), such as a fungible or non-fungible token. A cryptographic token may be written to a blockchain (e.g., minted on a blockchain) via a blockchain operation performed by a blockchain node. Para 0075; blockchain functions or operations include conducting transactions, querying a distributed ledger, generating additional blocks for a blockchain, transmitting communications-related NFTs, performing encryption/decryption, exchanging public/private keys, and/or other operations. The limitation “encryption-aware verification token (“EAT”)”, may broadly be in the form of a nonfungible token (or NFT) with associative encryption or cryptography] of the decentralized network [Osborn: para 0072; FIG. 7 shows a decentralized environment for performing blockchain functions or operations. Para 0076; blockchain functions or operations may also comprise actions related to mechanisms that facilitate other blockchain functions (e.g., actions related to metering activities for blockchain functions on a given blockchain network). For example, Ethereum, which is an open-source, globally decentralized computing infrastructure that executes smart contracts, uses a blockchain to synchronize and store the system's state changes], **the nonfungible token comprising a header, the encrypted message, and a digital signature; [**rejected under a secondary reference, discussion further below]
perform a first encryption-aware verification process at a second node; [Osborn: para 0028; Token processing subsystem transmit request to a blockchain node so that the blockchain node may retrieve verification data from the cryptographic token. The cryptographic token may be a data structure that has been written (e.g., minted) on the blockchain and the cryptographic token may be a non-fungible token (NFT). Para 0080; miner comprises a node in a blockchain network that facilitates blockchain functions by verifying blockchain functions or operations on the blockchain, adding new blocks to the existing chain, and/or ensuring that these additions are accurate. Thus, a second node can broadly be in the form of any of the nodes in the blockchain that performs an encryption-aware verification]
verify the first EAT; and [Osborn: para 0031; token processing subsystem pass the encrypted verification data to verification subsystem to decrypt the encrypted verification data and verify authenticity of the data. For example, verification subsystem verify that the data is genuine. More examples on para 0044, 0075]
decrypt the message. [Osborn: para 0079; the encrypted message may be decrypted]
Ref, et al. suggests encryption-aware verification token or NFT [Osborn: para 0023, 0075]. However, Ref did not clearly teach “the nonfungible token comprising a header, the encrypted message, and a digital signature”.
Quirk, et al. discloses the blockchain verification module stores blockchain verification data as metadata associated with an owner of the non-fungible token (NFT). For example, the blockchain verification data may be stored on a blockchain as immutable metadata associated with a user profile of the owner of the non-fungible token (NFT). Blockchain verification module receives a request to verify the blockchain (or wallet) address from registration module. The request include information for the verification. The blockchain verification module generates a unique message for signing by the user. The message may include various information in the payload, including the name of the non-fungible token (NFT), a blockchain address for an owner wallet containing the non-fungible token (NFT), a target blockchain type, a target blockchain address, and a salt (e.g., a random nonce for enhanced encryption and recreating a signature) [Quirk: para 0046-0047]. When the information for the blockchain associated with the application exists in the metadata as determined, the application verifies the information in the metadata for that blockchain. The metadata may include the original message (e.g., in plain text, etc.) used for verification of the user for the blockchain associated with the application (e.g., the name of the non-fungible token (NFT), the blockchain address of the owner of the wallet containing the non-fungible token (NFT), the target blockchain type, the target blockchain address, salt, etc.), the signed message (e.g., encrypted signature, etc.), the target blockchain type, and the target blockchain address [Quirk: para 0058]. As such, one would be motivated to include “the nonfungible token comprising a header, the encrypted message, and a digital signature”, for verification of the user for the blockchain that includes verification data as metadata associated with an owner of the non-fungible token (NFT).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine Quirk with Osborn to teach “the nonfungible token comprising a header, the encrypted message, and a digital signature” for the reason to provide verification data as metadata associated with an owner of the non-fungible token (NFT) for the purpose of verification for the blockchain.
Claim 2: Osborn: para 0031, 0055 [verification, access/generate tokens (e.g., cryptographic tokens). The second blockchain operation record the cryptographic token to a blockchain and transmit to the blockchain node]; discussing the system of claim 1, wherein the at least one processing device is further configured to: generate a second EAT at the second node; perform a second encryption-aware verification process at a third node; verify the second EAT; and decrypt the message at the third node.
Claim 3: Osborn: para 0075, 0080 [a plurality of nodes for the blockchain network, records and/or monitors peer connections to other nodes and/or miners for the blockchain network]; discussing the system of claim 1, wherein the first encryption-aware verification process comprises verifying a digital signature of the first EAT based on a public key of the first node.
Claim 4: Osborn: para 0022; discussing the system of claim 3, wherein the digital signature of the first EAT is generated based on a private key of the first node.
Claim 5: Osborn: para Osborn: para 0028, 0080 [a blockchain node retrieve verification data from the cryptographic token, an identifier of the cryptographic token (e.g., a token address). Records and/or monitors peer connections to other nodes and/or miners for the blockchain network]; discussing the system of claim 1, wherein at least one processing device is further configured to identify the second node based on a routing table of the first node.
Claim 6: Osborn: para 0028, 0080 [a blockchain node retrieve verification data from the cryptographic token, an identifier of the cryptographic token (e.g., a token address). Records and/or monitors peer connections to other nodes and/or miners for the blockchain network]; discussing the system of claim 1, wherein the message comprises information identifying a target node.
Claim 7: Osborn: para 0055, 0079; discussing the system of claim 6, wherein the at least one processing device is further configured to decrypt the message at the target node.
As per claim 8: Osborn, et al. teaches a computer program product for encryption-aware verification in a decentralized network, the computer program product comprising at least one non-transitory computer-readable medium having computer-readable program code portions embodied therein, the computer-readable program code portions comprising: [Osborn: para 0068]
an executable portion configured to encrypt a message at a first node; [Osborn: para 0079; Computing devices may then encrypt a message using an intended receiver's public key]
an executable portion configured to generate a first encryption-aware verification token (“EAT”) associated with the encrypted message [Osborn: para 0026; The cryptographic token may be associated with encrypted verification data encrypted using a public key associated with the cryptography-based storage application], wherein the first EAT comprises a nonfungible token recorded on a distributed ledger maintained on at least one authorized node [Osborn: para 0023; proving ownership/control of a particular cryptographic token (e.g., a non-fungible token) on a computer or another suitable user device (e.g., a smartphone, electronic tablet, etc.). A cryptographic token may be a token storing digital information (e.g., drawings, etc.) or value (e.g., monetary value), such as a fungible or non-fungible token. A cryptographic token may be written to a blockchain (e.g., minted on a blockchain) via a blockchain operation performed by a blockchain node. Para 0075; blockchain functions or operations include conducting transactions, querying a distributed ledger, generating additional blocks for a blockchain, transmitting communications-related NFTs, performing encryption/decryption, exchanging public/private keys, and/or other operations. The limitation “encryption-aware verification token (“EAT”)”, may broadly be in the form of a nonfungible token (or NFT) with associative encryption or cryptography] of the decentralized network [Osborn: para 0072; FIG. 7 shows a decentralized environment for performing blockchain functions or operations. Para 0076; blockchain functions or operations may also comprise actions related to mechanisms that facilitate other blockchain functions (e.g., actions related to metering activities for blockchain functions on a given blockchain network). For example, Ethereum, which is an open-source, globally decentralized computing infrastructure that executes smart contracts, uses a blockchain to synchronize and store the system's state changes], **the nonfungible token comprising a header, the encrypted message, and a digital signature; [**rejected under a secondary reference, discussion further below]
an executable portion configured to perform a first encryption-aware verification process at a second node; [Osborn: para 0028; Token processing subsystem transmit request to a blockchain node so that the blockchain node may retrieve verification data from the cryptographic token. The cryptographic token may be a data structure that has been written (e.g., minted) on the blockchain and the cryptographic token may be a non-fungible token (NFT). Para 0080; miner comprises a node in a blockchain network that facilitates blockchain functions by verifying blockchain functions or operations on the blockchain, adding new blocks to the existing chain, and/or ensuring that these additions are accurate. Thus, a second node can broadly be in the form of any of the nodes in the blockchain that performs an encryption-aware verification]
an executable portion configured to verify the first EAT; and [Osborn: para 0031; token processing subsystem pass the encrypted verification data to verification subsystem to decrypt the encrypted verification data and verify authenticity of the data. For example, verification subsystem verify that the data is genuine. More examples on para 0044, 0075]
an executable portion configured to decrypt the message. [Osborn: para 0079; the encrypted message may be decrypted]
Ref, et al. suggests encryption-aware verification token or NFT [Osborn: para 0023, 0075]. However, Ref did not clearly teach “the nonfungible token comprising a header, the encrypted message, and a digital signature”.
Quirk, et al. discloses the blockchain verification module stores blockchain verification data as metadata associated with an owner of the non-fungible token (NFT). For example, the blockchain verification data may be stored on a blockchain as immutable metadata associated with a user profile of the owner of the non-fungible token (NFT). Blockchain verification module receives a request to verify the blockchain (or wallet) address from registration module. The request include information for the verification. The blockchain verification module generates a unique message for signing by the user. The message may include various information in the payload, including the name of the non-fungible token (NFT), a blockchain address for an owner wallet containing the non-fungible token (NFT), a target blockchain type, a target blockchain address, and a salt (e.g., a random nonce for enhanced encryption and recreating a signature) [Quirk: para 0046-0047]. When the information for the blockchain associated with the application exists in the metadata as determined, the application verifies the information in the metadata for that blockchain. The metadata may include the original message (e.g., in plain text, etc.) used for verification of the user for the blockchain associated with the application (e.g., the name of the non-fungible token (NFT), the blockchain address of the owner of the wallet containing the non-fungible token (NFT), the target blockchain type, the target blockchain address, salt, etc.), the signed message (e.g., encrypted signature, etc.), the target blockchain type, and the target blockchain address [Quirk: para 0058]. As such, one would be motivated to include “the nonfungible token comprising a header, the encrypted message, and a digital signature”, for verification of the user for the blockchain that includes verification data as metadata associated with an owner of the non-fungible token (NFT).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine Quirk with Osborn to teach “the nonfungible token comprising a header, the encrypted message, and a digital signature” for the reason to provide verification data as metadata associated with an owner of the non-fungible token (NFT) for the purpose of verification for the blockchain.
Claim 9: Osborn: para 0031, 0055 [verification, access/generate tokens (e.g., cryptographic tokens). The second blockchain operation record the cryptographic token to a blockchain and transmit to the blockchain node]; discussing the computer program product of claim 8, further comprising: an executable portion configured to generate a second EAT at the second node; an executable portion configured to perform a second encryption-aware verification process at a third node; an executable portion configured to verify the second EAT; and an executable portion configured to decrypt the message at the third node.
Claim 10: Osborn: para 0075, 0080 [a plurality of nodes for the blockchain network, records and/or monitors peer connections to other nodes and/or miners for the blockchain network]; discussing the computer program product of claim 8, wherein the first encryption-aware verification process comprises verifying a digital signature of the first EAT based on a public key of the first node.
Claim 11: Osborn: para 0022; discussing the computer program product of claim 9, wherein the digital signature of the first EAT is generated based on a private key of the first node.
Claim 12: Osborn: para 0028, 0080 [a blockchain node retrieve verification data from the cryptographic token, an identifier of the cryptographic token (e.g., a token address). Records and/or monitors peer connections to other nodes and/or miners for the blockchain network]; discussing the computer program product of claim 8, further comprising an executable portion configured to identify the second node based on a routing table of the first node.
Claim 13: Osborn: para 0028, 0080 [a blockchain node retrieve verification data from the cryptographic token, an identifier of the cryptographic token (e.g., a token address). Records and/or monitors peer connections to other nodes and/or miners for the blockchain network]; discussing the computer program product of claim 8, wherein the message comprises information identifying a target node.
Claim 14: Osborn: para 0055, 0079; discussing the computer program product of claim 13, further comprising an executable portion configured to decrypt the message at the target node.
As per claim 15: Osborn, et al. teaches a computer-implemented method for encryption-aware verification in a decentralized network, the method comprising:
encrypting a message at a first node; [Osborn: para 0079; Computing devices may then encrypt a message using an intended receiver's public key]
generating a first encryption-aware verification token (“EAT”) associated with the encrypted message [Osborn: para 0026; The cryptographic token may be associated with encrypted verification data encrypted using a public key associated with the cryptography-based storage application], wherein the first EAT comprises a nonfungible token recorded on a distributed ledger maintained on at least one authorized node [Osborn: para 0023; proving ownership/control of a particular cryptographic token (e.g., a non-fungible token) on a computer or another suitable user device (e.g., a smartphone, electronic tablet, etc.). A cryptographic token may be a token storing digital information (e.g., drawings, etc.) or value (e.g., monetary value), such as a fungible or non-fungible token. A cryptographic token may be written to a blockchain (e.g., minted on a blockchain) via a blockchain operation performed by a blockchain node. Para 0075; blockchain functions or operations include conducting transactions, querying a distributed ledger, generating additional blocks for a blockchain, transmitting communications-related NFTs, performing encryption/decryption, exchanging public/private keys, and/or other operations. The limitation “encryption-aware verification token (“EAT”)”, may broadly be in the form of a nonfungible token (or NFT) with associative encryption or cryptography] of the decentralized network [Osborn: para 0072; FIG. 7 shows a decentralized environment for performing blockchain functions or operations. Para 0076; blockchain functions or operations may also comprise actions related to mechanisms that facilitate other blockchain functions (e.g., actions related to metering activities for blockchain functions on a given blockchain network). For example, Ethereum, which is an open-source, globally decentralized computing infrastructure that executes smart contracts, uses a blockchain to synchronize and store the system's state changes],**the nonfungible token comprising a header, the encrypted message, and a digital signature; [**rejected under a secondary reference, discussion further below]
performing a first encryption-aware verification process at a second node; [Osborn: para 0028; Token processing subsystem transmit request to a blockchain node so that the blockchain node may retrieve verification data from the cryptographic token. The cryptographic token may be a data structure that has been written (e.g., minted) on the blockchain and the cryptographic token may be a non-fungible token (NFT). Para 0080; miner comprises a node in a blockchain network that facilitates blockchain functions by verifying blockchain functions or operations on the blockchain, adding new blocks to the existing chain, and/or ensuring that these additions are accurate. Thus, a second node can broadly be in the form of any of the nodes in the blockchain that performs an encryption-aware verification]
verifying the first EAT; and [Osborn: para 0031; token processing subsystem pass the encrypted verification data to verification subsystem to decrypt the encrypted verification data and verify authenticity of the data. For example, verification subsystem verify that the data is genuine. More examples on para 0044, 0075]
decrypting the message. [Osborn: para 0079; the encrypted message may be decrypted]
Ref, et al. suggests encryption-aware verification token or NFT [Osborn: para 0023, 0075]. However, Ref did not clearly teach “the nonfungible token comprising a header, the encrypted message, and a digital signature”.
Quirk, et al. discloses the blockchain verification module stores blockchain verification data as metadata associated with an owner of the non-fungible token (NFT). For example, the blockchain verification data may be stored on a blockchain as immutable metadata associated with a user profile of the owner of the non-fungible token (NFT). Blockchain verification module receives a request to verify the blockchain (or wallet) address from registration module. The request include information for the verification. The blockchain verification module generates a unique message for signing by the user. The message may include various information in the payload, including the name of the non-fungible token (NFT), a blockchain address for an owner wallet containing the non-fungible token (NFT), a target blockchain type, a target blockchain address, and a salt (e.g., a random nonce for enhanced encryption and recreating a signature) [Quirk: para 0046-0047]. When the information for the blockchain associated with the application exists in the metadata as determined, the application verifies the information in the metadata for that blockchain. The metadata may include the original message (e.g., in plain text, etc.) used for verification of the user for the blockchain associated with the application (e.g., the name of the non-fungible token (NFT), the blockchain address of the owner of the wallet containing the non-fungible token (NFT), the target blockchain type, the target blockchain address, salt, etc.), the signed message (e.g., encrypted signature, etc.), the target blockchain type, and the target blockchain address [Quirk: para 0058]. As such, one would be motivated to include “the nonfungible token comprising a header, the encrypted message, and a digital signature”, for verification of the user for the blockchain that includes verification data as metadata associated with an owner of the non-fungible token (NFT).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine Quirk with Osborn to teach “the nonfungible token comprising a header, the encrypted message, and a digital signature” for the reason to provide verification data as metadata associated with an owner of the non-fungible token (NFT) for the purpose of verification for the blockchain.
Claim 16: Osborn: para 0031, 0055 [verification, access/generate tokens (e.g., cryptographic tokens). The second blockchain operation record the cryptographic token to a blockchain and transmit to the blockchain node]; discussing the computer-implemented method of claim 15, further comprising: generating a second EAT at the second node; performing a second encryption-aware verification process at a third node; verifying the second EAT; and decrypting the message at the third node.
Claim 17: Osborn: para 0075, 0080 [a plurality of nodes for the blockchain network, records and/or monitors peer connections to other nodes and/or miners for the blockchain network]; discussing the computer-implemented method of claim 15, wherein the first encryption-aware verification process comprises verifying a digital signature of the first EAT based on a public key of the first node.
Claim 18: Osborn: para 0022; discussing the computer-implemented method of claim 17, wherein the digital signature of the first EAT is generated based on a private key of the first node.
Claim 19: Osborn: para 0028, 0080 [a blockchain node retrieve verification data from the cryptographic token, an identifier of the cryptographic token (e.g., a token address). Records and/or monitors peer connections to other nodes and/or miners for the blockchain network]; discussing the computer-implemented method of claim 15, further comprising identifying the second node based on a routing table of the first node.
Claim 20: Osborn: para 0055, 0079; discussing the computer-implemented method of claim 15, wherein the message comprises information identifying a target node and wherein the method further comprises decrypting the message at the target node.
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 Leynna Truvan whose telephone number is (571)272-3851. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 9:00AM-5:00PM, 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, Amir Mehrmanesh can be reached at 571-270-3351. 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.
Leynna Truvan
Examiner
Art Unit 2435
/L.TT/Examiner, Art Unit 2435
/AMIR MEHRMANESH/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2491