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 .
DETAILED ACTION
This Office Action is in response to the Amendment filed on 02/05/2026.
In the instant Amendment, claims 1, 8-10, 12, 15 17 and 20 have been amended; claims 7, 13 and 18 have been cancelled and claims 1, 11 and 16 are independent claims. Claims 1-6, 8-12, 14-17 and 19-20 have been examined and are pending. This Action is made FINAL.
Response to Arguments
Applicants’ arguments in the instant Amendment, filed on 02/05/2026, with respect to limitations listed below, have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
Applicant’s arguments: For example, amended claim 1 recites, among other things, that "the timing for the request is after the authorization response has been generated." However, neither Chu nor Sato discloses, teaches, or suggests at least these elements. Thus, Applicant respectfully submits that independent claim 1, as amended.
The Examiner disagrees with the Applicants. The Examiner respectfully submits that the combination of Chu and Sato does disclose the timing for the request is after the authorization response has been generated. As seen in paragraphs 0032-0036 of Chu. Chu teaches that wherein the data tag storage module is configured to provide and store management tags for data in the smart contract and the management tags comprise data management limits of authority, management times and time thresholds; After passing the signature verification, reading the data to be managed, and locating the management tags of target data corresponding to the data to be managed in the smart contract; When the data management limits of authority are forbidden, terminating the actions. When the time thresholds have been reached, terminating the actions, otherwise executing renewing operations for the target data based on the data to be managed, and updating the management times in the management tags. Therefore, the combination of the combination of Chu and Sato does disclose the timing for the request is after the authorization response has been generated.
Independent claims 12 and 17 are directed to a non-transitory computer readable medium and system respectively that perform a method at least similar to that disclosed in claim 1 and claims 2-6, 8-11, 14-16 and 19-20 depend from claims 1, 12 and 17. Thus Applicants’ arguments with respect to claims 1-6, 8-12, 14-17 and 19-20, have been fully considered but they are not persuasive for at least the reasons explained above with respect to claim 1.
Thus, the amended limitations are still obvious over the prior art of record. Please see amended rejection below for the amended rejection.
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 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 of this title, 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 1-6, 8, 12 and 17 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Chu (US 2024/0214214) and in view of Sato (US 2018/0253482).
Regarding claim 1, Chu discloses a method comprising:
receiving, by a computer system, an authorization request from a user device (Chu par. 0077; The smart contract module is configured to receive the at least one data management request, generate the validation data and transmit to the data management terminal, and verify signature of received signature data and execute corresponding management operations. See also par. 0027);
determining, by the computer system, whether authorization data, stored in a cache of the computer system, complies with a timing threshold (Chu par. 0078-0079; executing timeliness verification for the validation data. When the timeliness verification of the validation data is failed, terminating the actions, otherwise, executing tag verification for the data in the smart contract); and
in accordance with a determination that the authorization data stored in the cache complies with the timing threshold (Chu par. 0079; When the timeliness verification of the validation data is failed, terminating the actions, otherwise, executing tag verification for the data in the smart contract):
generating, by the computer system, an authorization response (Chu par. 0079; When the timeliness verification of the validation data is failed, terminating the actions, otherwise, executing tag verification for the data in the smart contract); and
requesting, by the computer system, updated authorization data corresponding to the authorization data that does not comply with the timing threshold (Chu par. 0034-0036; When the time thresholds have been reached, terminating the actions, otherwise executing renewing operations for the target data based on the data to be managed, and updating the management times in the management tags. Preferably, the validation data generated by the smart contract module are randomly generated codes. Wherein rendering timeliness management to the validation data is to provide time stamps and predetermined time thresholds for the codes currently generated) by:
determining, by the computer system, a timing for the request for retrieving the updated authorization data from a metadata store (Chu par. 0034; Reading the management times, when the time thresholds have been reached, terminating the actions, otherwise executing renewing operations for the target data based on the data to be managed, and updating the management times in the management tags), wherein the timing for the request is after the authorization response has been generated (Chu par. 0032-0036; wherein the data tag storage module is configured to provide and store management tags for data in the smart contract and the management tags comprise data management limits of authority, management times and time thresholds; After passing the signature verification, reading the data to be managed, and locating the management tags of target data corresponding to the data to be managed in the smart contract; When the data management limits of authority are forbidden, terminating the actions. When the time thresholds have been reached, terminating the actions, otherwise executing renewing operations for the target data based on the data to be managed, and updating the management times in the management tags).
implementing, by the computer system, a lock configured to block subsequent requests for the updated authorization data (Chu par. 0078-0079; executing timeliness verification for the validation data. When the timeliness verification of the validation data is failed, terminating the actions, otherwise, executing tag verification for the data in the smart contract);
executing, by the computer system, the request for the updated authorization data according to the timing (Chu par. 0071; Reading the management times, when the time thresholds have been met terminating the actions, otherwise, executing renewing operations for the target data based on the data to be managed and renewing the management times in the data management tags).
Chu teaches, requesting, by the computer system, updated authorization data corresponding to the authorization data that does not comply with the timing threshold (Chu par. 0034-0036). However, Chu does not explicitly disclose storing, by the computer system, the updated authorization data in the cache.
However, in an analogous art, Sato teaches storing, by the computer system, the updated authorization data in the cache (Sato, par. 0110 and 0031; In step S1109, the MFP firmware 510 acquires the last update time from the synchronization control management file 514 and thereafter stores the acquired value in the RAM 203, and the processing proceeds to step S1110. The RAM 303 is an example of a cache memory of the setting value management server 120).
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 the teachings of Sato with the method and system of Chu, wherein storing, the updated authorization data in the cache to provide users with a means for acquisition of updated data on setting information about the client apparatus that is stored in a device of the server apparatus (Sato abstract).
Regarding claim 2, Chu and Sato disclose the method of claim 1,
Chu further discloses wherein the authorization request is for accessing data associated with a user device (Chu par. 0057-0059; A data security management method of smart contracts based on block chain network. Triggering a data management request, establishing communication in the block chain network; calling the smart contract to generate validation data, rendering timeliness management to the validation data and sending the validation data to a data management request end).
Regarding claim 3, Chu and Sato disclose the method of claim 2,
Chu further discloses further comprising: generating, by the computer system, an authorization response (Chu par. 0079; When the timeliness verification of the validation data is failed, terminating the actions, otherwise, executing tag verification for the data in the smart contract).
Regarding claim 4, Chu and Sato disclose the method of claim 3,
Chu further discloses further comprising: approving, by the computer system, access to the requested data according to the updated authorization data (Chu par. 0079; When the timeliness verification of the validation data is failed, terminating the actions, otherwise, executing tag verification for the data in the smart contract).
Regarding claim 5, Chu and Sato disclose the method of claim 3,
Chu further discloses further comprising: denying, by the computer system, access to the requested data according to the updated authorization data (Chu par. 0079; When the timeliness verification of the validation data is failed, terminating the actions, otherwise, executing tag verification for the data in the smart contract).
Regarding claim 6, Chu and Sato disclose the method of claim 5,
Chu further discloses further comprising: in accordance with a determination that the authorization data stored in the cache does comply with the timing threshold: generating, by the computer system, an authorization response (Chu par. 0034; Reading the management times, when the time thresholds have been reached, terminating the actions, otherwise executing renewing operations for the target data based on the data to be managed, and updating the management times in the management tags).
Regarding claim 8, Chu and Sato disclose the method of claim 1,
Chu further discloses further comprising: determining, by the computer system, that an authorization service is down (Chu par. 0079; When the timeliness verification of the validation data is failed, terminating the actions, otherwise, executing tag verification for the data in the smart contract).
Regarding claim 12; claim 12 is directed to a non-transitory computer readable medium associated with the method claimed in claim 1. Claim 12 is similar in scope to claim 1, and is therefore rejected under similar rationale respectively.
Regarding claim 17; claim 17 is directed to a computer system associated with the method claimed in claim 1. Claim 17 is similar in scope to claim 1, and is therefore rejected under similar rationale respectively.
Claims 11 and 16 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Chu (US 2024/0214214), in view of Sato (US 2018/0253482) and further in view of Motarwar (US 2015/0306504).
Regarding claim 11, Chu and Sato disclose the method of claim 1,
Chu and Sato failed to disclose but Motarwar discloses the method further comprising: generating, by the computer system, a hash key for the request; and tracking, by the computer system, the hash key (Motarwar par. 0051; The system may generate a unique hash key in order to trace and keep track of the user's activity throughout the system. In one aspect, the hash key may correspond to the user's ID, since each user ID also is unique, although the hash key may be a separate value entirely. Each hash key may be stored in a list that may be accessible by each of the system components in order to trace, analyze, and organize user activity data).
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 the teachings of Motarwar with the method and system of Chu and Sato, wherein generating, by the computer system, a hash key for the request; and tracking, by the computer system, the hash key in order to trace and keep track of the user's activity throughout the system (Motarwar par. 0051).
Regarding claim 16; claim 16 is directed to a non-transitory computer readable medium associated with the method claimed in claim 11. Claim 16 is similar in scope to claim 11, and is therefore rejected under similar rationale respectively.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 9-10, 14-15 and 19-20 objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, but would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
Conclusion
THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. 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 SANCHIT K SARKER whose telephone number is (571)270-7907. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 8:30 AM-5:30 PM.
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, FARID HOMAYOUNMEHR can be reached at 571-272-3739. 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.
/SANCHIT K SARKER/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2495