DETAILED ACTION
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 .
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.
Status of Claims
The following is a non-final, first office action in response to the communication filed on 07/09/2024.
Claims 1-18 are currently pending.
Claims 1-18 have been examined.
Application Data Sheet
The application data sheet filed 07/09/2024 appears to be missing a proper address for a listed inventor. Submission of a corrected application data sheet is required.
Claim Objections
Claims 9 and 18 are objected to because of the following informalities: The claims currently recite “. . . wherein the data identifying at least a make and model is data identifying at least one of: 1) make and model and 2) a blockchain that is dedicated to a particular make, certain makes, certain makes and certain models, make and model, specific sets of Vehicle Identification Numbers (VINs),” which the examiner notes appears to be missing a conjunction for the second list “. . . 2) a blockchain that is dedicated to a particular make, certain makes, certain makes and certain models, make and model, specific sets of Vehicle Identification Numbers (VINs),” and recommends updating to “. . . 2) a blockchain that is dedicated to a particular make, certain makes, certain makes and certain models, make and model, or specific sets of Vehicle Identification Numbers (VINs),” or “. . . 2) a blockchain that is dedicated to a particular make, certain makes, certain makes and certain models, make and model, and specific sets of Vehicle Identification Numbers (VINs),” as appropriate to avoid indefiniteness issues under 35 U.S.C. § 112(b). For the purposes or examination, the examiner is interpreting the claims to mean “. . . 2) a blockchain that is dedicated to a particular make, certain makes, certain makes and certain models, make and model, or specific sets of Vehicle Identification Numbers (VINs).” Appropriate correction is required.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 101
35 U.S.C. 101 reads as follows:
Whoever invents or discovers any new and useful process, machine, manufacture, or composition of matter, or any new and useful improvement thereof, may obtain a patent therefor, subject to the conditions and requirements of this title.
Claims 1-18 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 101 because the claimed invention is directed to an abstract idea without significantly more. The claims recite the judicial exception of a mental process. This judicial exception is not integrated into a practical application, nor do the claims include additional elements that are sufficient to amount to significantly more than the judicial exception.
Step 1: Yes, the claims are drawn to one or more statutory categories.
Step 1 of the Subject Matter Eligibility Test entails considering whether the claimed subject
matter falls within the four statutory categories of patentable subject matter identified by 35
U.S.C. 101: Process, machine, manufacture, or composition of matter.
Claims 1-9 are directed toward a method (i.e., process) with at least one step and claims 10-18 are directed toward a system (i.e., a machine).
Step 2A Prong 1: Yes, the claims recite an abstract idea.
If the claim recites a statutory category of invention, the claim requires further analysis
in Step 2A. Step 2A of the Subject Matter Eligibility Test is a two-prong inquiry. In Prong One,
examiners evaluate whether the claim recites a judicial exception.
Claim 1 recites abstract limitations, including those in bold below.
A method for data exchange between vehicles using blockchain, comprising:
storing, in a memory of a computing device in a first vehicle, a blockchain comprised of a plurality of blocks;
broadcasting, by a transmitter of the computing device in the first vehicle, an identification signal, the identification signal including data identifying at least a make and model of the first vehicle;
receiving, by a receiver of the computing device in the first vehicle, updated blockchain data from a second vehicle, the updated blockchain data including one or more new blocks for the blockchain;
updating, by a processor of the computing device in the first vehicle, the stored blockchain based on the updated blockchain data;
determining, by the processor of the computing device in the first vehicle, that the updated blockchain data includes a new blockchain data entry including a notification associated with the make and model of the first vehicle; and
transmitting, by the transmitter of the computing device in the first vehicle, the notification to a user interface device causing the user interface device to display the notification to a user.
These limitations, as drafted, are simple processes that, under their broadest reasonable interpretation, cover performance in the human mind. For example, the claim encompasses looking at data being added to a blockchain that includes a notification associated with a vehicle’s make and model and making a simple mental determination that the data is new. The claim does not recite anything that precludes it from the mental process grouping.
Step 2A Prong 2: No, the claims do not recite additional elements that integrate the judicial exception into a practical application.
If the claim recites a judicial exception in step 2A Prong One, the claim requires further
analysis in step 2A Prong Two. In step 2A Prong Two, examiners evaluate whether the claim
recites additional elements that integrate the exception into a practical application of that
exception.
Claim 1 recites additional element limitations, including those underlined below.
A method for data exchange between vehicles using blockchain, comprising:
storing, in a memory of a computing device in a first vehicle, a blockchain comprised of a plurality of blocks;
broadcasting, by a transmitter of the computing device in the first vehicle, an identification signal, the identification signal including data identifying at least a make and model of the first vehicle;
receiving, by a receiver of the computing device in the first vehicle, updated blockchain data from a second vehicle, the updated blockchain data including one or more new blocks for the blockchain;
updating, by a processor of the computing device in the first vehicle, the stored blockchain based on the updated blockchain data;
determining, by the processor of the computing device in the first vehicle, that the updated blockchain data includes a new blockchain data entry including a notification associated with the make and model of the first vehicle; and
transmitting, by the transmitter of the computing device in the first vehicle, the notification to a user interface device causing the user interface device to display the notification to a user.
The storage, broadcasting, receipt, and update of data are recited at a high level of generality and amount to no more than insignificant pre-solution activity.
The blockchain data structure, memory, transmitter, receiver, and processor merely describe how to generally “apply” the otherwise insignificant extra-solution activity or mental process steps using generic components. The data structure and components are recited at a high level of generality and merely serve as a means for performing the functions and steps as described.
The transmission and display of a notification are recited at a high level of generality and amount to no more than insignificant post-solution activity.
The additional elements fail to integrate the judicial exception into a practical application (see MPEP 2106.05(g)) because they merely provide insignificant extra-solution activity or serve as generic means to apply the otherwise abstract idea.
Step 2B: No, the additional elements of these claims do not amount to significantly more than the judicial exception.
If the additional elements do not integrate the exception into a practical application in
step 2A Prong Two, then the claim is directed to the recited judicial exception, and requires
further analysis under Step 2B to determine whether they provide an inventive concept (i.e.,
whether the additional elements amount to significantly more than the exception itself).
As discussed above, the storage, broadcasting, receipt, and update of data amount to no more than insignificant extra-solution activity and are recited at a high level of generality. The data transmission and storage practices as described in the claim are well-understood, routine, and conventional in the art.
As discussed above, the blockchain data structure additional element amounts to mere instructions to apply the exception. Blockchain per se is generic and conventional and is essentially a ledger. The claims do not recite any technological implementation details. Instead, the claims recite no more than the conceptual idea of using a block chain for storage. Thus, no inventive concept is recited.
As discussed above, the memory, transmitter, receiver, and processor additional elements amount to mere instructions to apply the exception. Mere instructions to apply an exception using a generic computer component cannot provide an inventive concept. Use of a computer or other machinery in its ordinary capacity or simply adding a general purpose computer or computer components after the fact to an abstract idea does not provide significantly more. See Affinity Labs v. DirecTV, 838 F.3d 1253, 1262, 120 USPQ2d 1201, 1207 (Fed. Cir. 2016) (cellular telephone); TLI Communications LLC v. AV Auto, LLC, 823 F.3d 607, 613, 118 USPQ2d 1744, 1748 (Fed. Cir. 2016) (computer server and telephone unit).
As discussed above, the transmission and display of a notification amount to no more than insignificant extra-solution activity and are recited at a high level of generality. The transmission and display of a notification as described in the claim are well-understood, routine, and conventional in the art.
The limitations of claims 2 merely serve to further characterize the environment in which communications take place. For the reasons described above with respect to claim 1, this judicial exception is not meaningfully integrated into a practical application or significantly more than the abstract idea.
The limitations of claims 3-6 and 9 merely serve to further characterize the data transmission and therefore merely serve to further characterize the extra-solution activity. For the reasons described above with respect to claim 1, this judicial exception is not meaningfully integrated into a practical application or significantly more than the abstract idea.
The limitations of claims 7-8 merely serve to further characterize the user interface device and therefore merely serve to further characterize the insignificant extra-solution activity. For the reasons described above with respect to claim 1, this judicial exception is not meaningfully integrated into a practical application or significantly more than the abstract idea.
The limitations of claim 10 are analogous to the limitations of claim 1 and thus the analysis of claim 1 is applied to claim 10. Claim 10 additionally recites a computing device comprising a memory, transmitter, receiver, and processor that merely serve as instructions to apply the otherwise mental process.
The limitations of claim 11 are analogous to the limitations of claim 2 and thus the analysis of claim 2 is applied to claim 11.
The limitations of claims 12-15 and 18 are analogous to the limitations of claims 3-6 and 9 and thus the analysis of claims 3-6 and 9 is applied to claims 12-15 and 18.
The limitations of claims 16-17 are analogous to the limitations of claims 7-8 and thus the analysis of claims 7-8 is applied to claims 16-17.
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.
Claims 1, 3, 6-10, 12, and 15-18 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Gaither et al. (US 20250065757 A1; hereinafter Gaither) in view of Patro et al. (Patro, P. K., Ahmad, R. W., Yaqoob, I., Salah, K., & Jayaraman, R. (2021). Blockchain-based solution for product recall management in the automotive supply chain. IEEE Access, 9, 167756-167775.; hereinafter Patro) and further in view of Elzoghbi (US 20200242622 A1; hereinafter Elzoghbi).
Regarding claim 1, Gaither discloses the subject matter indicated in bold below.
A method for data exchange between vehicles using blockchain, comprising (see Gaither at least [0031] “Communications between the vehicle(s) . . . may be sent and/or received and processed by one or more ‘components’ which may be hardware, firmware, software, or a combination thereof. The components may be part of any of these entities or computing devices . . . In one example, consensus decisions related to blockchain transactions may be performed by one or more computing devices or components (which may be any element described and/or depicted herein) associated with the vehicle(s) and one or more of the components outside or at a remote location from the vehicle(s).”):
storing, in a memory of a computing device in a first vehicle, a blockchain comprised of a plurality of blocks (see Gaither at least [0036] “Within the communication infrastructure, a decentralized database is a distributed storage system which includes multiple nodes that communicate with each other. A blockchain is an example of a decentralized database, which includes an append-only immutable data structure (i.e., a distributed ledger) capable of maintaining records between untrusted parties. The untrusted parties are referred to herein as peers, nodes, or peer nodes.”; [0048] “Any of the actions described herein may be performed by one or more processors . . . with . . . memory, which may be located on-board the vehicle . . . The one or more processors may communicate with other memory and/or other processors on-board or off-board other vehicles to utilize data being sent by and/or to the vehicle. The one or more processors and the other processors can send data, receive data, and utilize this data to perform one or more of the actions described or depicted herein.”; [0078] “While this example describes in detail only one vehicle 202, multiple such nodes may be connected to the blockchain.”; [0148] “The blockchain transactions 520 are stored in memory of computers as the transactions are received and approved by the consensus model dictated by the members' nodes [(i.e., vehicles)]. Approved transactions 526 are stored in current blocks of the blockchain [(i.e., multiple blocks in the blockchain)] and committed to the blockchain via a committal procedure, which includes performing a hash of the data contents of the transactions in a current block and referencing a previous hash of a previous block.”);
broadcasting, by a transmitter of the computing device in the first vehicle, an identification signal, the identification signal including data identifying at least a make and model of the first vehicle (see Gaither at least [0070] “The onboard processor holds a vehicle profile in its memory. The vehicle profile includes crucial information like the make, model, age, and vehicle mileage, which can be retrieved from the vehicle's odometer. The charging point requests the vehicle profile information from the onboard processor over a network [(i.e., identification information communications over network)].”; [0071] “The network comprises elements including a vehicle 202 including a processor 204, as well as a vehicle 202′ including a processor 204′. The vehicles 202, 202′ communicate with one another via the processors 204, 204′, as well as other elements (not shown) including transceivers, transmitters, receivers, storage, sensors, and other elements capable of providing communication.”);
receiving, by a receiver of the computing device in the first vehicle, updated blockchain data from a second vehicle, the updated blockchain data including one or more new blocks for the blockchain (see Gaither at least [0038] “Nodes are the communication entities of the blockchain system. A “node” may perform a logical function in the sense that multiple nodes of different types can run on the same physical server. Nodes are grouped in trust domains and are associated with logical entities that control them in various ways. Nodes may include different types, such as a client or submitting-client node, which submits an entry-invocation to an endorser (e.g., peer), and broadcasts entry proposals to an ordering service (e.g., ordering node).”; [0071] “The network comprises elements including a vehicle 202 including a processor 204, as well as a vehicle 202′ including a processor 204′. The vehicles 202, 202′ communicate with one another via the processors 204, 204′, as well as other elements (not shown) including transceivers, transmitters, receivers, storage, sensors, and other elements capable of providing communication.”; [0167] “FIG. 5E illustrates a process 500E of a new block being added to a distributed ledger 520E, according to example embodiments, and FIG. 5D illustrates the contents of FIG. 5E's new data block structure 530E for blockchain, according to example embodiments.”; Figure 5E- Blockchain nodes append new blockchain blocks to the blockchain);
updating, by a processor of the computing device in the first vehicle, the stored blockchain based on the updated blockchain data (see Gaither at least [0071] “The network comprises elements including a vehicle 202 including a processor 204, as well as a vehicle 202′ including a processor 204′. The vehicles 202, 202′ communicate with one another via the processors 204, 204′, as well as other elements (not shown) including transceivers, transmitters, receivers, storage, sensors, and other elements capable of providing communication.”; [0167] “FIG. 5E illustrates a process 500E of a new block being added to a distributed ledger 520E, according to example embodiments, and FIG. 5D illustrates the contents of FIG. 5E's new data block structure 530E for blockchain, according to example embodiments.”; Figure 5E- Blockchain nodes append new blockchain blocks to the blockchain);
determining, by the processor of the computing device in the first vehicle, that the updated blockchain data includes a new blockchain data entry (see Gaither at least [0152] “. . . the information may include a new entry, which may be processed by one or more processing entities (e.g., processors, virtual machines, etc.) included in the blockchain layer. The result may include a decision to reject or approve the new entry based on the criteria defined in the smart contract and/or a consensus of the peers. The physical infrastructure may be utilized to retrieve any of the data or information described herein.”) . . .
transmitting, by the transmitter of the computing device in the first vehicle . . . to a user interface device (see Gaither at least [0071] “The vehicles 202, 202′ communicate with one another via the processors 204, 204′, as well as other elements (not shown) including transceivers, transmitters, receivers, storage, sensors, and other elements capable of providing communication. The communication between the vehicles 202, and 202′ can occur directly, via a private and/or a public network (not shown), or via other vehicles and elements comprising one or more of a processor, memory, and software. Although depicted as single vehicles and processors, a plurality of vehicles and processors may be present. One or more of the applications, features, steps, solutions, etc., described and/or depicted herein may be utilized and/or provided by the instant elements.”; [0072] “The processors 204, 204′ can further communicate with one or more elements 230 including . . . mobile phone 220 . . .”) . . .
While Gaither discloses storing, in a memory of a computing device in a first vehicle, a blockchain comprised of a plurality of blocks, broadcasting, by a transmitter of the computing device in the first vehicle, an identification signal, the identification signal including data identifying at least a make and model of the first vehicle, receiving, by a receiver of the computing device in the first vehicle, updated blockchain data from a second vehicle, the updated blockchain data including one or more new blocks for the blockchain, updating, by a processor of the computing device in the first vehicle, the stored blockchain based on the updated blockchain data, determining, by the processor of the computing device in the first vehicle, that the updated blockchain data includes a new blockchain data entry, and a transmitter of the computing device of the first vehicle transmitting communications, it does not appear to explicitly disclose determining, by the processor of the computing device in the first vehicle, that the updated blockchain data includes a new blockchain data entry including a notification associated with the make and model of the first vehicle and transmitting, by the transmitter of the computing device in the first vehicle the notification to a user interface device causing the user interface device to display the notification to a user.
Patro teaches the subject matter underlined below:
. . . determining . . . that the updated blockchain data includes a new blockchain data entry including a notification associated with the make and model of the first vehicle (see Patro at least pg. 167761, col. 2, paragraph 2 “The customer accepts the request by calling the function ReceiveRecallNotice and accepts or rejects the recall notice.”; pg. 167768, col. 2, paragraph 3 “Figure 13 exhibits the transaction details of the ReceiveRecallNotice function. When this function is successfully executed, an event called RecallNoticeReceived is triggered, which maintains a record of the transaction details on the blockchain.”; Figure 13- Vehicle VIN part of the transaction data and associated with make and model of vehicle); and . . .
It would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention with a reasonable expectation of success to have modified the determining, by the processor of the computing device in the first vehicle, that the updated blockchain data includes a new blockchain data entry of Gaither with the determining that the updated blockchain data includes a new blockchain data entry including a notification associated with the make and model of the first vehicle as taught by Patro to determine, by the processor of the computing device in the first vehicle, that the updated blockchain data includes a new blockchain data entry including a notification associated with the make and model of the first vehicle. Doing so would provide specific information to the blockchain associated with a vehicle make and model, enabling downstream functions such as recall notifications that improve safety, as recognized by Patro (see Patro at least Abstract “Product recalls can assist in removing potentially unsafe products from the marketplace and minimizing a company’s responsibility for corporate negligence.”; pg. 167757, col. 2, paragraph 1 “. . . we chose to use blockchain technology to address the challenges in the existing automotive product recall management process. This paper aims to show how blockchain can efficiently improve the existing automobile product recall management process using Ethereum smart contracts.”).
While Gaither and Patro disclose storing, in a memory of a computing device in a first vehicle, a blockchain comprised of a plurality of blocks, broadcasting, by a transmitter of the computing device in the first vehicle, an identification signal, the identification signal including data identifying at least a make and model of the first vehicle, receiving, by a receiver of the computing device in the first vehicle, updated blockchain data from a second vehicle, the updated blockchain data including one or more new blocks for the blockchain, updating, by a processor of the computing device in the first vehicle, the stored blockchain based on the updated blockchain data, determining, by the processor of the computing device in the first vehicle, that the updated blockchain data includes a new blockchain data entry including a notification associated with the make and model of the first vehicle, and a transmitter of the computing device of the first vehicle transmitting communications, they do not appear to explicitly disclose transmitting, by the transmitter of the computing device in the first vehicle the notification to a user interface device causing the user interface device to display the notification to a user.
Elzoghbi teaches the subject matter double underlined below:
. . . transmitting . . . the notification to a user interface device causing the user interface device to display the notification to a user (see Elzoghbi at least [0071] “. . . the application services trigger the notifications services module to notify the target users with the recall notice details and the required action. A customer receives the notification by email, or on the phone and he will be able to look at notification message and start contacting the manufacturer using the resolution center.”; [0078] “Notification services 31 sends notification based on the analytics and reporting services. The recall status display 96 is showing the recall status with a linkage to the actual legal notice in case of a product is recalled.”).
It would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention with a reasonable expectation of success to have modified the transmitting, by the transmitter of the computing device in the first vehicle, information to a user interface device of Gaither and the notification of a recall of Patro with the transmission of a recall notification to a user interface device causing the user interface device to display the notification to a user as taught by Elzoghbi to transmit, by the transmitter of the computing device in the first vehicle, the notification to a user interface device causing the user interface device to display the notification to a user. Doing so would improve safety by enabling user corrective action when vehicle parts are recalled, as recognized by Elzoghbi (see Elzoghbi at least [0019] “It is an object of the present invention to directly notify and report to a vehicle owner with any recall notices of a vehicle. The customer can then contact the manufacture or dealer to take necessary action since it is not safe to drive a recalled vehicle.”).
Regarding claim 3, Gaither, Patro, and Elzoghbi disclose the subject matter of claim 1 as recited in the claim and applied above.
While Gaither discloses vehicle communications associated with blockchain entries (see Gaither at least [0071] “The vehicles 202, 202′ communicate with one another via the processors 204, 204′, as well as other elements (not shown) including transceivers, transmitters, receivers, storage, sensors, and other elements capable of providing communication. The communication between the vehicles 202, and 202′ can occur directly, via a private and/or a public network (not shown), or via other vehicles and elements comprising one or more of a processor, memory, and software. Although depicted as single vehicles and processors, a plurality of vehicles and processors may be present. One or more of the applications, features, steps, solutions, etc., described and/or depicted herein may be utilized and/or provided by the instant elements.”; [0072] “The processors 204, 204′ can further communicate with one or more elements 230 including . . . mobile phone 220 . . .”), it does not appear to explicitly disclose a notification indicating a recall affecting the make and model of the first vehicle.
Patro teaches the subject matter underlined below:
. . . wherein the notification indicates a recall affecting the make and model of the first vehicle (see Patro at least pg. 167761, col. 2, paragraph 2 “The customer accepts the request by calling the function ReceiveRecallNotice and accepts or rejects the recall notice.”; pg. 167768, col. 2, paragraph 3 “Figure 13 exhibits the transaction details of the ReceiveRecallNotice function. When this function is successfully executed, an event called RecallNoticeReceived is triggered, which maintains a record of the transaction details on the blockchain.”; Figure 13- Vehicle VIN part of the transaction data and associated with make and model of vehicle).
It would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention with a reasonable expectation of success to have modified the vehicle communications associated with blockchain entries of Gaither with the blockchain entries including a notification indicating a recall affecting the make and model of the first vehicle as taught by Patro to have the notification indicates a recall affecting the make and model of the first vehicle. The examiner supplies the same rationale for the combinations of these references as provided above with regard to claim 1.
Regarding claim 6, Gaither, Patro, and Elzoghbi disclose the subject matter of claim 1 as recited in the claim and applied above. Additionally, Gaither discloses the subject matter indicated in bold below:
. . . wherein the blockchain includes a blockchain data entry including at least one of a vehicle identification number, registration number, license plate number, odometer reading, and registration state associated with the first vehicle (see Gaither at least [0050] “. . . the processor 111 receives the number of miles on the vehicle 102 from an odometer 126 and may store the number of miles in the vehicle profile 125.”; [0178] “. . . the blockchain data 563 includes vehicle profile data comprising any of the make of the vehicle, the model of the vehicle, the age of the vehicle, or the number of miles on the vehicle.”).
Regarding claim 7, Gaither, Patro, and Elzoghbi disclose the subject matter of claim 1 as recited in the claim and applied above.
While Gaither discloses a user interface device (see Gaither at least [0071] “The vehicles 202, 202′ communicate with one another via the processors 204, 204′, as well as other elements (not shown) including transceivers, transmitters, receivers, storage, sensors, and other elements capable of providing communication. The communication between the vehicles 202, and 202′ can occur directly, via a private and/or a public network (not shown), or via other vehicles and elements comprising one or more of a processor, memory, and software. Although depicted as single vehicles and processors, a plurality of vehicles and processors may be present. One or more of the applications, features, steps, solutions, etc., described and/or depicted herein may be utilized and/or provided by the instant elements.”; [0072] “The processors 204, 204′ can further communicate with one or more elements 230 including . . . mobile phone 220 . . .”), it does not appear to explicitly disclose the user interface being a physical display integrated with the first vehicle.
Elzoghbi teaches the subject matter underlined below:
. . . wherein the user interface device is a physical display integrated with the first vehicle (see Elzoghbi at least [0105] “. . . the system is adapted to communicate with a user via a user's digital device. The digital device is selected from . . . a digital display in a vehicle console.”).
It would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention with a reasonable expectation of success to have modified the user interface of Gaither with the physical display integrated with the first vehicle as taught by Elzoghbi to have the user interface be a physical display integrated with the first vehicle. Doing so would provide an alternative means for notifying the user that does not require the user to possess an additional device.
Regarding claim 8, Gaither, Patro, and Elzoghbi disclose the subject matter of claim 1 as recited in the claim and applied above. Additionally, Gaither discloses the subject matter indicated in bold below:
. . . wherein the user interface device is a handheld computing device of the user separate from the computing device in the first vehicle (see Gaither at least [0071] “The vehicles 202, 202′ communicate with one another via the processors 204, 204′, as well as other elements (not shown) including transceivers, transmitters, receivers, storage, sensors, and other elements capable of providing communication. The communication between the vehicles 202, and 202′ can occur directly, via a private and/or a public network (not shown), or via other vehicles and elements comprising one or more of a processor, memory, and software. Although depicted as single vehicles and processors, a plurality of vehicles and processors may be present. One or more of the applications, features, steps, solutions, etc., described and/or depicted herein may be utilized and/or provided by the instant elements.”; [0072] “The processors 204, 204′ can further communicate with one or more elements 230 including . . . mobile phone 220 . . .”).
Regarding claim 9, Gaither, Patro, and Elzoghbi disclose the subject matter of claim 1 as recited in the claim and applied above. Additionally, Gaither discloses the subject matter indicated in bold below:
. . . wherein the data identifying at least a make and model is data identifying at least one of: 1) make and model and 2) a blockchain that is dedicated to a particular make, certain makes, certain makes and certain models, make and model, specific sets of Vehicle Identification Numbers (VINs) (see Gaither at least [0070] “The onboard processor holds a vehicle profile in its memory. The vehicle profile includes crucial information like the make, model, age, and vehicle mileage, which can be retrieved from the vehicle's odometer. The charging point requests the vehicle profile information from the onboard processor over a network.”).
Regarding claim 10, Gaither discloses the subject matter indicated in bold below:
A system for data exchange between vehicles using blockchain (see Gaither at least [0031] “Communications between the vehicle(s) . . . may be sent and/or received and processed by one or more ‘components’ which may be hardware, firmware, software, or a combination thereof. The components may be part of any of these entities or computing devices . . . In one example, consensus decisions related to blockchain transactions may be performed by one or more computing devices or components (which may be any element described and/or depicted herein) associated with the vehicle(s) and one or more of the components outside or at a remote location from the vehicle(s).”), comprising:
a first vehicle (see Gaither at least [0078] “While this example describes in detail only one vehicle 202, multiple such nodes may be connected to the blockchain.”);
a second vehicle (see Gaither at least [0071] “The network comprises elements including a vehicle 202 including a processor 204, as well as a vehicle 202′ including a processor 204′. The vehicles 202, 202′ communicate with one another via the processors 204, 204′, as well as other elements (not shown) including transceivers, transmitters, receivers, storage, sensors, and other elements capable of providing communication.”; [0078] “While this example describes in detail only one vehicle 202, multiple such nodes may be connected to the blockchain.”); and
a user interface device (see Gaither at least [0072] “The processors 204, 204′ can further communicate with one or more elements 230 including . . . mobile phone 220 . . .”), wherein
the first vehicle includes computing device (see Gaither at least [0048] “Any of the actions described herein may be performed by one or more processors . . . with . . . memory, which may be located on-board the vehicle . . . The one or more processors may communicate with other memory and/or other processors on-board or off-board other vehicles to utilize data being sent by and/or to the vehicle. The one or more processors and the other processors can send data, receive data, and utilize this data to perform one or more of the actions described or depicted herein.”), the computing device comprising
a memory storing a blockchain comprised of a plurality of blocks (see Gaither at least [0036] “Within the communication infrastructure, a decentralized database is a distributed storage system which includes multiple nodes that communicate with each other. A blockchain is an example of a decentralized database, which includes an append-only immutable data structure (i.e., a distributed ledger) capable of maintaining records between untrusted parties. The untrusted parties are referred to herein as peers, nodes, or peer nodes.”; [0048] “Any of the actions described herein may be performed by one or more processors . . . with . . . memory, which may be located on-board the vehicle . . . The one or more processors may communicate with other memory and/or other processors on-board or off-board other vehicles to utilize data being sent by and/or to the vehicle. The one or more processors and the other processors can send data, receive data, and utilize this data to perform one or more of the actions described or depicted herein.”; [0078] “While this example describes in detail only one vehicle 202, multiple such nodes may be connected to the blockchain.”; [0148] “The blockchain transactions 520 are stored in memory of computers as the transactions are received and approved by the consensus model dictated by the members' nodes [(i.e., vehicles)]. Approved transactions 526 are stored in current blocks of the blockchain [(i.e., multiple blocks in the blockchain)] and committed to the blockchain via a committal procedure, which includes performing a hash of the data contents of the transactions in a current block and referencing a previous hash of a previous block.”),
a transmitter broadcasting an identification signal, the identification signal including data identifying at least a make and model of the first vehicle (see Gaither at least [0070] “The onboard processor holds a vehicle profile in its memory. The vehicle profile includes crucial information like the make, model, age, and vehicle mileage, which can be retrieved from the vehicle's odometer. The charging point requests the vehicle profile information from the onboard processor over a network [(i.e., identification information communications over network)].”; [0071] “The network comprises elements including a vehicle 202 including a processor 204, as well as a vehicle 202′ including a processor 204′. The vehicles 202, 202′ communicate with one another via the processors 204, 204′, as well as other elements (not shown) including transceivers, transmitters, receivers, storage, sensors, and other elements capable of providing communication.”),
a receiver receiving updated blockchain data from the second vehicle, the updated blockchain data including one or more new blocks for the blockchain (see Gaither at least [0038] “Nodes are the communication entities of the blockchain system. A “node” may perform a logical function in the sense that multiple nodes of different types can run on the same physical server. Nodes are grouped in trust domains and are associated with logical entities that control them in various ways. Nodes may include different types, such as a client or submitting-client node, which submits an entry-invocation to an endorser (e.g., peer), and broadcasts entry proposals to an ordering service (e.g., ordering node).”; [0071] “The network comprises elements including a vehicle 202 including a processor 204, as well as a vehicle 202′ including a processor 204′. The vehicles 202, 202′ communicate with one another via the processors 204, 204′, as well as other elements (not shown) including transceivers, transmitters, receivers, storage, sensors, and other elements capable of providing communication.”; [0167] “FIG. 5E illustrates a process 500E of a new block being added to a distributed ledger 520E, according to example embodiments, and FIG. 5D illustrates the contents of FIG. 5E's new data block structure 530E for blockchain, according to example embodiments.”; Figure 5E- Blockchain nodes append new blockchain blocks to the blockchain),
a processor updating the stored blockchain based on the updated blockchain data s(see Gaither at least [0071] “The network comprises elements including a vehicle 202 including a processor 204, as well as a vehicle 202′ including a processor 204′. The vehicles 202, 202′ communicate with one another via the processors 204, 204′, as well as other elements (not shown) including transceivers, transmitters, receivers, storage, sensors, and other elements capable of providing communication.”; [0167] “FIG. 5E illustrates a process 500E of a new block being added to a distributed ledger 520E, according to example embodiments, and FIG. 5D illustrates the contents of FIG. 5E's new data block structure 530E for blockchain, according to example embodiments.”; Figure 5E- Blockchain nodes append new blockchain blocks to the blockchain), and determining that the updated blockchain data includes a new blockchain data entry (see Gaither at least [0152] “. . . the information may include a new entry, which may be processed by one or more processing entities (e.g., processors, virtual machines, etc.) included in the blockchain layer. The result may include a decision to reject or approve the new entry based on the criteria defined in the smart contract and/or a consensus of the peers. The physical infrastructure may be utilized to retrieve any of the data or information described herein.”) . . . wherein
the transmitter of the computing device of the first vehicle further transmits . . . to the user interface device (see Gaither at least [0071] “The vehicles 202, 202′ communicate with one another via the processors 204, 204′, as well as other elements (not shown) including transceivers, transmitters, receivers, storage, sensors, and other elements capable of providing communication. The communication between the vehicles 202, and 202′ can occur directly, via a private and/or a public network (not shown), or via other vehicles and elements comprising one or more of a processor, memory, and software. Although depicted as single vehicles and processors, a plurality of vehicles and processors may be present. One or more of the applications, features, steps, solutions, etc., described and/or depicted herein may be utilized and/or provided by the instant elements.”; [0072] “The processors 204, 204′ can further communicate with one or more elements 230 including . . . mobile phone 220 . . .”) . . .
While Gaither discloses storing, in a memory of a computing device in a first vehicle, a blockchain comprised of a plurality of blocks, broadcasting, by a transmitter of the computing device in the first vehicle, an identification signal, the identification signal including data identifying at least a make and model of the first vehicle, receiving, by a receiver of the computing device in the first vehicle, updated blockchain data from a second vehicle, the updated blockchain data including one or more new blocks for the blockchain, updating, by a processor of the computing device in the first vehicle, the stored blockchain based on the updated blockchain data, determining, by the processor of the computing device in the first vehicle, that the updated blockchain data includes a new blockchain data entry, and a transmitter of the computing device of the first vehicle transmitting communications, it does not appear to explicitly disclose determining, by the processor of the computing device in the first vehicle, that the updated blockchain data includes a new blockchain data entry including a notification associated with the make and model of the first vehicle and transmitting, by the transmitter of the computing device in the first vehicle the notification to a user interface device causing the user interface device to display the notification to a user.
Patro teaches the subject matter underlined below:
. . . determining that the updated blockchain data includes a new blockchain data entry including a notification associated with the make and model of the first vehicle (see Patro at least pg. 167761, col. 2, paragraph 2 “The customer accepts the request by calling the function ReceiveRecallNotice and accepts or rejects the recall notice.”; pg. 167768, col. 2, paragraph 3 “Figure 13 exhibits the transaction details of the ReceiveRecallNotice function. When this function is successfully executed, an event called RecallNoticeReceived is triggered, which maintains a record of the transaction details on the blockchain.”; Figure 13- Vehicle VIN part of the transaction data and associated with make and model of vehicle) . . .
It would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention with a reasonable expectation of success to have modified the determining, by the processor of the computing device in the first vehicle, that the updated blockchain data includes a new blockchain data entry of Gaither with the determining that the updated blockchain data includes a new blockchain data entry including a notification associated with the make and model of the first vehicle as taught by Patro to determine, by the processor of the computing device in the first vehicle, that the updated blockchain data includes a new blockchain data entry including a notification associated with the make and model of the first vehicle. Doing so would provide specific information to the blockchain associated with a vehicle make and model, enabling downstream functions such as recall notifications that improve safety, as recognized by Patro (see Patro at least Abstract “Product recalls can assist in removing potentially unsafe products from the marketplace and minimizing a company’s responsibility for corporate negligence.”; pg. 167757, col. 2, paragraph 1 “. . . we chose to use blockchain technology to address the challenges in the existing automotive product recall management process. This paper aims to show how blockchain can efficiently improve the existing automobile product recall management process using Ethereum smart contracts.”).
While Gaither and Patro disclose storing, in a memory of a computing device in a first vehicle, a blockchain comprised of a plurality of blocks, broadcasting, by a transmitter of the computing device in the first vehicle, an identification signal, the identification signal including data identifying at least a make and model of the first vehicle, receiving, by a receiver of the computing device in the first vehicle, updated blockchain data from a second vehicle, the updated blockchain data including one or more new blocks for the blockchain, updating, by a processor of the computing device in the first vehicle, the stored blockchain based on the updated blockchain data, determining, by the processor of the computing device in the first vehicle, that the updated blockchain data includes a new blockchain data entry including a notification associated with the make and model of the first vehicle, and a transmitter of the computing device of the first vehicle transmitting communications, they do not appear to explicitly disclose transmitting, by the transmitter of the computing device in the first vehicle the notification to a user interface device causing the user interface device to display the notification to a user.
Elzoghbi teaches the subject matter double underlined below:
. . . transmits the notification to the user interface device causing the user interface device to display the notification to a user (see Elzoghbi at least [0071] “. . . the application services trigger the notifications services module to notify the target users with the recall notice details and the required action. A customer receives the notification by email, or on the phone and he will be able to look at notification message and start contacting the manufacturer using the resolution center.”; [0078] “Notification services 31 sends notification based on the analytics and reporting services. The recall status display 96 is showing the recall status with a linkage to the actual legal notice in case of a product is recalled.”).
It would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention with a reasonable expectation of success to have modified the transmitting, by the transmitter of the computing device in the first vehicle, information to a user interface device of Gaither and the notification of a recall of Patro with the transmission of a recall notification to a user interface device causing the user interface device to display the notification to a user as taught by Elzoghbi to transmit, by the transmitter of the computing device in the first vehicle, the notification to a user interface device causing the user interface device to display the notification to a user. Doing so would improve safety by enabling user corrective action when vehicle parts are recalled, as recognized by Elzoghbi (see Elzoghbi at least [0019] “It is an object of the present invention to directly notify and report to a vehicle owner with any recall notices of a vehicle. The customer can then contact the manufacture or dealer to take necessary action since it is not safe to drive a recalled vehicle.”).
Regarding claim 12, Gaither, Patro, and Elzoghbi disclose the subject matter of claim 10 as recited in the claim and applied above.
While Gaither discloses vehicle communications associated with blockchain entries (see Gaither at least [0071] “The vehicles 202, 202′ communicate with one another via the processors 204, 204′, as well as other elements (not shown) including transceivers, transmitters, receivers, storage, sensors, and other elements capable of providing communication. The communication between the vehicles 202, and 202′ can occur directly, via a private and/or a public network (not shown), or via other vehicles and elements comprising one or more of a processor, memory, and software. Although depicted as single vehicles and processors, a plurality of vehicles and processors may be present. One or more of the applications, features, steps, solutions, etc., described and/or depicted herein may be utilized and/or provided by the instant elements.”; [0072] “The processors 204, 204′ can further communicate with one or more elements 230 including . . . mobile phone 220 . . .”), it does not appear to explicitly disclose a notification indicating a recall affecting the make and model of the first vehicle.
Patro teaches the subject matter underlined below:
. . . wherein the notification indicates a recall affecting the make and model of the first vehicle (see Patro at least pg. 167761, col. 2, paragraph 2 “The customer accepts the request by calling the function ReceiveRecallNotice and accepts or rejects the recall notice.”; pg. 167768, col. 2, paragraph 3 “Figure 13 exhibits the transaction details of the ReceiveRecallNotice function. When this function is successfully executed, an event called RecallNoticeReceived is triggered, which maintains a record of the transaction details on the blockchain.”; Figure 13- Vehicle VIN part of the transaction data and associated with make and model of vehicle).
It would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention with a reasonable expectation of success to have modified the vehicle communications associated with blockchain entries of Gaither with the blockchain entries including a notification indicating a recall affecting the make and model of the first vehicle as taught by Patro to have the notification indicates a recall affecting the make and model of the first vehicle. The examiner supplies the same rationale for the combinations of these references as provided above with regard to claim 10.
Regarding claim 15, Gaither, Patro, and Elzoghbi disclose the subject matter of claim 10 as recited in the claim and applied above. Additionally, Gaither discloses the subject matter indicated in bold below:
. . . wherein the blockchain includes a blockchain data entry including at least one of a vehicle identification number, registration number, license plate number, odometer reading, and registration state associated with the first vehicle (see Gaither at least [0050] “. . . the processor 111 receives the number of miles on the vehicle 102 from an odometer 126 and may store the number of miles in the vehicle profile 125.”; [0178] “. . . the blockchain data 563 includes vehicle profile data comprising any of the make of the vehicle, the model of the vehicle, the age of the vehicle, or the number of miles on the vehicle.”).
Regarding claim 16, Gaither, Patro, and Elzoghbi disclose the subject matter of claim 10 as recited in the claim and applied above.
While Gaither discloses a user interface device (see Gaither at least [0071] “The vehicles 202, 202′ communicate with one another via the processors 204, 204′, as well as other elements (not shown) including transceivers, transmitters, receivers, storage, sensors, and other elements capable of providing communication. The communication between the vehicles 202, and 202′ can occur directly, via a private and/or a public network (not shown), or via other vehicles and elements comprising one or more of a processor, memory, and software. Although depicted as single vehicles and processors, a plurality of vehicles and processors may be present. One or more of the applications, features, steps, solutions, etc., described and/or depicted herein may be utilized and/or provided by the instant elements.”; [0072] “The processors 204, 204′ can further communicate with one or more elements 230 including . . . mobile phone 220 . . .”), it does not appear to explicitly disclose the user interface being a physical display integrated with the first vehicle.
Elzoghbi teaches the subject matter underlined below:
. . . wherein the user interface device is a physical display integrated with the first vehicle (see Elzoghbi at least [0105] “. . . the system is adapted to communicate with a user via a user's digital device. The digital device is selected from . . . a digital display in a vehicle console.”).
It would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention with a reasonable expectation of success to have modified the user interface of Gaither with the physical display integrated with the first vehicle as taught by Elzoghbi to have the user interface be a physical display integrated with the first vehicle. Doing so would provide an alternative means for notifying the user that does not require the user to possess an additional device.
Regarding claim 17, Gaither, Patro, and Elzoghbi disclose the subject matter of claim 10 as recited in the claim and applied above. Additionally, Gaither discloses the subject matter indicated in bold below:
. . . wherein the user interface device is a handheld computing device of the user separate from the computing device in the first vehicle (see Gaither at least [0071] “The vehicles 202, 202′ communicate with one another via the processors 204, 204′, as well as other elements (not shown) including transceivers, transmitters, receivers, storage, sensors, and other elements capable of providing communication. The communication between the vehicles 202, and 202′ can occur directly, via a private and/or a public network (not shown), or via other vehicles and elements comprising one or more of a processor, memory, and software. Although depicted as single vehicles and processors, a plurality of vehicles and processors may be present. One or more of the applications, features, steps, solutions, etc., described and/or depicted herein may be utilized and/or provided by the instant elements.”; [0072] “The processors 204, 204′ can further communicate with one or more elements 230 including . . . mobile phone 220 . . .”).
Regarding claim 18, Gaither, Patro, and Elzoghbi disclose the subject matter of claim 10 as recited in the claim and applied above. Additionally, Gaither discloses the subject matter indicated in bold below:
. . . wherein the data identifying at least a make and model is data identifying at least one of: 1) make and model and 2) a blockchain that is dedicated to a particular make, certain makes, certain makes and certain models, make and model, specific sets of Vehicle Identification Numbers (VINs) (see Gaither at least [0070] “The onboard processor holds a vehicle profile in its memory. The vehicle profile includes crucial information like the make, model, age, and vehicle mileage, which can be retrieved from the vehicle's odometer. The charging point requests the vehicle profile information from the onboard processor over a network.”).
Claims 2 and 11 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Gaither in view of Patro and further in view of Elzoghbi and Roads and Bridges (Roads & Bridges. (2017, March 14). Connected vehicles: Cadillac introducing first V2V cars in U.S. Roads & Bridges.; hereinafter Roads and Bridges).
Regarding claim 2, Gaither, Patro, and Elzoghbi disclose the subject matter of claim 1 as recited in the claim and applied above.
While Gaither discloses vehicle-to-vehicle communications (see Gaither at least [0071] “The network comprises elements including a vehicle 202 including a processor 204, as well as a vehicle 202′ including a processor 204′. The vehicles 202, 202′ communicate with one another via the processors 204, 204′, as well as other elements (not shown) including transceivers, transmitters, receivers, storage, sensors, and other elements capable of providing communication.”), it does not appear to explicitly disclose the second vehicle being the same make and model as the first vehicle.
Roads and Bridges teaches the subject matter underlined below:
. . . wherein the second vehicle is of the same make and model as the first vehicle (see Roads and Bridges at least paragraph 4 “Cadillac's cars can only communicate with other CTS models for now . . .”).
It would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention with a reasonable expectation of success to have modified the vehicle-to-vehicle communications of Gaither with the second vehicle being the same make and model as the first vehicle as taught by Roads and Bridges to have the second vehicle being the same make and model as the first vehicle. Doing so would ensure that communications are possible, as vehicles of the same make and model are likely to deploy the same vehicle-to-vehicle communication technology in an industry with a number of different protocols that are utilized.
Regarding claim 11, Gaither, Patro, and Elzoghbi disclose the subject matter of claim 10 as recited in the claim and applied above.
While Gaither discloses vehicle-to-vehicle communications (see Gaither at least [0071] “The network comprises elements including a vehicle 202 including a processor 204, as well as a vehicle 202′ including a processor 204′. The vehicles 202, 202′ communicate with one another via the processors 204, 204′, as well as other elements (not shown) including transceivers, transmitters, receivers, storage, sensors, and other elements capable of providing communication.”), it does not appear to explicitly disclose the second vehicle being the same make and model as the first vehicle.
Roads and Bridges teaches the subject matter underlined below:
. . . wherein the second vehicle is of the same make and model as the first vehicle (see Roads and Bridges at least paragraph 4 “Cadillac's cars can only communicate with other CTS models for now . . .”).
It would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention with a reasonable expectation of success to have modified the vehicle-to-vehicle communications of Gaither with the second vehicle being the same make and model as the first vehicle as taught by Roads and Bridges to have the second vehicle being the same make and model as the first vehicle. Doing so would ensure that communications are possible, as vehicles of the same make and model are likely to deploy the same vehicle-to-vehicle communication technology in an industry with a number of different protocols that are utilized.
Claims 4-5 and 13-14 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Gaither in view of Patro and further in view of Elzoghbi and Andrusenko (Andrusenko, I. (2019, May 16). Are block timestamps decentralized? [Online forum post]. Stack Exchange.; hereinafter Andrusenko).
Regarding claim 4, Gaither, Patro, and Elzoghbi disclose the subject matter of claim 1 as recited in the claim and applied above.
While Gaither discloses a broadcast signal that includes information stored in a blockchain and a blockchain containing timestamps (see Gaither at least [0070] “The onboard processor holds a vehicle profile in its memory. The vehicle profile includes crucial information like the make, model, age, and vehicle mileage, which can be retrieved from the vehicle's odometer. The charging point requests the vehicle profile information from the onboard processor over a network [(i.e., identification information communications over network)].”; [0071] “The network comprises elements including a vehicle 202 including a processor 204, as well as a vehicle 202′ including a processor 204′. The vehicles 202, 202′ communicate with one another via the processors 204, 204′, as well as other elements (not shown) including transceivers, transmitters, receivers, storage, sensors, and other elements capable of providing communication.”; [0176] “The block data 550 may store transactional information of each transaction that is recorded within the new data block 530. For example, the transaction data may include . . . a timestamp . . .”; [0178] “. . . the blockchain data 563 includes vehicle profile data comprising any of the make of the vehicle, the model of the vehicle, the age of the vehicle, or the number of miles on the vehicle.”), it does not appear to explicitly disclose the broadcast signal itself further including a timestamp associated with the stored blockchain.
Andrusenko teaches the subject matter underlined below:
. . . wherein the broadcast signal further includes a timestamp associated with the stored blockchain (see Andrusenko at least paragraph 3 “In PoW (Ethash) your block will be accepted if you are 15 seconds ahead (or less). If you are trying to propagate a block with a stale timestamp, the block will be instantly rejected [(i.e., timestamp is provided with output)].”).
It would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention with a reasonable expectation of success to have modified the broadcast signal that includes information stored in a blockchain and a blockchain containing timestamps of Gaither with the broadcast signal further including a timestamp associated with the stored blockchain as taught by Andrusenko to have the broadcast signal further include a timestamp associated with the stored blockchain. Doing so would allow downstream sources to verify the signal based on the timestamp.
Regarding claim 5, Gaither, Patro, Elzoghbi, and Andrusenko disclose the subject matter of claim 4 as recited in the claim and applied above.
While Gaither discloses updating blockchain data including one or more new blocks added to the blockchain with timestamp information (see Gaither at least [0038] “Nodes are the communication entities of the blockchain system. A “node” may perform a logical function in the sense that multiple nodes of different types can run on the same physical server. Nodes are grouped in trust domains and are associated with logical entities that control them in various ways. Nodes may include different types, such as a client or submitting-client node, which submits an entry-invocation to an endorser (e.g., peer), and broadcasts entry proposals to an ordering service (e.g., ordering node).”; [0071] “The network comprises elements including a vehicle 202 including a processor 204, as well as a vehicle 202′ including a processor 204′. The vehicles 202, 202′ communicate with one another via the processors 204, 204′, as well as other elements (not shown) including transceivers, transmitters, receivers, storage, sensors, and other elements capable of providing communication.”; [0167] “FIG. 5E illustrates a process 500E of a new block being added to a distributed ledger 520E, according to example embodiments, and FIG. 5D illustrates the contents of FIG. 5E's new data block structure 530E for blockchain, according to example embodiments.”; [0176] “The block data 550 may store transactional information of each transaction that is recorded within the new data block 530. For example, the transaction data may include . . . a timestamp . . .”; [0178] “. . . the blockchain data 563 includes vehicle profile data comprising any of the make of the vehicle, the model of the vehicle, the age of the vehicle, or the number of miles on the vehicle.”; Figure 5E- Blockchain nodes append new blockchain blocks to the blockchain), it does not appear to explicitly disclose the updated blockchain data including one or more new blocks added to the blockchain identified based on the timestamp.
Andrusenko teaches the subject matter underlined below:
. . . wherein the updated blockchain data includes one or more new blocks added to the blockchain identified based on the timestamp (see Andrusenko at least paragraph 3 “In PoW (Ethash) your block will be accepted if you are 15 seconds ahead (or less). If you are trying to propagate a block with a stale timestamp, the block will be instantly rejected [(i.e., new blocks verified based on timestamp)].”).
It would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention with a reasonable expectation of success to have modified the updating blockchain data including one or more new blocks added to the blockchain with timestamp information of Gaither with the updated blockchain data including one or more new blocks added to the blockchain identified based on the timestamp as taught by Andrusenko to have the updated blockchain data include one or more new blocks added to the blockchain identified based on the timestamp. Doing so would improve the integrity of the blockchain by only committing new blocks with valid timestamps.
Regarding claim 13, Gaither, Patro, and Elzoghbi disclose the subject matter of claim 10 as recited in the claim and applied above.
While Gaither discloses a broadcast signal that includes information stored in a blockchain and a blockchain containing timestamps (see Gaither at least [0070] “The onboard processor holds a vehicle profile in its memory. The vehicle profile includes crucial information like the make, model, age, and vehicle mileage, which can be retrieved from the vehicle's odometer. The charging point requests the vehicle profile information from the onboard processor over a network [(i.e., identification information communications over network)].”; [0071] “The network comprises elements including a vehicle 202 including a processor 204, as well as a vehicle 202′ including a processor 204′. The vehicles 202, 202′ communicate with one another via the processors 204, 204′, as well as other elements (not shown) including transceivers, transmitters, receivers, storage, sensors, and other elements capable of providing communication.”; [0176] “The block data 550 may store transactional information of each transaction that is recorded within the new data block 530. For example, the transaction data may include . . . a timestamp . . .”; [0178] “. . . the blockchain data 563 includes vehicle profile data comprising any of the make of the vehicle, the model of the vehicle, the age of the vehicle, or the number of miles on the vehicle.”), it does not appear to explicitly disclose the broadcast signal itself further including a timestamp associated with the stored blockchain.
Andrusenko teaches the subject matter underlined below:
. . . wherein the broadcast signal further includes a timestamp associated with the stored blockchain (see Andrusenko at least paragraph 3 “In PoW (Ethash) your block will be accepted if you are 15 seconds ahead (or less). If you are trying to propagate a block with a stale timestamp, the block will be instantly rejected [(i.e., timestamp is provided with output)].”).
It would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention with a reasonable expectation of success to have modified the broadcast signal that includes information stored in a blockchain and a blockchain containing timestamps of Gaither with the broadcast signal further including a timestamp associated with the stored blockchain as taught by Andrusenko to have the broadcast signal further include a timestamp associated with the stored blockchain. Doing so would allow downstream sources to verify the signal based on the timestamp.
Regarding claim 14, Gaither, Patro, Elzoghbi, and Andrusenko disclose the subject matter of claim 13 as recited in the claim and applied above.
While Gaither discloses updating blockchain data including one or more new blocks added to the blockchain with timestamp information (see Gaither at least [0038] “Nodes are the communication entities of the blockchain system. A “node” may perform a logical function in the sense that multiple nodes of different types can run on the same physical server. Nodes are grouped in trust domains and are associated with logical entities that control them in various ways. Nodes may include different types, such as a client or submitting-client node, which submits an entry-invocation to an endorser (e.g., peer), and broadcasts entry proposals to an ordering service (e.g., ordering node).”; [0071] “The network comprises elements including a vehicle 202 including a processor 204, as well as a vehicle 202′ including a processor 204′. The vehicles 202, 202′ communicate with one another via the processors 204, 204′, as well as other elements (not shown) including transceivers, transmitters, receivers, storage, sensors, and other elements capable of providing communication.”; [0167] “FIG. 5E illustrates a process 500E of a new block being added to a distributed ledger 520E, according to example embodiments, and FIG. 5D illustrates the contents of FIG. 5E's new data block structure 530E for blockchain, according to example embodiments.”; [0176] “The block data 550 may store transactional information of each transaction that is recorded within the new data block 530. For example, the transaction data may include . . . a timestamp . . .”; [0178] “. . . the blockchain data 563 includes vehicle profile data comprising any of the make of the vehicle, the model of the vehicle, the age of the vehicle, or the number of miles on the vehicle.”; Figure 5E- Blockchain nodes append new blockchain blocks to the blockchain), it does not appear to explicitly disclose the updated blockchain data including one or more new blocks added to the blockchain identified based on the timestamp.
Andrusenko teaches the subject matter underlined below:
. . . wherein the updated blockchain data includes one or more new blocks added to the blockchain identified based on the timestamp (see Andrusenko at least paragraph 3 “In PoW (Ethash) your block will be accepted if you are 15 seconds ahead (or less). If you are trying to propagate a block with a stale timestamp, the block will be instantly rejected [(i.e., new blocks verified based on timestamp)].”).
It would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention with a reasonable expectation of success to have modified the updating blockchain data including one or more new blocks added to the blockchain with timestamp information of Gaither with the updated blockchain data including one or more new blocks added to the blockchain identified based on the timestamp as taught by Andrusenko to have the updated blockchain data include one or more new blocks added to the blockchain identified based on the timestamp. Doing so would improve the integrity of the blockchain by only committing new blocks with valid timestamps.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to the applicant’s disclosure.
Leise et al. (US 20210312405 A1) discloses using blockchain to implement vehicle recalls.
Euler et al. (JP 2023553245 A) discloses using blockchain technology to facilitate communication between vehicles and other entities.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to TABITHA KRESS whose telephone number is (703) 756-1763. The examiner can normally be reached MTWR 06:30-16:30 CST.
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, Hitesh Patel can be reached at (571) 270-5442. 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.
/TABITHA KRESS/Examiner, Art Unit 3667
/Hitesh Patel/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3667
6/27/26
Prosecution Insights