Response to Amendment
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 .
This action is responsive to amendment filed on 3/20/26 and 4/22/26. Claims 1-18 are now pending.
Abstract analysis: Claims 1, 13 and 17 have been reviewed for statutory subject matter and Abstract compliance. Claims 1 , 13 and 17 teach finding a loss of a resource/electricity in a distributed ledger on a plurality of devices and a retention period indicating a period for which the first user has held the resource, the loss of a resource being a remaining amount of a resource left unconsumed by users upon an expiration limit, and calculating a retention value being included in a retention index which is an index indicating involvement in retention of the resource, comprises integrating the method into a practical application of the distributed ledger.
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.
Claim(s) 1-16 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kade et al (USPN. 2020/0286164) in view of Leshner et al (USPN. 2021/0065300).
Regarding claims 1, 13 and 14, Kade discloses a management method, system and program performed by one of a plurality of devices included in a management system, the plurality of devices each holding a distributed ledger for managing a record of a consumption process in which a plurality of users including a first user and a second user consume a resource with an expiration limit, the management method comprising (figs. 1 and 4, item 400, 402 and 404, bank account 1 and back account 2, and reconciliation of ledgers, par. 191)):
storing first transaction data into the distributed ledger (par. 49, DB 180, using and storing transactions/resources and par. 191, reconciliation of ledgers) when the first user performs at least one of (i) consuming a first amount of a resource out of a predetermined amount of a resource with an expiration limit or (ii) handing a second amount of a resource out of the predetermined amount of the resource over to the second user, the first transaction data including a record of the at least one of the consumption and the handover by the first user (fig. 4, par. 81, barrowed resource balance implies an amount of resource barrowed between two entities, and how much of the barrowed resource has been used);
when a loss of the resource is found, (i) obtaining from the distributed ledger a start time when the first user began holding the resource and an end time when the first user stopped holding the resource (fig. 4, pars. 90-92, historical data on resource thru out the day comprises start and end time of a resource) and
ii) calculating a retention period based on the start time and the end time, the loss of the resource being a remaining amount of a resource left unconsumed by the plurality of users upon the expiration limit out of the predetermined amount of the resource, the retention period indicating a period for which the first user has held the resource (figs. 4 and 13, items 462 and 464 par. 185, “retention instruction may include both the reserved amount and the date of release, par. 187, the loss or remaining amount of a resource left see “to process a transfer…determine whether sufficient resources are available to process the transfer without having to use the resources reserved by the retention”, in combination with historical data, see step (i) above),
the retention period indicating a period from the start time when the first user received and began holding the resource until the end time when the first user consumed the resource or handed the resource over to the second user and stopped holding the resource (figs 4 and 6, pars 80-81, 99-100 and 185-187, borrowed resource balance and reserved borrowed resource amount 466 are managed and indicated in fig. 6);
calculating a retention value of the first user based on the remaining and the retention period, and outputting the retention value calculated (fig. 4, system 400, items 460, 462 and 466, borrowed resource limit, borrowed resources used and borrowed resource balance), the retention value being included in a retention which indicates involvement in retention of the resource (figs. 4 and 18, par. 270, “adjusting a current quantity of resources available (e.g., a current balance) to account for one or more of the expected transfers having associated value dates...”, and “the balance may be adjusted by adding an amount of resources associated with such expected transfers”, note that the balance is the retention value which indicates involvement for expected transactions during the specified dates). To the degree that Kade does not explicitly teach a retention index, maintaining a retention index is well known in the field of managing transactions/resources. One such system, Leshner, teaches a retention index (par. 33, an interest rate index is calculated using associated interest rate changes, Leshner). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the field at the effective filing date to integrate Leshner retention index to Kade financial system 400 by adding the retention index to Kade server (figs. 1 and 4, server 160 and system 400, Kade). One would have been motivated to integrate retention index with financial resources to improve financial resource tracking in real-time (par. 191, provide real-time tracking of transfer processing, Kade).
Regarding claim 2, Kade/Leshner combined teach calculating the loss of the resource by referring to the distributed ledger (par. 61, distributed ledger, Leshner) when the expiration limit is reached, wherein the retention value is calculated based on the loss of the resource and the retention period (pars. 185 and 187, retention instruction to prevent or permit use of borrowed resources, Kade).
Regarding claim 3, Kade/Leshner combined teach determining, according to an ordinal number in a sequence of the plurality of users to whom the predetermined amount of the resource has been handed over, a weight for each of the plurality of users who has obtained at least a part of the predetermined amount of the resource, wherein the retention value is calculated based on the weight determined for the first user, the loss, and the retention period (par. 33, index captures user operations on the resources, the operations have a positive or negative weight reflected in the interest rate increasing or decreasing as discussed in pars. 39 and 42, Leshner).
Regarding claim 4, Kade/Leshner combined teach wherein the weight is determined to be greater as the ordinal number increases (par. 33, index captures user operations on the resources, the operations have a positive influence reflected in the interest rate increasing in pars. 39 and 42, Leshner).
Regarding claim 5, Kade/Leshner combined teach, wherein the weight is determined to be greater as the ordinal number decreases (par. 33, index captures user operations on the resources, the operations causing decreasing the interest rate, see pars. 39 and 42, Leshner).
Regarding claim 6, Kade/Leshner combined teach determining a greater token for a higher level of the involvement in the retention of the resource that is indicated by the retention value and collecting the token from the first user (par. 32, incentivize liquidity, Leshner).
Regarding claim 7, Kade/Leshner combined teach wherein a first smart contract is stored in the distributed ledger (par. 61, distributed ledger, Leshner), the first smart contract being a smart contract for performing a process of adding 1 to a latest ordinal number in a sequence of the handover of the predetermined amount of the resource, the latest ordinal number being specified by referring to the distributed ledger, and the first smart contract is executed when the first transaction data is stored (par. 66, adding an asset to the pool of assets of a smart contract to the ledger comprises adding 1 to the sequence of the assets, Leshner, in addition, Kade and Leshner teach changing/adding to the resources available based on amount of borrowed resources and adjusting the limits, see fig. 4 and par. 186, Kade).
Regarding claim 8, Kade/Leshner combined teach wherein the first smart contract is a smart contract for further performing a process of determining whether a timestamp included in the first transaction data is beyond the expiration limit (par. 65, last updates, timestamp to last updates and other index values and conditions, Leshenr).
Regarding claim 9, Kade/Leshner combined teach, wherein a second smart contract for calculating the retention period and the retention value is further stored in the distributed ledger, and the second smart contract is executed when second transaction data is stored into the distributed ledger, the second transaction data including expiry information indicating that the expiration limit has been reached (par. 62, smart contracts are executed on blockchain, Leshner, note that Kade financial transactions transacted on multiple banks between at least two entities in view of Leshner smart contracts comprise multiple transactions and expiration limits such as resource limit 460, fig. 4, pars. 81-82, barrowed resource balance implies an amount of resource barrowed between two entities, and using other resource transactions such as borrowing and earmarked, Kade).
Regarding claim 10, Kade/Leshner combined teach,, wherein the resource of the predetermined amount is an object that deteriorates over time and when the expiration limit is exceeded, loses a predetermined function (par. 83, special processing conditions may defer processing which in fact may deteriorate the value/function of the resource based on currency/interest, Kade).
Regarding claim 11, Kade/Leshner combined teach, wherein the resource of the predetermined amount is a logical resource that expires when the expiration limit is exceeded (par. 169, processing condition for a resource may expire at 4pm, hence in some application the resource will not be processed, Kade).
Regarding claim 12, Kade/Leshner combined teach management method according to claim 1, wherein the retention value is calculated for each of the plurality of users. (par. 186, retention instruction is implemented by updating the reserved borrowed resource amount wherein various user screens are displayed to show the available resource amount, Kade).
Regarding claims 15 and 16, Kade/Leshner combined teach calculating the retention value includes, determining a sub-retention period for each of proportion of the resource held by the first user based on a time when the portion was handed over (fig. 4, system 400, items 460, 462 and 466, par. 270, borrowed resource limit, borrowed resources used and borrowed resource balance comprises sub retention period, Kade), and calculating for each of the protions, a sub-ratio based on (i) a proportion of the portion I entirety of the resource and (ii) a proportion of sub-retention period corresponding to the portion in a shelflife of the resource, summing up sub-ratios calculated for the portions, and calculating a retention period ratio of the first user, and the retention value of the first user is calculated on the remaining amount of the resource and the retention period ratio (figs. 4 and 6, par. 274, “ portion of borrowed resources available has been used up”, configuration parameters associated with user defined condition, wherein taking into account the resource, user sharing the resource and expiration, the resource availability is calculated and displayed on interface 600, Kade).
Kade/Leshner further teach determining a weight for the first user according to order in which the resource was handed over to the plurality of user, the retention value of the first user is calculated my multiplying the remaining amount of the resource by the retention period ratio and the weight (pars. 186-187, retention is determined and calculated in a way that does not permit or enable violation of the retention, ensures transfer can be completed, this is equated to giving a weight advantage to the first user to use the resource during his retention period over any other conflict such as other users during the retention time and amount, Kade).
Claim(s) 17-18 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kade et al (USPN. 2020/0286164) in view of Leshner et al (USPN. 2021/0065300), further in view of King et al (USPN. 2022/0121260).
Regarding claim 17, Kade discloses a management method performed by one of a plurality of servers included in a management system, the plurality of servers each holding a distributed ledger for managing a record of a consumption process in which a plurality of devices including a first device and a second device consume a resource with an expiration limit, the management method comprising (figs. 1 and 4, server 160, item 400, 402 and 404, bank account 1 and back account 2, and reconciliation of ledgers, par. 191 and par. 46, computing resources)):
(Note: first and second devices as claimed are equated to first and second users using a resource, respectively)
storing first transaction data into the distributed ledger (par. 49, DB 180, using and storing transactions/resources and par. 191, reconciliation of ledgers) when the first user performs at least one of (i) consuming a first amount of a resource out of a predetermined amount of a resource with an expiration limit or (ii) handing a second amount of a resource out of the predetermined amount of the resource over to the second user, the first transaction data including a record of the at least one of the consumption and the handover by the first user (fig. 4, par. 81, barrowed resource balance implies an amount of resource barrowed between two entities, and how much of the barrowed resource has been used);
when a loss of the resource is found, (i) obtaining from the distributed ledger a start time when the first user began holding the resource and an end time when the first user stopped holding the resource (fig. 4, pars. 90-92, historical data on resource thru out the day comprises start and end time of a resource) and
ii) calculating a retention period based on the start time and the end time, the loss of the resource being a remaining amount of a resource left unconsumed by the plurality of users upon the expiration limit out of the predetermined amount of the resource, the retention period indicating a period for which the first user has held the resource (figs. 4 and 13, items 462 and 464 par. 185, “retention instruction may include both the reserved amount and the date of release, par. 187, the loss or remaining amount of a resource left see “to process a transfer…determine whether sufficient resources are available to process the transfer without having to use the resources reserved by the retention”, in combination with historical data, see step (i) above),
the retention period indicating a period from the start time when the first user received and began holding the resource until the end time when the first user consumed the resource or handed the resource over to the second user and stopped holding the resource (figs 4 and 6, pars 80-81, 99-100 and 185-187, borrowed resource balance and reserved borrowed resource amount 466 are managed and indicated in fig. 6);
calculating a retention value of the first user based on the remaining and the retention period, and outputting the retention value calculated (fig. 4, system 400, items 460, 462 and 466, borrowed resource limit, borrowed resources used and borrowed resource balance), the retention value being included in a retention which indicates involvement in retention of the resource (figs. 4 and 18, par. 270, “adjusting a current quantity of resources available (e.g., a current balance) to account for one or more of the expected transfers having associated value dates...”, and “the balance may be adjusted by adding an amount of resources associated with such expected transfers”, note that the balance is the retention value which indicates involvement for expected transactions during the specified dates). To the degree that Kade does not explicitly teach a retention index, maintaining a retention index is well known in the field of managing transactions/resources. One such system, Leshner, teaches a retention index (par. 33, an interest rate index is calculated using associated interest rate changes, Leshner). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the field at the effective filing date to integrate Leshner retention index to Kade financial system 400 by adding the retention index to Kade server (figs. 1 and 4, server 160 and system 400, Kade). One would have been motivated to integrate retention index with financial resources to improve financial resource tracking in real-time (par. 191, provide real-time tracking of transfer processing, Kade).
To the degree that Kade in view of Leshner do not explicitly teach the computing resource is electricity (par. 47, Kade), computing systems commonly track and distribute electricity resource. One such system, King, teaches resources are electric resources (par. 98, “The event tracker manager 330 can update an event tracker maintained by the controller in response to routing the generated unit of power or energy. The event tracker manager 330 can include in the event tracker an event indicating the routing of the generated unit of power or energy from the source device to the destination device”, King). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the field at the effective filing date to implement electric resources to Kade/Leshner system comprising types of resources (par. 3, “Resources, such as computing resources including memory and processing power and other resources such as tokens or value stores, may sometimes be transferred at electronic systems”, Kade). One would have been motivated to monitor electricity/power resources to maintain load of devices (par. 117, “implement load shifting and/or peak shaving”, King).
Regarding claim 18, Kade in view of Leshner teach the subject matter of claim 1. Kade in view of Leshner do not explicitly teach the computing resource is electricity (par. 47, Kade). King, teaches resources are electric resources (par. 98, “The event tracker manager 330 can update an event tracker maintained by the controller in response to routing the generated unit of power or energy. The event tracker manager 330 can include in the event tracker an event indicating the routing of the generated unit of power or energy from the source device to the destination device”, King). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the field at the effective filing date to implement electric resources to Kade/Leshner system comprising types of resources (par. 3, “Resources, such as computing resources including memory and processing power and other resources such as tokens or value stores, may sometimes be transferred at electronic systems”, Kade). One would have been motivated to monitor electricity/power resources to maintain load of devices (par. 117, “implement load shifting and/or peak shaving”, King).
Kade, Leshner and King combined teach,
the management method,
acquiring an amount of electricity estimated to be used by the first user and determining, based on the amount of electricity estimated, an amount of electricity available to the first user as the predetermined amount of the resource (fig. 4, par. 81, barrowed resource balance implies an amount of resource barrowed between two entities, and how much of the barrowed resource has been used, modified Kade).
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 3/20/26 and 4/22/26 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive. See comments below.
Applicant alleges the amended features comprises “consumption by the first user or handing it over to the second user” and comprises the aspect of time not disclosed by the prior art.
Examiner disagrees. The updated action now reads,
“the retention period indicating a period from the start time when the first user received and began holding the resource until the end time when the first user consumed the resource or handed the resource over to the second user and stopped holding the resource (figs 4 and 6, pars 80-81, 99-100 and 185-187, borrowed resource balance and reserved borrowed resource amount 466 are managed and indicated in fig. 6)”.
Kade clearly discloses resource balance and reserved borrowed resource amount which has the data amounts of the resource usage compared to when the resource was acquired, the amount of the resource borrowed and the amount of the resource used, the balance. In addition, different resource activities are noted as depicted in figure 6. As such, this allegation is believed moot.
Applicant alleges the retention value now claimed is not taught by the prior art.
Examiner disagrees. The office action reads,
“calculating a retention value of the first user based on the remaining and the retention period, and outputting the retention value calculated (fig. 4, system 400, items 460, 462 and 466, borrowed resource limit, borrowed resources used and borrowed resource balance), the retention value being included in a retention which indicates involvement in retention of the resource (figs. 4 and 18, par. 270, “adjusting a current quantity of resources available (e.g., a current balance) to account for one or more of the expected transfers having associated value dates...”, and “the balance may be adjusted by adding an amount of resources associated with such expected transfers”, note that the balance is the retention value which indicates involvement for expected transactions during the specified dates). To the degree that Kade does not explicitly teach a retention index, maintaining a retention index is well known in the field of managing transactions/resources. One such system, Leshner, teaches a retention index (par. 33, an interest rate index is calculated using associated interest rate changes, Leshner). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the field at the effective filing date to integrate Leshner retention index to Kade financial system 400 by adding the retention index to Kade server (figs. 1 and 4, server 160 and system 400, Kade). One would have been motivated to integrate retention index with financial resources to improve financial resource tracking in real-time (par. 191, provide real-time tracking of transfer processing, Kade)”.
Kade in view of Leshner teach a borrowed resource balance (fig. 4, Kade). The combination teaches calculating the total borrow balance and updating the balance based on activities such as interest (pars. 34-38, Leshner). As such, this allegation is believed moot.
No additional allegations were submitted regarding new claims 17 and 18.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure in the field of distributed ledgers and resource consumption:
USPN. 20210216647 par. 43, fig. 1 and 3, ledger
USPN. 20210224827 Abstract
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to MARCIN R FILIPCZYK whose telephone number is (571)272-4019. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 7-4 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, Kavita Stanley can be reached at 571-272-8352. 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.
April 30, 2026
/MARCIN R FILIPCZYK/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2153
Prosecution Insights