DETAILED ACTION
This is a non-final office action on the merits. The U.S. Patent and Trademark Office (the Office) has received claims 1 -80 in application 18/740,0112.
Claims 1-61 are cancelled.
Claims 62-80 are new.
Claims 62-80 are pending and have been examined on the merits.
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 .
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 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.
Claim(s) 62-80 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Wright et al. (WO2017145019 A1) hereinafter “Wright”, in view of Forbes, Jr. et al. (US20170358041 A1) hereinafter “Forbes, Jr.”.
Regarding Claims 62 and 80. Wright teaches (in BOLD):
computing validation data for validating integrity of the data;
Wright – hash of the contract (Abstract). The invention…controlling the visibility and/or performance of a contract. 'Visibility' may mean how and to whom the existence and/or contents of the contract are available or accessible (page 3, lines 27-29). a hash of the contract can be used as a look-up key for finding the contract (page 4, lines 6 and 7). The metadata may also store a hash (validation data) of the contract. The contract may be a smart contract (page 9, line 1).
creating a storage record including the data and writing the storage record to a first storage partition of the blockchain using a first smart contract of the blockchain; and
Wright - broadcasting a transaction to a blockchain (page 2, line 30). generating a script…and paying…to the script (page 3, lines 7-9).
creating a validation record including the validation data and writing the validation record to a second storage partition of the blockchain using a second smart contract of the blockchain;
Wright - The location of the store and the secure hash of that document may be stored for later use; creating a redeem script covering the contract document being secured, in a m of n multi-signature structure where: m is at least one; and n is m plus the number of metadata blocks (page 5, lines 4-9). generating a sub-contract derived from the contract (page 7, line 31). storing the sub-contract in or on the repository with a reference to the contract, and broadcasting a transaction to the blockchain comprising a script which includes the reference (page 8, lines 2-4).
creating a validation record including the validation data and writing the validation record to a second storage partition of the blockchain using a second smart contract of the blockchain;
Wright - generating a sub-contract derived from the contract (page 7, line 31). storing the sub-contract in or on the repository with a reference to the contract, and broadcasting a transaction to the blockchain comprising a script which includes the reference (page 8, lines 2-4).
wherein access to the first and second smart contracts is controlled based on respective first and second access permissions; and
Wright - Access to some or all of the contents of the contract may be restricted to at least one designated authorised party. In other words, authorisation may be required in order to access or view some or all of the contract (page 7, lines 6-8).
wherein the second smart contract allows access to validation records by one or more users in accordance with the second access permissions where said users are prevented from accessing the first smart contract in accordance with the first access permissions,
Wright – hash of the contract (Abstract). The invention…controlling the visibility and/or performance of a contract. 'Visibility' may mean how and to whom the existence and/or contents of the contract are available or accessible (page 3, lines 27-29). The metadata may also store a hash (validation data) of the contract. The contract may be a smart contract (page 9, line 1). it can be public knowledge that there is a contract between A and B, and this can be publicly verified, but anything other than its existence is restricted to authorised parties (page 9, line 32 and page 10, line 1).
Wright does not teach, however Forbes, Jr. discloses (in BOLD):
receiving, at a storage controller, data to be stored in the blockchain;
Forbes, Jr. - communication over a blockchain-based platform (Claim 1). The multiplicity of active grid elements…generate messages (data). The messages comprise energy related data and settlement related data. The energy related data of the multiplicity of active grid elements are based on measurement and verification sufficient as defined by the market or grid operator. The energy related data and the settlement related data are validated and recorded on a distributed ledger with a time stamp (¶ 0014). validating and recording the energy related data and the settlement related data on a distributed ledger with a time stamp (Claim 16).
creating a storage record including the data and writing the storage record to a first storage partition of the blockchain using a first smart contract of the blockchain; and
Forbes, Jr. - generate messages…messages comprise energy related data and settlement related data (Abstract). The multiplicity of active grid elements are operable to make peer-to-peer transactions based on their participation within the electric power grid by generating and executing a digital contract (¶ 0014). validating and recording…on a distributed ledger (Claim 16). The Power Broker creates the offer via a smart contract…and publishes the smart contract onto the blockchain.
wherein the storage controller writes the storage record to the first smart contract immediately but writes validation records to the second smart contract in batches.
Forbes, Jr. - The energy related data and the settlement related data are validated and recorded on a distributed ledger with a time stamp (Abstract). A settlement authority on the EnergyNet platform then detects the presence of a measurement event that matches a smart contract and clears the transaction with the next block creation. A power purchaser can sell multiple copies of the same data set to multiple power brokers (¶ 0266). The multiplicity of active grid elements are operable to generate messages autonomously and/or automatically within a predetermined time interval (¶ 0270).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skilled of the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify using a distinct smart-contract context with different access permissions of Wright to compute a cryptographic hash of each storage record and record a separate validation transaction/record containing that hash of Forbes, Jr. to reduce blockchain payload while persevering an immutable integrity check and enable third-party auditability without exposing raw consumer data.
Regarding Claim 63. The combination of Wright and Forbes, Jr. further discloses:
The method according to claim 62, wherein the blockchain comprises a smart contract for managing the access permissions.
Wright – hash of the contract (Abstract). The invention…controlling the visibility and/or performance of a contract. 'Visibility' may mean how and to whom the existence and/or contents of the contract are available or accessible (page 3, lines 27-29). The metadata may also store a hash (validation data) of the contract. The contract may be a smart contract (page 9, line 1). it can be public knowledge that there is a contract between A and B, and this can be publicly verified, but anything other than its existence is restricted to authorised parties (page 9, line 32 and page 10, line 1).
Regarding Claim 64. The combination of Wright and Forbes, Jr. further discloses:
The method according to claim 62, wherein the storage record further includes the validation data.
Wright – hash of the contract (Abstract). The invention…controlling the visibility and/or performance of a contract. 'Visibility' may mean how and to whom the existence and/or contents of the contract are available or accessible (page 3, lines 27-29). The metadata may also store a hash (validation data) of the contract. The contract may be a smart contract (page 9, line 1).
Regarding Claim 65. The combination of Wright and Forbes, Jr. further discloses:
The method according to claim 62, comprising at least one of: adding a transaction identifier to the validation record identifying the corresponding storage record; and adding a common transaction identifier to the storage record and validation record.
Wright - The location of the store and the secure hash of that document may be stored for later use; creating a redeem script covering the contract document being secured, in a m of n multi-signature structure where: m is at least one; and n is m plus the number of metadata blocks (page 5, lines 4-9). generating a sub-contract derived from the contract (page 7, line 31). storing the sub-contract in or on the repository with a reference to the contract, and broadcasting a transaction to the blockchain comprising a script which includes the reference (page 8, lines 2-4).
Regarding Claim 66.
The method according to claim 62, wherein the storage record comprises a plurality of data elements, the method comprising adding one or more, but preferably not all, of the data elements of the storage record to the validation record.
Wright – hash of the contract (Abstract). The invention…controlling the visibility and/or performance of a contract. 'Visibility' may mean how and to whom the existence and/or contents of the contract are available or accessible (page 3, lines 27-29). The metadata may also store a hash (validation data) of the contract. The contract may be a smart contract (page 9, line 1).
Regarding Claim 67.
The method according to claim 62, comprising encrypting one or both of the storage record and the validation record before storage, optionally using different encryption keys.
Wright - Standard Bitcoin features such as CheckLockTime Verify (CLTV) can allow the contract to have a formal, automated expiry at a point in the future. Use of the blockchain enables this expiry date to be a matter of secure (unalterable) public record. This concept, in combination with the use of multiple encryption keys described below, enables the CLTV model to automatically roll-on or renew the contract unless explicitly cancelled (page 14, lines 5-9).
Regarding Claim 68. The combination of Wright and Forbes, Jr. further discloses:
The method according to claim 62, comprising processing an energy supply transaction, wherein the received data relates to the energy supply transaction; wherein the data comprises one or more of: an identifier of an energy consumer; an energy consumption value indicating an amount of energy consumed by the energy consumer; a payment amount; and a payment reference.
Forbes, Jr. - Furthermore, specific applications for distributed energy resources, renewable energy, storage devices, electric vehicles, fuel cells or any supply or demand side technologies are provided in data centers and/or microgrids for military, government, business and residence. The present invention also provides power consumption control, management, messaging and settlements, mobile applications, web sites, marketing offers, optimal pricing for comparable energy plans, retail electric provider and direct consumer alternatives, network of power architecture, EnergyNet applications, software development kit(s), application program interfaces (APIs), service oriented architecture (SOA) also known as web services, application web-based storefronts, and combinations thereof (¶ 0011).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skilled of the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify using a distinct smart-contract context with different access permissions of Wright to compute a cryptographic hash of each storage record and record a separate validation transaction/record containing that hash of Forbes, Jr. to reduce blockchain payload while persevering an immutable integrity check and enable third-party auditability without exposing raw consumer data.
Regarding Claim 69. The combination of Wright and Forbes, Jr. further discloses:
The method according to claim 68, wherein processing the energy supply transaction comprises: obtaining consumption data specifying energy consumption by an energy consumer; determining a consumption value based on the consumption data and optionally based on past payment transaction data for the energy consumer; and creating payment transaction data based on the consumption value; wherein the data to be stored comprises the payment transaction data.
Forbes, Jr. - Furthermore, specific applications for distributed energy resources, renewable energy, storage devices, electric vehicles, fuel cells or any supply or demand side technologies are provided in data centers and/or microgrids for military, government, business and residence. The present invention also provides power consumption control, management, messaging and settlements, mobile applications, web sites, marketing offers, optimal pricing for comparable energy plans, retail electric provider and direct consumer alternatives, network of power architecture, EnergyNet applications, software development kit(s), application program interfaces (APIs), service oriented architecture (SOA) also known as web services, application web-based storefronts, and combinations thereof (¶ 0011).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skilled of the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify using a distinct smart-contract context with different access permissions of Wright to compute a cryptographic hash of each storage record and record a separate validation transaction/record containing that hash of Forbes, Jr. to reduce blockchain payload while persevering an immutable integrity check and enable third-party auditability without exposing raw consumer data.
Regarding Claim 70. The combination of Wright and Forbes, Jr. further discloses:
The method according to claim 62, comprising validating the storage record by a process comprising: retrieving the storage record including the stored data; re-computing the validation data from the stored data; retrieving the validation record corresponding to the storage record from the blockchain; comparing the re-computed validation data to the validation data in the retrieved validation record; and outputting a validation result in dependence on the comparison.
Wright - The location of the store and the secure hash of that document may be stored for later use; creating a redeem script covering the contract document being secured, in a m of n multi-signature structure where: m is at least one; and n is m plus the number of metadata blocks (page 5, lines 4-9). generating a sub-contract derived from the contract (page 7, line 31). storing the sub-contract in or on the repository with a reference to the contract, and broadcasting a transaction to the blockchain comprising a script which includes the reference (page 8, lines 2-4).
Regarding Claim 71. The combination of Wright and Forbes, Jr. further discloses:
The method according to claim 62, further comprising: transferring a plurality of storage records from a first entity to a second entity, the first entity having stored the storage records in a storage domain under control of the first entity and not accessible to the second entity, the storage domain comprising the first storage partition of the blockchain, the first entity further having stored validation records corresponding to the storage records in the second storage partition of the blockchain, the second storage partition of the blockchain accessible by both the first and second entities; retrieving, by the second entity, the validation records corresponding to the transferred storage records from the blockchain; and validating, by the second entity, the transferred storage records using the retrieved validation records.
Wright – hash of the contract (Abstract). The invention…controlling the visibility and/or performance of a contract. 'Visibility' may mean how and to whom the existence and/or contents of the contract are available or accessible (page 3, lines 27-29). The metadata may also store a hash (validation data) of the contract. The contract may be a smart contract (page 9, line 1).
Regarding Claim 72. The combination of Wright and Forbes, Jr. further discloses:
The method according to claim 71, wherein the first and second entities comprise respective first and second computer systems associated with respective first and second energy providers, and wherein the transfer and validation is performed by the second computer system associated with the second energy provider in response to a transfer of an energy consumer from the first energy provider to the second energy provider.
Forbes, Jr. - block payloads are used to transfer data across multiple distributed EnergyNet platforms. For example, meter read data is visible to the supplier of the power, and to whoever buys the power based on a smart digital contract. This enables customers (market participants) to know exactly what information is used for their transactions. The blockchain implementation of the smart contracts have a security via cryptography including but not limited to hashing, keys, and/or digital signatures (¶ 0250).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skilled of the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify using a distinct smart-contract context with different access permissions of Wright to compute a cryptographic hash of each storage record and record a separate validation transaction/record containing that hash of Forbes, Jr. to reduce blockchain payload while persevering an immutable integrity check and enable third-party auditability without exposing raw consumer data.
Regarding Claim 73. The combination of Wright and Forbes, Jr. further discloses:
The method according to claim 62, further comprising sending, by the storage controller, the storage record to the first smart contract and the validation record to the second smart contract, wherein the storage controller prioritizes the performance of the first smart contract.
Forbes, Jr. - Each settlement authority is required to have a computational rules engine capable of processing measurements by validating, verifying, and estimating any incomplete measurement and processing contracts by executing the rules in priority order as per contract terms (¶ 0267).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skilled of the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify using a distinct smart-contract context with different access permissions of Wright to compute a cryptographic hash of each storage record and record a separate validation transaction/record containing that hash of Forbes, Jr. to reduce blockchain payload while persevering an immutable integrity check and enable third-party auditability without exposing raw consumer data.
Regarding Claim 74. The combination of Wright and Forbes, Jr. further discloses:
The method according to claim 62, wherein the computing step comprises computing a hash value based on the data, the validation data comprising the hash value.
Wright – hash of the contract (Abstract). The invention…controlling the visibility and/or performance of a contract. 'Visibility' may mean how and to whom the existence and/or contents of the contract are available or accessible (page 3, lines 27-29). The metadata may also store a hash (validation data) of the contract. The contract may be a smart contract (page 9, line 1).
Regarding Claim 75. The combination of Wright and Forbes, Jr. further discloses:
The method according to claim 62, wherein the blockchain is a public blockchain.
Forbes, Jr. - The multiplicity of active grid elements…generate messages (data). The messages comprise energy related data and settlement related data. The energy related data of the multiplicity of active grid elements are based on measurement and verification sufficient as defined by the market or grid operator. The energy related data and the settlement related data are validated and recorded on a distributed ledger with a time stamp (¶ 0014). validating and recording the energy related data and the settlement related data on a distributed ledger with a time stamp (Claim 16).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skilled of the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify using a distinct smart-contract context with different access permissions of Wright to compute a cryptographic hash of each storage record and record a separate validation transaction/record containing that hash of Forbes, Jr. to reduce blockchain payload while persevering an immutable integrity check and enable third-party auditability without exposing raw consumer data.
Regarding Claim 76. The combination of Wright and Forbes, Jr. further discloses:
The method according to claim 62, wherein the first smart contract provides an interface to the first storage partition of the blockchain, and the second smart contract provides an interface to the second storage partition of the blockchain, wherein the first and second interfaces comprise respective code executable by the blockchain.
Wright – hash of the contract (Abstract). The invention…controlling the visibility and/or performance of a contract. 'Visibility' may mean how and to whom the existence and/or contents of the contract are available or accessible (page 3, lines 27-29). The metadata may also store a hash (validation data) of the contract. The contract may be a smart contract (page 9, line 1). it can be public knowledge that there is a contract between A and B, and this can be publicly verified, but anything other than its existence is restricted to authorised parties (page 9, line 32 and page 10, line 1).
Regarding Claim 77. The combination of Wright and Forbes, Jr. further discloses:
The method according to claim 76, wherein each smart contract operates on the blockchain, preferably by providing a means to write data to and / or read data from the blockchain.
Wright - The phrase "Underlying BTC value" refers to the bitcoin amount (BTC) attached to the transaction output. In the Bitcoin protocol every transaction output must have non-zero BTC amount to be considered valid. In fact, the BTC amount must be greater than a set minimum (known as 'dust') which, at the time of writing, is currently set to 546 satoshis. 1 bitcoin is defined as being equal to 100 million satoshis. As the bitcoin transactions are here used only as a means of facilitating an exchange of ownership, the actual underlying BTC amount is arbitrary: the true value lies in the contract specification. In theory every token could be carried by dust (page 30, lines 9-16).
Regarding Claim 78. The combination of Wright and Forbes, Jr. further discloses:
The method according to claim 77, wherein the blockchain is the Ethereum blockchain and each smart contract is an Ethereum smart contract.
Forbes, Jr. - FIG. 59 is a block diagram for the functions of an interconnection processing interface provided by an EnergyNet data platform. The interconnection processing interface enables a sales engineer for a DER provider, demand response, curtailment response provider, or renewable energy provider, or any assets deployed at transmission/distribution system level for electric power grids to facilitate interconnection requests and studies, system sizing and template, shopping and order adjustments, and interaction with the utility interconnect desk. The interconnection processing interface also provides a validation function wherein a sales engineer is unable to submit an incomplete system (¶ 0208).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skilled of the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify using a distinct smart-contract context with different access permissions of Wright to compute a cryptographic hash of each storage record and record a separate validation transaction/record containing that hash of Forbes, Jr. to reduce blockchain payload while persevering an immutable integrity check and enable third-party auditability without exposing raw consumer data.
Regarding Claim 79. The combination of Wright and Forbes, Jr. further discloses:
The method according to claim 62, wherein the first smart contract is specific to an energy provider and is deployed on a faster system than the second contract, the first contract providing faster transaction throughput than the second contract; and wherein the first storage partition of the blockchain is a private data partition and the second storage partition of the blockchain is a public data partition, the partitioning of the data being achieved based on a difference between the first and second access permissions.
Forbes, Jr. - EnergyNet delivers an “app store,” real-time communications, real-time financial transactions and data services to all power grid participants. EnergyNet is a market platform ecosystems with an “arm's length” interface to existing OT and IT systems. Real-time communication increases messaging and telecommunications exchange speed among grid elements, existing grid deployments, and intelligent management systems. Advanced settlements deliver rapid payments to market participants and settle transactions with energy markets in days instead of weeks (¶ 0141).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skilled of the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify using a distinct smart-contract context with different access permissions of Wright to compute a cryptographic hash of each storage record and record a separate validation transaction/record containing that hash of Forbes, Jr. to reduce blockchain payload while persevering an immutable integrity check and enable third-party auditability without exposing raw consumer data.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. Middleton et al. (US20170187535A1) - Devices, systems, and methods enabling parties with little trust or no trust in each other to enter into and enforce value transfer agreements conditioned on input from or participation of a third party, over arbitrary distances, without special technical knowledge of the underlying transfer mechanism(s), optionally affording participation of third-party mediators, substitution of transferors and transferees, term substitution, revision, or reformation, etc. Such value transfers can occur reliably without involving costly third-party intermediaries who traditionally may otherwise be required, and without traditional exposure to counterparty risk.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to CHRISTINA C whose telephone number is (571)270-7280. The examiner can normally be reached on Monday-Friday from 8am to 5pm.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Patrick Mcatee, can be reached at telephone number 571-272-7575. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300.
Information regarding the status of an application may be obtained from Patent Center. Status information for published applications may be obtained from Patent Center. Status information for unpublished applications is available through Patent Center for authorized users only. Should you have questions about access to Patent Center, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free).
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) Form at https://www.uspto.gov/patents/uspto-automated- interview-request-air-form.
/C.C.S./Examiner, Art Unit 3698
/PATRICK MCATEE/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3698