DETAILED ACTION
The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status.
The following is a quotation of 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, 3-7, 11, 21, 23-27 and 31 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Wood et al. US 2019/0058581 (hereinafter Wood), in view of Moiyallah, Jr. et al. US 2021/0166206 (hereinafter Moiyallah).
As per claim 1, Wood teaches a method to facilitate filtration in blockchains, comprising: recovering, from a list of prospective entries to be appended to a primary blockchain, a reference to a blockchain entry, wherein the blockchain entry; corresponds to at least one action; and is temporarily stored on a secondary blockchain associated with the list of prospective entries (Wood paragraph [0003], [0074], [0201], receiving a header and a state-transition proof associated with a candidate block at a validator node in a relay chain from a collator node in a parachain. Move transactions on the output queue of a parachain into input queue of the destination);
obtaining, from the primary blockchain, a certainty level associated with the blockchain entry, wherein the certainty level reflects a likelihood that recording the blockchain entry on the primary blockchain will have harmful effects on the primary blockchain (Wood paragraph [0003], in the case that any invalid candidate blocks are included, due to the activity of malicious or byzantine nodes, a process for detection and reversion of the invalid candidate block and the punishment of the offending nodes);
deleting the blockchain entry from the secondary blockchain (Wood paragraph [0074], [0201], Move transactions on the output queue of a parachain into input queue of the destination).
Wood does not explicitly disclose assessing a classification of blockchain entry based on certainty level, wherein the classification is made a confirmation classification when the certainty level falls under a minimum threshold; and when the classification is the confirmation classification: recording the blockchain entry on primary blockchain.
Moiyallah teaches assessing a classification of blockchain entry based on certainty level, wherein the classification is made a confirmation classification when the certainty level falls under a minimum threshold; and when the classification is the confirmation classification: recording the blockchain entry on primary blockchain (Moiyallah paragraph [0044], [0046], [0052]-[0053], the transactional integrity is above a threshold level (e.g., less than a threshold number of repeating transfer patterns). The bridging protocol initiate a transfer of the currency to the destination digital wallet system. The bridging protocol record the credit and debit in distributed ledger).
Thus it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the invention of Wood of validating candidate blocks before recording on the blockchain with the teachings of Moiyallah to include validation with a threshold level and performing certain action(s) based on the validation because the results would have been predictable and resulted in performing a certain action such as allowing the recording or delaying the recording based on the validation.
As per claim 3, Wood in view of Moiyallah teaches the method of claim 1, wherein the primary blockchain is a layer-1 (L1) blockchain and the secondary blockchain is a layer-2 (L2) blockchain (Wood paragraph [0016], [0018], Polkadot enables blockchains to communicate and pool their security while still allowing them to have entirely arbitrary state-transition functions…a network of blockchains, where private and consortium chains can be integrated with open and public chains. Polkadot separates consensus from execution by providing agreement over summaries of accumulated execution from several parallelized chains or parachains.).
As per claim 4, Wood in view of Moiyallah teaches the method of claim 1, wherein: when assessing the classification of the blockchain entry, the classification is made a blocking classification when the certainty level exceeds a maximum threshold; and the blockchain entry is deleted and the at least one action associated with the blockchain entry is cancelled when the classification is the blocking classification (Wood paragraph [0003], [0074], [0201], in the case that any invalid candidate blocks are included, due to the activity of malicious or byzantine nodes, a process for detection and reversion of the invalid candidate block; Moiyallah paragraph [0048], transactional integrity is below the threshold the bridging protocol may be configured to reject the transfer request. The transaction integrity may be below the threshold when the mapping of the currency flow includes a threshold number of repeating transfer patterns.).
As per claim 5, Wood in view of Moiyallah teaches the method of claim 4, wherein, when assessing the classification of the blockchain entry, the classification is made a delay classification when at least one of: the certainty level neither exceeds the maximum threshold nor falls below the minimum threshold; or no feedback is received from a validating entity before a predetermined amount of time after a given action of the at least one action (Wood paragraph [0126], at least one positive and at least one negative vote on validity, an exceptional condition is created and the whole set of validators votes to determine if there are malicious parties or if there is an accidental fork. Aside from valid and invalid, a third kind of votes are allowed, equivalent to voting for both; Moiyallah paragraph [0090], imposing a time delay on the transferring).
As per claim 6, Wood in view of Moiyallah teaches the method of claim 1, wherein assessing the classification of the blockchain entry is based on at least one of: feedback from at least one entity; time elapsed from when a given action of the at least one action occurred; time elapsed from when the reference to the blockchain entry was first stored on the list of prospective entries; or a result from a process evaluating the blockchain entry (Wood paragraph [0003], [0207], consensus process, wherein plurality of validator nodes will validate the candidate block. in the case that any invalid candidate blocks are included, due to the activity of malicious or byzantine nodes, a process for detection and reversion of the invalid candidate block and the punishment of the offending nodes.; Moiyallah paragraph [0043]-[0044], [0046], [0052]-[0053], validate transactional integrity… the transactional integrity is above a threshold level (e.g., less than a threshold number of repeating transfer patterns). The bridging protocol initiate a transfer of the currency to the destination digital wallet system. The bridging protocol record the credit and debit in distributed ledger).
As per claim 7, Wood in view of Moiyallah teaches the method of claim 5, wherein assessing the classification of the blockchain entry is performed by a vote conducted through a consensus mechanism among a plurality of parties (Wood paragraph [0003], [0207], consensus process, wherein plurality of validator nodes will validate the candidate block. in the case that any invalid candidate blocks are included, due to the activity of malicious or byzantine nodes, a process for detection and reversion of the invalid candidate block and the punishment of the offending nodes.; Moiyallah paragraph [0043]-[0044], [0046], [0052]-[0053], validate transactional integrity… the transactional integrity is above a threshold level (e.g., less than a threshold number of repeating transfer patterns). The bridging protocol initiate a transfer of the currency to the destination digital wallet system. The bridging protocol record the credit and debit in distributed ledger).
As per claim 11, Wood in view of Moiyallah teaches the method of claim 1, wherein: recording the blockchain entry on the primary blockchain is performed by a bridge between the primary blockchain and the secondary blockchain; and the bridge between the primary blockchain and the secondary blockchain is generated at periodic intervals, within which recording the blockchain entry on the primary blockchain is performed (Wood paragraph [0003], [0074]; Moiyallah paragraph [0044], [0046], [0052]-[0053], The bridging protocol initiate a transfer of the currency to the destination digital wallet system. The bridging protocol record the credit and debit in distributed ledger).
As per claims 21, 23-27 and 31, the claims claim a non-transitory computer-readable medium essentially corresponding to the method claims 1, 3-7 and 11 above, and they are rejected, at least for the same reasons.
Claims 9, 14, 29 and 34 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Wood in view of Moiyallah, and further in view of Micali et al. US 2022/0374886 (hereinafter Micali).
As per claim 9, Wood in view of Moiyallah teaches the method of claim 7.
Wood in view of Moiyallah does not explicitly disclose wherein: vote is further conducted through a quorum; wherein the quorum is determined through an application of digital signatures, using at least one private key; and the at least one private key is shared with plurality of parties using a polynomial secret sharing method.
Micali teaches wherein: vote is further conducted through a quorum; wherein the quorum is determined through an application of digital signatures, using at least one private key; and the at least one private key is shared with plurality of parties using a polynomial secret sharing method (Micali paragraph [0016]-[0017], [0064], validation is performed via a quorum of validators using threshold signature scheme).
Thus it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the invention of Wood in view of Moiyallah of validating candidate blocks before recording on the blockchain via consensus of the validators with the teachings of Micali to include validation via a quorum of validators using threshold signature scheme because the results would have been predictable and resulted in performing validation using threshold signatures.
As per claim 14, Wood in view of Moiyallah teaches the method of any of claim 1, wherein: when the classification is the confirmation classification (Wood paragraph [0003]; Moiyallah paragraph [0044], [0046], [0052]-[0053], the transactional integrity is above a threshold level (e.g., less than a threshold number of repeating transfer patterns). The bridging protocol initiate a transfer of the currency to the destination digital wallet system. The bridging protocol record the credit and debit in distributed ledger).
Wood in view of Moiyallah does not explicitly disclose blockchain entry is hashed; and a hash value that results from the hash is logged on primary blockchain; and the hash is performed by at least one of: a proof of history configuration; or a Merkle tree constructed by a bridge between the primary blockchain and secondary blockchain.
Micali teaches blockchain entry is hashed; and a hash value that results from the hash is logged on primary blockchain; and the hash is performed by at least one of: a proof of history configuration; or a Merkle tree constructed by a bridge between the primary blockchain and secondary blockchain (Micali paragraph [0027]-[0028], [0036], [0106], [0108], hash entry and record hash on the blockchain. Hash is performed via merkle tree between the chains).
Thus it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the invention of Wood in view of Moiyallah of validating candidate blocks before recording on the blockchain with the teachings of Micali to include hashing an entry and recording the hash on the blockchain because the results would have been predictable and resulted in recording the hash of the candidate block on the blockchain.
As per claims 29 and 34, the claims claim a non-transitory computer-readable medium essentially corresponding to the method claims 9 and 14 above, and they are rejected, at least for the same reasons.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 16 and 36 are objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, but would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to HENRY TSANG whose telephone number is (571)270-7959. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 9am - 5pm EST.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Farid Homayounmehr can be reached at (571) 272-3739. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300.
Information regarding the status of published or unpublished applications may be obtained from Patent Center. Unpublished application information in Patent Center is available to registered users. To file and manage patent submissions in Patent Center, visit: https://patentcenter.uspto.gov. Visit https://www.uspto.gov/patents/apply/patent-center for more information about Patent Center and https://www.uspto.gov/patents/docx for information about filing in DOCX format. For additional questions, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000.
/HENRY TSANG/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2495