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 .
Claims 1-22 are presented for examination.
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)(1) the claimed invention was patented, described in a printed publication, or in public use, on sale, or otherwise available to the public before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
(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 1-11 and 19-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1)/(a)(2) as being anticipated by EJOBE et al, US 2023/0088566 A1.
Regarding claims 1, 19 and 20, EJOBE teaches reducing size of a blockchain, comprising steps of:
a) providing a series of data files (0034: the data is simply written to a file as a series of data records and/or data elements (e.g., as used in fixed-format file or a self-describing data file such as an XML-style file));
b) generating, at a time interval, a series of processed files based on filtering and/or aggregation of the series of data files (Fig. 1, aggregator system 100 and paragraph 0034. FIG. 10, a smart contract memorializes the length of time that the data can be used (as specified in the “validuntilatleast” field) and an acknowledgment of what data fields the data consumer device 140 is going to be receiving);
c) for each one of the series of processed files, computing a hash value;
d) adding the hash values respectively as blocks to a blockchain (0034: a cryptographic digest of the data (such as a hash) is written to a distributed ledger instead to provide accountability of the data as received from the user device and/or as transferred to data consumer devices); and e) storing the series of processed files off the blockchain (0034: a record number or record pointer identifying a record in an off-ledger data storage (e.g., a database) is written to the distributed ledger to provide accountability of the data as received from the user device and/or as transferred to data consumer devices.).
Regarding claim 2, EJOBE teaches the computer-implemented method of claim 1, wherein the series of data files are network resource log files of a cellular network (0023: When the at least one data aggregator system 100 “obtains” data from any one of the user devices 120, the at least one data aggregator system 100 may receive the data through any form of data transfer, including, but not limited to receiving the data using a wired communication (e.g., serial-based communication such as USB or Ethernet) or a wireless communication (e.g., using radio frequency (RF) communication (such as Wi-Fi (under any of the 802.11 families of standards), mesh, cellular, and/or wireless Local Area Network (WLAN) communication), infrared (IR) communication, or other light-based communication).).
Regarding claim 3, EJOBE teaches the computer-implemented of method claim 2, wherein the series of processed files are related to performance requirement for a Service Level Agreement (SLA) of the cellular network in a proof period (0022: a user may use a user device 120 to log into or otherwise interact with a remotely provided service (e.g., a web-based service)).
Regarding claim 4, EJOBE teaches the computer-implemented method of claim 3, wherein the proof period is equal to a length of the time interval (0038 and FIG. 10, a smart contract memorializes the length of time that the data can be used (as specified in the “validuntilatleast” field) and an acknowledgment of what data fields the data consumer device 140 is going to be receiving.).
Regarding claim 5, EJOBE teaches the computer-implemented method of claim 1, wherein a number of the processed files in the series of the processed files, is smaller than a number of the data files in the series of the data files (0021: the data aggregator system can determine, in response to the correlating, that the data consumer device is a participant in at least one of a threshold number and/or a threshold percentage of smart contracts.).
Regarding claim 6, EJOBE teaches the computer-implemented method of claim 3, wherein one of the series of processed files is an aggregation of two of the series of the data files which are associated with the performance requirement (0034: accessible either directly using by reading from/writing to the database or through a database manager (including a database manager that performs network accesses, including reads and writes, to at least one remote database).).
Regarding claim 7, EJOBE teaches the computer-implemented method of claim 3, wherein the blockchain further comprises, beside the hash values, a block being a record of the SLA (0041: using smart contracts, prior to transfer T430, one or more smart contracts for the shared data are written to a distributed ledger or blockchain to record the agreed upon conditions for the data sharing.).
Regarding claim 8. The, EJOBE teaches the computer-implemented method of claim 7, wherein the record of the SLA comprises the performance requirement, the proof period, a period of the SLA, and an SLA record retention date (0048: (2c) the expiration of the use of the data is in the date range of <Date1>-<Date2>; and (3) otherwise block the request from being passed on to the user.).
Regarding claim 9, EJOBE teaches the computer-implemented method of claim 1, wherein in Step d) the hash values are sequentially added to the blockchain at the time interval (0034: a cryptographic digest of the data (such as a hash) is written to a distributed ledger instead to provide accountability of the data as received from the user device and/or as transferred to data consumer devices.).
Regarding claim 10, EJOBE teaches the computer-implemented method of claim 2, wherein the blockchain is accessible by a provider and a tenant of network resource (0034: the data is stored in at least one record in a database (or in plural databases that are local and/or remote) accessible either directly using by reading from/writing to the database or through a database manager (including a database manager that performs network accesses, including reads and writes, to at least one remote database). In another alternate embodiment, the data elements when stored by the at least one data aggregator system 100 are written (in encrypted form) to a distributed ledger (e.g., using a blockchain) to provide accountability of the data as received from the user device and/or as transferred to data consumer devices.).
Regarding claim 11, EJOBE teaches the computer-implemented method of claim 10, wherein Step e) further comprises: f) providing, by the blockchain, the hash values to the provider; g) storing, by the provider, the hash values associated their respective processed files in a database (0034: when stored by the at least one data aggregator system 100 are written (in encrypted form) to a distributed ledger (e.g., using a blockchain) to provide accountability of the data as received from the user device and/or as transferred to data consumer devices. In a further alternate embodiment, a cryptographic digest of the data (such as a hash) is written to a distributed ledger instead to provide accountability of the data as received from the user device and/or as transferred to data consumer devices.).
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 12-18 and 21-22 are allowed.
Reasons for allowance will be furnished at time of allowance of the application.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to AUBREY H WYSZYNSKI whose telephone number is (571)272-8155. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 9-5.
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, KAMBIZ ZAND can be reached at 571-272-3811. 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.
/AUBREY H WYSZYNSKI/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2434