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 .
The Application number 18/724,507 filed on 6/26/2024 has been considered. Claims 1-17 and 19-21 are pending.
Priority
Acknowledgment is made of applicant’s claim for foreign priority under 35 U.S.C. 119 (a)-(d). The certified copy of Application No. CN202210754376.6, filed on 6/26/2024.
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted on 6/26/2024 is being considered by the examiner.
Claim Objections
Claim 8 is objected to because of the following informalities: As per claim 8, it appears there is a typographical error on line 6 “…and in response toat least one…”. Appropriate correction is required.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(b):
(b) CONCLUSION.—The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph:
The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the applicant regards as his invention.
Claims 5 and 21 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor (or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the applicant), regards as the invention.
Claim 5 recites the limitation "the constructed data structure". There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
Claim 21 recites the limitation "the supervision center". There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
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 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.
Claims 1-6, 8, 10-12 and 19-21 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) as being anticipated by Newman et al. (US 2021/0382860 hereinafter Newman).
Regarding claim 1, Newman discloses a blockchain monitoring method, applied to a monitoring node deployed in each of blockchains, comprising:
receiving rule information sent by a monitoring center, and determining a corresponding detection algorithm according to a detection means defined in the rule information (FIG. 1-4, ¶ [0029]-[0030], [0040]-[0047]; i.e. loading a list of one or more policies/rules for the blockchain being monitored wherein each of the policies/rules have one or more conditions/algorithms associated with one or more stored executable actions); and
acquiring on-chain block data, and performing detection on the on-chain block data by using the detection algorithm, so as to determine whether the on-chain block data meets a compliance condition defined in the rule information (FIG. 1-4, ¶ [0029]-[0030], [0040]-[0047]; i.e. analyzing one or more of the loaded policies/rules against data in the blockchain using the conditions/algorithms to determine whether the blockchain data meet the conditions/algorithms).
Regarding claim 2, Newman discloses the blockchain monitoring method according to claim 1, wherein the determining a corresponding detection algorithm according to a detection means defined in the rule information comprises: determining the corresponding detection algorithm from a detection algorithm pool deployed on the monitoring node according to the detection means defined in the rule information (FIG. 1-4, ¶ [0040], [0044]-[0047]).
Regarding claim 3, Newman discloses the blockchain monitoring method according to claim 1, wherein the performing detection on the on-chain block data by using the detection algorithm comprises: constructing a data structure corresponding to the detection algorithm, and performing detection on the on-chain block data by using the data structure (FIG. 4, ¶ [0040], [0071]-[0072]).
Regarding claim 4, Newman discloses the blockchain monitoring method according to claim 3, wherein the receiving rule information sent by a monitoring center comprises: receiving the rule information and change information sent by the monitoring center, wherein the change information represents difference information between the rule information received by the monitoring node this time and rule information received last time; and accordingly, the constructing a data structure corresponding to the detection algorithm comprises: determining a changed detection algorithm according to the change information, and updating the data structure based on the changed detection algorithm (¶ [0078]-[0086]).
Regarding claim 5, Newman discloses the blockchain monitoring method according to claim 1, wherein the performing detection on the on-chain block data by using the detection algorithm comprises: in a case where the monitoring node has already constructed the data structure, performing detection on the on-chain block data by using the constructed data structure (FIG. 1-4, ¶ [0044]).
Regarding claim 6, Newman discloses the blockchain monitoring method according to claim 1, after determining whether the on-chain block data meets the compliance condition defined in the rule information, comprising: in response to the on-chain block data not meeting the compliance condition, generating a corresponding non-compliance record according to a detection result, and sending the non-compliance record to the monitoring center, so that the monitoring center saves the non-compliance record in a local storage system (FIG. 1-4, ¶ [0042]-[0044]).
Regarding claim 8, Newman discloses the blockchain monitoring method according to claim 1, wherein the performing detection on the on-chain block data by using the detection algorithm, so as to determine whether the on-chain block data meets a compliance condition defined in the rule information comprises: performing detection on on-chain data and off-chain data of the on-chain block data by using the detection algorithm, respectively, and in response to at least one of the on-chain data and the off-chain data not meeting the compliance condition, determining that the on-chain block data does not meet the compliance condition (FIG. 1-4, ¶ [0029]-[0030], [0037]-[0040]).
Regarding claim 10, Newman discloses the blockchain monitoring method according to claim 8, comprising: sending the rule information to a monitoring agent software deployed at a preset position of each of block nodes in the blockchain where the monitoring node is located, so that each monitoring agent software determines the corresponding detection algorithm according to the detection means defined in the rule information, and performs detection on the on-chain data sent to a client by the block node where the monitoring agent software is located by using the detection algorithm, so as to determine whether the on-chain data meets the compliance condition defined in the rule information (FIG. 1-4, ¶ [0029]-[0030], [0071]-[0077]).
Regarding claim 11, Newman discloses the blockchain monitoring method according to claim 10, wherein the preset position comprises at least one running device of the block node or at least one device connected to an external network in a network where the block node is located (FIG. 1-4, ¶ [0029]-[0030], [0071]-[0077]).
Regarding claim 12, Newman discloses the blockchain monitoring method according to claim 11, wherein the determining whether the on-chain block data meets a compliance condition defined in the rule information comprises: determining whether at least one of the on-chain data and the off-chain data contains a target text defined in the rule information according to a detection result, and in response to at least one of the on-chain data and the off-chain data containing the target text, determining that at least one of the on-chain data and the off-chain data does not meet the compliance condition (¶ [0072]-[0086]).
Regarding claim 19, Newman discloses an electronic device, comprising a processor and a memory, wherein the memory is configured to store a computer program, and the computer program is loaded and executed by the processor to implement following actions (FIG. 1-4, ¶ [0029]-[0030]):
receiving rule information sent by a monitoring center, and determining a corresponding detection algorithm according to a detection means defined in the rule information (FIG. 1-4, ¶ [0029]-[0030], [0040]-[0047]; i.e. loading a list of one or more policies/rules for the blockchain being monitored wherein each of the policies/rules have one or more conditions/algorithms associated with one or more stored executable actions); and
acquiring on-chain block data, and performing detection on the on-chain block data by using the detection algorithm, so as to determine whether the on-chain block data meets a compliance condition defined in the rule information (FIG. 1-4, ¶ [0029]-[0030], [0040]-[0047]; i.e. analyzing one or more of the loaded policies/rules against data in the blockchain using the conditions/algorithms to determine whether the blockchain data meet the conditions/algorithms).
Regarding claim 20, Newman discloses a computer non-volatile readable storage medium, configured to store a computer executable instruction, wherein the computer executable instruction is loaded and executed by a processor to implement following actions:
receiving rule information sent by a monitoring center, and determining a corresponding detection algorithm according to a detection means defined in the rule information (FIG. 1-4, ¶ [0029]-[0030], [0040]-[0047]; i.e. loading a list of one or more policies/rules for the blockchain being monitored wherein each of the policies/rules have one or more conditions/algorithms associated with one or more stored executable actions); and
acquiring on-chain block data, and performing detection on the on-chain block data by using the detection algorithm, so as to determine whether the on-chain block data meets a compliance condition defined in the rule information (FIG. 1-4, ¶ [0029]-[0030], [0040]-[0047]; i.e. analyzing one or more of the loaded policies/rules against data in the blockchain using the conditions/algorithms to determine whether the blockchain data meet the conditions/algorithms).
Regarding claim 21, Newman discloses the blockchain monitoring method according to claim 1, wherein the rule information is stored on a disk of the supervision center in the form of a database or a file, and at least defines the detection means and the compliance condition (FIG. 1-2, ¶ [0036], [0043]).
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.
Claims 7 and 16-17 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Newman et al. (US 2021/0382860 hereinafter Newman) in view of Feng et al. (US 10,778,445 hereinafter Feng).
Regarding claim 7, Newman discloses the blockchain monitoring method according to claim 1.
Newman does not explicitly disclose wherein the performing a detection on the on-chain block data by using the detection algorithm comprises at least one of the following: performing sensitive word detection on the on-chain block data by using a text matching algorithm, wherein the compliance condition comprises that the on-chain block data does not contain specified sensitive words; and performing sensitive image detection on the on-chain block data by using an image detection algorithm, wherein the compliance condition comprises that the on-chain block data does not contain sensitive images.
However, Feng discloses wherein the performing a detection on the on-chain block data by using the detection algorithm comprises at least one of the following: performing sensitive word detection on the on-chain block data by using a text matching algorithm, wherein the compliance condition comprises that the on-chain block data does not contain specified sensitive words; and performing sensitive image detection on the on-chain block data by using an image detection algorithm, wherein the compliance condition comprises that the on-chain block data does not contain sensitive images (col. 9, lines 8-30, col. 10, lines 14-35).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine Newman and Feng in order to provide data security and prevent data leakage (Feng, col. 1, lines 18-45).
Regarding claim 16, Newman discloses the blockchain monitoring method according to claim 10, comprising: intercepting, by the monitoring agent software, a response data packet by means of a function hook [[and performing decryption on the response data packet]], wherein the response data packet containing the on-chain data is a response of the block node where the monitoring agent software is located to a data request of the client (FIG. 1-4, ¶ [0029]-[0030], [0037]-[0038]); and performing, by the monitoring agent software, parsing on the decrypted response data packet to perform detection on the parsed response data packet by using the detection algorithm (FIG. 1-4, ¶ [0029]-[0030], [0070]-[0077]).
Newman does not explicitly disclose performing decryption on the response data packet.
However, Feng discloses performing decryption on the response data packet (col. 9, lines 8-30).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine Newman and Feng in order to provide data security and prevent data leakage (Feng, col. 1, lines 18-45).
Regarding claim 17, Newman in view of Feng discloses the blockchain monitoring method according to claim 16, wherein the performing, by the monitoring agent software, parsing on the decrypted response data packet comprises: determining, by the monitoring agent software, a block protocol of the decrypted response data packet, and determining a corresponding block parsing module according to the block protocol, so as to perform parsing on the decrypted response data packet by using the block parsing module (Newman, ¶ [0070]-[0077]; Feng, col. 9, lines 8-30).
Claim 9 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Newman et al. (US 2021/0382860 hereinafter Newman) in view of Osborn et al. (US 2024/0005309 hereinafter Osborn).
Regarding claim 9, Newman discloses the blockchain monitoring method according to claim 8, before performing detection on the on-chain data and the off-chain data of the on-chain block data by using the detection algorithm, respectively, comprising: determining a data content of the on-chain block data (FIG. 1-4, ¶ [0029]-[0030], [0040]-[0047]) as the off-chain data, and determining a hash value of the data content and a Uniform Resource Identifier (URI) for acquiring the data content as the on-chain data.
Newman does not explicitly disclose determining the data content as the off-chain data, and determining a hash value of the data content and a Uniform Resource Identifier (URI) for acquiring the data content as the on-chain data.
However, Osborn discloses determining the data content as the off-chain data, and determining a hash value of the data content and a Uniform Resource Identifier (URI) for acquiring the data content as the on-chain data (FIG. 6-7, ¶ [0043]-[0047], [0084]-[0085]).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine Newman and Osborn in order to implement a variable non-fungible toke to allow accessing high volumes of off-chain data, minimizing security issues, maintaining high transaction speeds and preventing the network bottlenecks (Osborn, ¶ [0001]-[0005]).
Claims 13-15 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Newman et al. (US 2021/0382860 hereinafter Newman) in view of Khan et al. (US 2023/0297540 hereinafter Khan).
Regarding claim 13, Newman discloses the blockchain monitoring method according to claim 12.
Newman does not explicitly disclose after determining that at least one of the on-chain data and the off-chain data does not meet the compliance condition, comprising: in response to data that does not meeting the compliance condition comprises the off-chain data, adding a resource identifier corresponding to the off-chain data to the target text of the rule information, so that the monitoring agent software determines whether the on-chain data contains the resource identifier added to the target text according to the detection result, and in response to the on-chain data containing the resource identifier, determining that the on-chain data does not meet the compliance condition.
However, Khan discloses after determining that at least one of the on-chain data and the off-chain data does not meet the compliance condition, comprising: in response to data that does not meeting the compliance condition comprises the off-chain data, adding a resource identifier corresponding to the off-chain data to the target text of the rule information, so that the monitoring agent software determines whether the on-chain data contains the resource identifier added to the target text according to the detection result, and in response to the on-chain data containing the resource identifier, determining that the on-chain data does not meet the compliance condition (¶ [0033]-[0035], [0054]-[0056]).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before effective filing date of the claimed invention to combine Newman and Khan in order to reduce cost of data storage (Khan, ¶ [0012]-[0015]).
Regarding claim 14, Newman in view of Khan discloses the blockchain monitoring method according to claim 13, after determining that the on-chain data does not meet the compliance condition, comprising: performing, by the monitoring agent software, processing on the on-chain data that does not meet the compliance condition according to a processing means defined in the rule information, so that a corresponding block node sends a processed on-chain data to the client (Khan, ¶ [0033]-[0035], [0054]-[0056]) .
Regarding claim 15, Newman in view of Khan discloses the blockchain monitoring method according to claim 14, wherein the performing, by the monitoring agent software, processing on the on-chain data that does not meet the compliance condition according to a processing means defined in the rule information comprises: performing, by the monitoring agent software, processing on the on-chain data that does not meet the compliance condition according to at least one mask action defined in the rule information, wherein the mask action comprises at least one of the following: replacement, modification, and deletion (Khan, ¶ [0033]-[0035], [0054]-[0056]).
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to CHI D NGUY whose telephone number is (571)270-7311. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 9-5 ET.
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.
/C.D.N/Examiner, Art Unit 2435
/AMIR MEHRMANESH/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2435
Prosecution Insights