DETAILED ACTION
Claims 1-20 are presented for examination.
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 § 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.
Claim 16 is 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 16 recites the terms “the at least one secondary user device” which lack antecedent basis. For the purpose of examination, claim 16 is interpreted as being dependent on claims 14 which provides antecedent basis for these terms.
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 1-3, 10-13 and 16-19 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Gilchrist et al (US Pub.No.2025/0293879).
Re Claim 1. Gilchrist discloses: a system for dynamically generating trusted networks for electronic devices, the system comprising: a memory device with computer-readable program code stored thereon; at least one processing device operatively coupled to the at least one memory device and the at least one communication device (i.e. a network architecture that avoids single points of failure, offers robust fault tolerance, and supports real-time adjustments in the face of compromised nodes…………….the processing system may validate exchanged cryptographic signatures to confirm secure and trusted interactions. In some embodiments, the processing system may establish secure connections through HSMs or secure enclave technologies configured to safeguard digital keys and sensitive data. In some embodiments, the processing system may be further configured to periodically verify connection security through cryptographic session integrity checks to detect potential compromise attempts) [Gilchrist, para.0344, 0371], wherein executing the computer-readable code is configured to cause the at least one processing device to: identify a data transmission attempt from a primary user device (i.e. the processing system may receive a transaction request including transaction data, the transaction data including a source location, a destination location, and a transaction amount………………the methods may include verifying the integrity of the source chain by validating cryptographic links within the source chain, each cryptographic link representing a verified relationship between the event record and other records in the source chain) [Gilchrist, para.0285, 0524]; analyze, by a generative artificial intelligent (AI) scanner (i.e. Specialized processors 126 (e.g., AI processors, neural processing units (NPUs), etc.) may execute inference (i.e., a process that is performed at runtime or during execution of the software application program corresponding to the machine learning algorithm) tasks for real-time pattern recognition, anomaly detection, decision-making, etc………………… multiple GPUs or tensor units process machine learning inference for anomaly detection…) [Gilchrist, para.0095, 0102, Note: AI processors that perform machine learning inference are interpreted as generative AI] and prior to allowing the data transmission attempt, the primary user device (i.e. the processing system may use a machine learning model to detect anomalies in transaction requests. For example, the processing system may isolate transactions flagged by the model for additional validation and prevent fraudulent activities or data corruption………..the processing system may be further configured to dynamically reallocate document segments from nodes identified as compromised or unresponsive)[Gilchrist, para.0291, 0341]; determine, by the generative AI scanner, at least one altered property is present on the primary user device (i.e. detecting the anomaly may include monitoring data interactions within the distributed computing system using the sensors, which includes identifying patterns associated with unauthorized data modifications. The detecting may further include analyzing the monitored data interactions using a machine learning model trained to detect deviations indicative of tampering or re-entrancy attacks) [Gilchrist, para.0450]; generate, based on the determination at least one altered property is on the primary user device, a root break alert interface component comprising a program identifier of the at least one altered property (i.e. detecting, by one or more sensors deployed within the distributed computing system, an anomaly indicative of a tampering attempt, the anomaly identified based on a deviation from predefined operational thresholds. The method may further include generating an alert in response to the detected anomaly, the alert including a reference to the memorialized event and the detected deviation) [Gilchrist, para.0445], (i.e. The threat alert generator 612 may be configured to generate alerts and notify administrators or automated systems of potential security incidents. The actuator 614 may be configured to implement corrective actions, such as isolating compromised nodes, terminating unauthorized processes, traffic throttling, node quarantining,) [Gilchrist, para.0243, Note: alert of unauthorized processes teaches root break alert]; and transmit the root break alert interface component to the user device (i.e. the processing system may generate an alert through a rules-based engine that scans ledger updates for unauthorized changes. In some embodiments, the processing system may forward alert notifications to designated incident responders or automated remediation service) [Gilchrist, para.0470].
Gilchrist does not disclose all the above in the same embodiment, however it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to combine the embodiments of Gilchrist since it is suggested by Gilchrist: the methods discussed in this application are presented as separate embodiments. While each method is delineated for illustrative purposes, it should be clear to those skilled in the art that various combinations or omissions of these methods, blocks, operations, etc. could be used to achieve a desired result or a specific outcome. It should also be understood that the descriptions herein do not preclude the integration or adaptation of different embodiments of the methods, blocks, operations, etc. from producing a modified or alternative result or solution [0637]. This motivation to combine the embodiments of Gilchrist applies to the dependent claims as well.
Re Claims 11 and 17. These claims recite features similar to those in claim 1 and therefore they are similarly rejected.
Re Claims 2, 12 and 18. Gilchrist discloses the features of claims 1, 11 and 17, Gilchrist further discloses: wherein executing the computer-readable code is further configured to cause the at least one processing device to: trigger a configuration of a graphical user interface of the user device based on the root break alert interface component (i.e. track usage patterns to detect suspicious behavior. In some embodiments, the processing system may include dashboards that visualize each event, sub-event link, or transaction log, allowing retrieval or reconstruction as needed) [Gilchrist, para.0523].
Re Claims 3, 13 and 19. Gilchrist discloses the features of claims 1, 11 and 17, Gilchrist further discloses: wherein executing the computer-readable code is further configured to cause the at least one processing device to: generate, by a generative AI based smart contract, a trusted network between the primary user device and at least one secondary user device (i.e. the methods may further include dynamically reassigning the transaction request ……………..dynamically routing the access requests to a node based on network performance metrics and node availability, and logging the access requests for auditing purposes …………………embedding validation rules in the smart contract, the validation rules specifying conditions for accessing or modifying the input dataset. In some embodiments, the methods may further include generating a visualization of encrypted segment distribution across the decentralized storage nodes, the visualization including active decentralized storage nodes, allocation details for encrypted segments, and status indicators for synchronization and availability of the nodes. In some embodiments, the methods may further include implementing security for the decentralized storage nodes by encrypting communications between the decentralized storage nodes,) [Gilchrist, para.0281, 0301-0302, Note: the smart contract of Gilchrist is based on the generative AI of Gilchrist as mapped in claim 1], wherein the at least one secondary user device is identified based on an association with the primary user device (i.e. the processing system may identify a region associated with the source location………… the processing system may route the transaction request to a set of distributed nodes associated with the identified region. For example, the processing system may query a node registry stored on the distributed ledger to identify nodes capable of local transaction processing within the geographic region) [Gilchrist, para.0286-0288, Note: the second device is selected from a region identified as the region of the primary/source device, therefore the identification of the second device is based on association with the primary device].
Re Claims 10 and 16. Gilchrist discloses the features of claims 3 and 14, wherein the at least one secondary user device is located remote from the primary user device (i.e. may dynamically reassign transactions to alternative regions in response to detecting network congestion or node failures in the originally identified region) [Gilchrist, para.0288].
Claims 4-6, 9, 14-15 and 20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Gilchrist et al (US Pub.No.2025/0293879) in view of Jakobsson et al (US Pub.No.2023/0004970).
Re Claims 4, 14 and 20. Gilchrist discloses the features of claims 3, 13 and 19, Gilchrist does not explicitly disclose whereas Jakobsson further discloses: wherein executing the computer-readable code is further configured to cause the at least one processing device to: automatically, from the primary user device to the secondary user device, transmit the data transmission attempt (i.e. The transaction can include a transfer of one or more tokens to another entity. In various embodiments, the transaction can be submitted by a transactor. A petition for reversal can be submitted. The petition for reversal can reference a transaction. Petitions for reversal can be submitted by a transactor that submitted the transaction or another entity such as (but not limited to) a trusted entity, a bounty hunter, a monitor, and/or another transactor. The petition can be submitted as a transaction on the blockchain. In some embodiments, the petition can include a transfer of tokens (e.g., cryptocurrency, NFT or other tokens) to an escrow smart contract. The transferred tokens can be considered part of a “stake”. Petitions in accordance with several embodiments of the invention can include one or more reasons describing why the associated transaction should be reversed, or reversed in part. Example reversal reasons can include (but are not limited to) one or more of: indications of fraud, indications of malware, indications of human error, a change in a market value of assets transferred in the transaction) [Jakobsson, para.0404]; and automatically, from the at least one secondary user device, transmit the data transmission attempt to an intended recipient device (i.e. An example of a process for a controlled transfer of a digital asset for value is conceptually depicted in FIG. 37. In various embodiments, the process can be executed by a smart contract or an escrow authority……………………….. evaluate the validity or probability of non-malicious actions associated with the transfer of the ownership of the digital asset. The result of the evaluation 3720 of the transfer results in the process approving or disapproving the transfer of the digital asset. The process 3700 can transfer (3740) the digital asset to the second entity based on the process 3700 approving the transfer) [Jakobsson, para.0430-0433, see also 0450, Note: the escrow of Jakobsson is mapped to the claimed secondary device and the second entity of Jakobsson is mapped to the claimed recipient device].
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify Gilchrist with Jakobsson because in case a malicious smart contract attempts to transfer ownership of a digital asset of the wallet, the transfer can only be done through an escrow authority to which the owner has associated, linked, connected or locked their wallet. In this way, the owner can be given the possibility to cancel the transfer once being aware of it taking place [Jakobsson, para.0428].
Re Claims 5 and 15. Gilchrist in view of Jakobsson discloses the features of claims 4 and 14, Gilchrist and Jakobsson further disclose: wherein the data transmission attempt transmitted from the primary user device is a Non-Fungible Token (NFT) (i.e. configured to support creating, managing, and exchanging digital tokens representing assets, access rights, or credentials. The tokenization platform may generate fungible tokens (e.g., ERC-20 currency tokens, etc.), non-fungible tokens (e.g., ERC-721 collectible tokens, etc.), and identity-linked tokens (e.g., custom credential tokens, etc.)) [Gilchrist, para.0079],
Jakobsson also discloses the above feature (i.e. The digital asset can be received from a first entity. The process can receive, with the digital asset, information describing the conditions for transferring the digital asset………… The digital assets can include an NFT) [Jakbosson, para.0431-0432, 0456].
The same motivation to modify with Jakobsson, as in claim 4, applies.
Re Claim 6. Gilchrist in view of Jakobsson discloses the features of claim 4, Gilchrist and Jakobsson further disclose: wherein the data transmission attempt transmitted from the at least one secondary user device to the intended recipient device is a Non-Fungible Token (NFT) (i.e. configured to support creating, managing, and exchanging digital tokens representing assets, access rights, or credentials. The tokenization platform may generate fungible tokens (e.g., ERC-20 currency tokens, etc.), non-fungible tokens (e.g., ERC-721 collectible tokens, etc.), and identity-linked tokens (e.g., custom credential tokens, etc.)) [Gilchrist, para.0079].
Jakobsson also discloses the above feature (i.e. The process 3700 can transfer (3740) the digital asset to the second entity based on the process 3700 approving the transfer………… The digital assets can include an NFT,) [Jakbosson, para.0433, 0456].
The same motivation to modify with Jakobsson, as in claim 4, applies.
Re Claim 9. Gilchrist discloses the features of claim 3, Gilchrist does not explicitly disclose whereas Jakobsson does: wherein the association between the at least one secondary user device and the primary user device comprises a pre-selection by a user account associated with the primary user device of an at least one secondary account associated with the at least one secondary user device (i.e. a user or owner of digital assets can associate, link, connect or lock their wallet holding the digital assets to one or more escrow authorities.) [Jakobsson, para.0428].
The same motivation to modify with Jakobsson, as in claim 4, applies.
Claims 7-8 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Gilchrist et al (US Pub.No.2025/0293879) in view of Kurian et al (US Pub. No.2023/0186309).
Re Claim 7. Gilchrist discloses the features of claim 3, Gilchrist uses geofencing (i.e. incorporate geofencing capabilities. For example, administrators may define geographic boundaries for token minting, transfer, or redemption) [Gilchrist, para.0168], however does not explicitly disclose whereas Kurian discloses: wherein the association between the at least one secondary user device and the primary user device comprises a near field geofence between the primary user device and the at least one secondary user device (i.e. in response to a user presenting the card device at a resource event apparatus (e.g., ATM, POS device or the like), first NFT-related information is received at the resource event apparatus from (i) the card device and/or (ii) a digital wallet/mobile device of the user. As previously discussed, presenting the card device at the resource event apparatus may include inserting, swiping or short-range wirelessly contacting (e.g., NFC or the like)) [Kurian, para.0079].
It would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to modify Gilchrist with Kurian because it allows dual authentication of both the card device and the user of the card device…… the distributed trust computing network is accessed to determine if a match exists between the user credential information and a user credential-specific NFT (i.e., whether a user credential-specific NFT exists for the user credential information) and, if so, whether the user credential-specific NFT is linked to the card-device-specific NFT. If a match and link is determined to exist, the user is deemed to be authenticated and allowed to process/conduct resource events and the resource event apparatus, while if no match or no link is determined to exist, the user is denied from processing further events at the resource event apparatus [Kurian, para.0008].
Re Claim 8. Gilchrist in view of Kurian discloses the features of claim 7, Kurian further discloses: wherein the near field geofence is based on at least one of short-range wireless communication, a Near Field Communication (NFC), or Radio Frequency Identification (RFID) (i.e. in response to a user presenting the card device at a resource event apparatus (e.g., ATM, POS device or the like), first NFT-related information is received at the resource event apparatus from (i) the card device and/or (ii) a digital wallet/mobile device of the user. As previously discussed, presenting the card device at the resource event apparatus may include inserting, swiping or short-range wirelessly contacting (e.g., NFC or the like)) [Kurian, para.0079].
The same motivation to modify with Kurian, as in claim 7, applies.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to NOURA ZOUBAIR whose telephone number is (571)270-7285. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday.
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.
/NOURA ZOUBAIR/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2434