Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status
The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
DETAILED ACTION
Status of Claims
Claims 1-7, 9, 11, 18-21, 25 are subject to examination.
Claims 8, 10, 12-17, 22-24 are cancelled.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of 35 U.S.C. 112(a):
(a) IN GENERAL.—The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor or joint inventor of carrying out the invention.
The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112:
The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor of carrying out his invention.
Claims 1-7, 9, 11, 18-21, 25 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(a) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), first paragraph, as failing to comply with the written description requirement. The claim(s) contains subject matter which was not described in the specification in such a way as to reasonably convey to one skilled in the relevant art that the inventor or a joint inventor, or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the inventor(s), at the time the application was filed, had possession of the claimed invention.
Claims 1, 18, 19, 25, contain, “at least” both first data and second data. However, the specification does implement/limit to what all data beyond “both first data and second data” are encrypted. For example, “at least” includes data that are beyond the scope of the specification defined data.
Claims 2-7, 9, 11, 19-21, are dependent claims of claims 1, 18, 19, 25, and hence subject to the same rejections.
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.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph:
The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the applicant regards as his invention.
Claims 1, 18, 19, 25, contain, “verifying the associated digital timestamp”. However, it fails to particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter. It is not apparent how the timestamp by itself is considered verified versus not verified. The specification rather contains, at page 19, The new second hash value is compared to the second hash value in the hands of the verifier in operation 53. If the second hash value and the new second hash value are identical, then the timestamp is verified.
Mere obtaining a digital timestamp would make all the timestamp considered as verified and it fails to distinguish between which digital timestamp is considered as verified versus not verified.
A digital timestamp is merely_a secure record that proves the exact date and time a digital file or event existed, ensuring integrity and authenticity.
Claims 2-7, 9, 11, 19-21, are dependent claims of claims 1, 18, 19, 25, and hence subject to the same rejections.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 103 which forms the basis for all obviousness rejections set forth in this Office action:
A patent for a claimed invention may not be obtained, notwithstanding that the claimed invention is not identically disclosed as set forth in section 102 of this title, if the differences between the claimed invention and the prior art are such that the claimed invention as a whole would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which the claimed invention pertains. Patentability shall not be negated by the manner in which the invention was made.
Claim(s) 1-4, 6, 7, 9, 25, 18-21, 25 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Zabetian 20200396087 in view of HÉMEURY, EP 3706020 A1 and Chang et al., 11301847.
Encryption is a process that transforms readable data, known as plaintext, into an unreadable format called ciphertext. This transformation ensures that only authorized parties can access the original information. Encryption is essential for maintaining data confidentiality, integrity, and security.
Calculating a hash value involves using a hash function to convert a given piece of data into a fixed-length output, which serves as a unique identifier or reference for that data. This process is essential in various applications, including data integrity checks, password storage, and cryptographic security. The hash value is determined by the specific algorithm used, such as SHA-256 or MD5, and is crucial for ensuring that the data has not been altered or tampered with
A digital document is a file that is created, stored, and managed in a digital format, allowing for easy access and sharing. Unlike traditional paper documents, digital documents can be edited, organized, and tracked electronically, making them integral to modern workflows.
A digital timestamp is a record that indicates the exact date and time an event or action occurred in the digital realm. It is created automatically by systems or applications to provide a precise and reliable measure of when something happened. Digital timestamps serve as strong legal evidence that the contents of a document existed at a specific point in time and have not been altered since then.
Referring to claims 1, 25, Zabetian discloses A computer-implemented method to verify document ownership, the method including;
[0044] Additionally, the agent can utilize a smartphone's user authentication, whether password based or biometric, to add authorship and ownership to the SDs' authentications.
[0038] An electronic or digital document that can include one or more of: a snippet of text as typed by the user; a digital or electronic document (e.g., a text file, a PDF file, a spreadsheet, a database, etc.); a photograph or other digital or electronic image stored in a computer readable medium; a physical geographic location, usually stored as a coordinate pair, with optional altitude and movement data; any file that is stored on the smartphone (or other user device); any file that is sent to the smartphone (or other user device); representations of data that is being shared by other apps on that smartphone, or other document or file for which timestamping and/or authentication may be suitable. In some implementations, a subject or source document can include a user's current geographic location, a user's biometric data (e.g., fingerprint, facial recognition, etc.), or a combination of one or more of the above subject document types. Some implementations can timestamp subject documents such as the user's location or proof of the user's presence at their smartphone (optionally along with a given location), or a combination of two or more of the above subject or source document types.
processing both first data and second data, the first data and second data providing information to identify an individual (para 38); and
obtaining a digital timestamp associated to the digital document, the acquired first data and second data (para 38) and verifying the associated digital timestamp (para 38)
[0085] At 408, the generated hash value and the hash value retrieved from the secure ledger are compared. If the values are the same, the digital document is authentic in the sense that it is the same as the digital document that was initially timestamped and had its information entered into the secure ledger.
[0093] For example, application 610 can include a digital (or electronic) document timestamp and authentication application, which as described herein can securely timestamp and store information about the digital document in order to authenticate the digital document and/or timestamp.
Zabetian does not mention about which HÉMEURY discloses, encrypting both first data and second data, calculating a first hash value based on a digital document; and the encrypted first data and second data (a digital document comprising digital data, encrypted or not, to be protected and / or to be certified, last para, page 1, obtaining a first registration number associated with said digital document encrypted according to a first encryption algorithm, obtaining a first signature recorded with said first registration number, calculating a second signature of said digital document encrypted according to a second encryption algorithm, last fifth para, page 3, at least one block of digital data forming a digital document containing digital data, the digital document forming part of a series of digital documents processed successively, This process comprises, for a digital document, steps of: obtaining a registration number associated with a registration of a previously registered signature of said digital document; obtaining one or more metadata associated with the digital document, and calculating at least one associated hash value; obtaining a hash value of at least part of the digital data of said digital document, calculation of a signature of the digital document as a function of the hash value (s) associated with the metadata and of the hash value of the digital data to be protected, obtaining the previously registered signature of said digital document, comparison of the signature previously recorded with the calculated signature, the digital data is encrypted with a predetermined encryption algorithm, and the hash function is applied to the encrypted data, last 4th para, page 3
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the invention disclosed by Zabetian to implement these limitations and also one of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to do so because it could provide utilizing decrypting and hash. This would enable ensuring that the data has not been altered or tampered with, last 4th para, page 3.
Zabetian and HÉMEURY do not mention about which Chang discloses,
obtaining a digital timestamp associated to the calculated first hash value; and verifying the associated digital timestamp (
The computing system may retrieve the TST including the hash cryptographically bound to the time stamp. The TST can be subsequently included in the encryption algorithm as the plaintext along with the authorized identification element, used in an account access request, or along with authentication by the authorized identification system. The time stamp token may be subsequently validated by verifying that the time stamp token was generated using the hash. Col., 5, lines 35-40).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the invention disclosed by Zabetian to implement these limitations and also one of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to do so because it could provide utilizing digital timestamp. This would enable ensuring that the The time stamp token may be subsequently validated by verifying that the time stamp token was generated using the hash for the access request, Col., 5, lines 35-40.
Referring to claim 2, Zabetian discloses storing the digital timestamp and the digital document, first data, and second data (para 93).
Referring to claim 3, Zabetian discloses, wherein the first data or the second data comprise one or more out of:
a biometric characteristic of the individual or of a third party;
a physiological characteristic of the individual or of a third party;
a physical characteristic of the individual or of a third party;
a characteristic of an act of creating the digital document;
a location of the individual or of a third party; and
a characteristic of an environment where the individual or a third party is located. (para 38).
Referring to claim 4, Zabetian discloses acquiring the first data or the second data while the individual creates the digital document (para 38).
Referring to claim 6, Zabetian discloses, wherein obtaining the digital timestamp, obtaining a trusted digital timestamp associated to the digital document, the first data and the second data. (para 58)
Referring to claim 7, Zabetian discloses
calculating a first hash value by inputting the digital document (para 62, 60), the first data and the second data to a hash function (para 13); and
Referring to claim 9, Zabetian discloses
obtaining the digital timestamp associated to the digital document, the first data and the second data by means of a blockchain (para 58, 49, 14).
Referring to claim 18, Zabetian discloses a method to verify document:
processing both first data and second data, the first data and second data providing information to identify an individual (para 38); and
obtaining a digital timestamp associated to the digital document, the acquired first data and second data (para 38) and verifying the associated digital timestamp (para 38)
obtaining the digital document, the first data, the second data, and the digital timestamp;
verifying the digital timestamp associated to the digital document, first data and second data;
if the digital timestamp is verified , inspecting first data and second data to determine an identity of the individual.
Zabetian does not mention about which HÉMEURY discloses, encrypting both first data and second data, calculating a first hash value based on a digital document; and the encrypted first data and second data (a digital document comprising digital data, encrypted or not, to be protected and / or to be certified, last para, page 1, obtaining a first registration number associated with said digital document encrypted according to a first encryption algorithm, obtaining a first signature recorded with said first registration number, calculating a second signature of said digital document encrypted according to a second encryption algorithm, last fifth para, page 3, at least one block of digital data forming a digital document containing digital data, the digital document forming part of a series of digital documents processed successively, This process comprises, for a digital document, steps of: obtaining a registration number associated with a registration of a previously registered signature of said digital document; obtaining one or more metadata associated with the digital document, and calculating at least one associated hash value; obtaining a hash value of at least part of the digital data of said digital document, calculation of a signature of the digital document as a function of the hash value (s) associated with the metadata and of the hash value of the digital data to be protected, obtaining the previously registered signature of said digital document, comparison of the signature previously recorded with the calculated signature, the digital data is encrypted with a predetermined encryption algorithm, and the hash function is applied to the encrypted data, last 4th para, page 3
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the invention disclosed by Zabetian to implement these limitations and also one of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to do so because it could provide utilizing decrypting and hash. This would enable ensuring that the data has not been altered or tampered with, last 4th para, page 3.
Zabetian and HÉMEURY do not mention about which Chang discloses,
obtaining a digital timestamp associated to the calculated first hash value; and verifying the associated digital timestamp (
The computing system may retrieve the TST including the hash cryptographically bound to the time stamp. The TST can be subsequently included in the encryption algorithm as the plaintext along with the authorized identification element, used in an account access request, or along with authentication by the authorized identification system. The time stamp token may be subsequently validated by verifying that the time stamp token was generated using the hash. Col., 5, lines 35-40).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the invention disclosed by Zabetian to implement these limitations and also one of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to do so because it could provide utilizing digital timestamp. This would enable ensuring that the The time stamp token may be subsequently validated by verifying that the time stamp token was generated using the hash for the access request, Col., 5, lines 35-40.
Referring to claim 19, Zabetian discloses a system to provide evidence of ownership of a document, the system comprising a processor and a memory , the memory containing instructions executable by the processor to cause the system to:
obtain the digital document;
acquire/process first data and second data, wherein a combination of the first data and the second data provides information to identify the individual; and
obtain a digital timestamp associated to the digital document, the acquired first data and second data.
Zabetian does not mention about which HÉMEURY discloses, encrypting both first data and second data, calculating a first hash value based on a digital document; and the encrypted first data and second data (a digital document comprising digital data, encrypted or not, to be protected and / or to be certified, last para, page 1, obtaining a first registration number associated with said digital document encrypted according to a first encryption algorithm, obtaining a first signature recorded with said first registration number, calculating a second signature of said digital document encrypted according to a second encryption algorithm, last fifth para, page 3, at least one block of digital data forming a digital document containing digital data, the digital document forming part of a series of digital documents processed successively, This process comprises, for a digital document, steps of: obtaining a registration number associated with a registration of a previously registered signature of said digital document; obtaining one or more metadata associated with the digital document, and calculating at least one associated hash value; obtaining a hash value of at least part of the digital data of said digital document, calculation of a signature of the digital document as a function of the hash value (s) associated with the metadata and of the hash value of the digital data to be protected, obtaining the previously registered signature of said digital document, comparison of the signature previously recorded with the calculated signature, the digital data is encrypted with a predetermined encryption algorithm, and the hash function is applied to the encrypted data, last 4th para, page 3
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the invention disclosed by Zabetian to implement these limitations and also one of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to do so because it could provide utilizing decrypting and hash. This would enable ensuring that the data has not been altered or tampered with, last 4th para, page 3.
Zabetian and HÉMEURY do not mention about which Chang discloses,
obtaining a digital timestamp associated to the calculated first hash value; and verifying the associated digital timestamp (
The computing system may retrieve the TST including the hash cryptographically bound to the time stamp. The TST can be subsequently included in the encryption algorithm as the plaintext along with the authorized identification element, used in an account access request, or along with authentication by the authorized identification system. The time stamp token may be subsequently validated by verifying that the time stamp token was generated using the hash. Col., 5, lines 35-40).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the invention disclosed by Zabetian to implement these limitations and also one of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to do so because it could provide utilizing digital timestamp. This would enable ensuring that the The time stamp token may be subsequently validated by verifying that the time stamp token was generated using the hash for the access request, Col., 5, lines 35-40.
Referring to claim 20, Zabetian discloses a first sensor configured to acquire the first data (para 36, 13, 96, 108)
Referring to claim 21, Zabetian discloses a second sensor configured to acquire the second data (para 36, 13, 96, 108).
Claim(s) 5, 11 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Zabetian in view of in view of HÉMEURY, EP 3706020 A1 and Chang et al., 11301847 and Official Notice.
Referring to claim 5, Zabetian discloses obtaining the digital document in a time sequence (para 49), for the documents (para 13). Zabetian does not specifically mention about, partial portions of the document. Official Notice is taken that these limitations are well-known and expected in the art.
For example, Kumar et al., US 10366315 B1 col., 7, lines 9-19 discloses it.
Zabetian discloses use of blockchain and providing the documents in the time sequence. Zabetian discloses that the documents can contain different entities in the document in the time sequence as they are captured/collected. Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the invention disclosed by Zabetian to implement these limitations and also one of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to do so because it could provide utilizing partial portions of the document. This would enable knowing of which portion was obtained prior to the next portion. Whether the portion belongs to a single document or multiple document, the timestamp associated with the portion would enable determining the evidence using the timestamp for the portion in reference to other evidences.
Referring to claim 11, Zabetian discloses encrypting the information (para 112). Zabetian does not specifically mention about, encrypting first data and the second data using a private key. Official Notice is taken that these limitations are well-known and expected in the art. Zabetian discloses use of encryption. Zabetian discloses that the documents can contain different entities in the document in the time sequence as they are captured/collected.
For example, KUMAGAI et al., CA 2494513 C discloses it 1st para, page 12.
One of ordinary skilled in the art would readily know what Encryption is. It is the process of scrambling data so that only authorized parties can understand it, and it is used to protect data both while it is being transferred (data in motion) and while it is stored (data at rest). It uses an algorithm and a secret key to turn readable "plaintext" into unreadable "ciphertext". This process safeguards confidentiality, integrity, and authenticity by making sure only the intended recipient with the correct key can decrypt and read the data.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the invention disclosed by Zabetian to implement these limitations and also one of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to do so because it could provide utilizing the well-known encryption. This would enable safeguarding confidentiality, integrity, and authenticity by making sure only the intended recipient with the correct key can decrypt and read the data.
Response to Arguments
Remarks/Arguments filed 2/8/26, pages 8-12 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive. Therefore, rejection of claims 1-7, 9, 11, 18-20 is maintained.
Regarding the remarks for the amended claims, the rejections are updated accordingly. Please refer to the updated rejections for the amended limitations. Also, please see above evidence for the Official Notice limitations.
Conclusion
The concept of encrypting data …, calculating hash value of the data …, digital document having data, verifying the digital timestamp with information, had been well-known in the art.
Encryption is a process that transforms readable data, known as plaintext, into an unreadable format called ciphertext. This transformation ensures that only authorized parties can access the original information. Encryption is essential for maintaining data confidentiality, integrity, and security.
Calculating a hash value involves using a hash function to convert a given piece of data into a fixed-length output, which serves as a unique identifier or reference for that data. This process is essential in various applications, including data integrity checks, password storage, and cryptographic security. The hash value is determined by the specific algorithm used, such as SHA-256 or MD5, and is crucial for ensuring that the data has not been altered or tampered with
A digital document is a file that is created, stored, and managed in a digital format, allowing for easy access and sharing. Unlike traditional paper documents, digital documents can be edited, organized, and tracked electronically, making them integral to modern workflows.
A digital timestamp is a record that indicates the exact date and time an event or action occurred in the digital realm. It is created automatically by systems or applications to provide a precise and reliable measure of when something happened. Digital timestamps serve as strong legal evidence that the contents of a document existed at a specific point in time and have not been altered since then
Addition of above well-known elements for the data/information of the teachings of Zabetian, 20200396087 do not make the claimed subject matter novel.
THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a).
A shortened statutory period for reply to this final action is set to expire THREE MONTHS from the mailing date of this action. In the event a first reply is filed within TWO MONTHS of the mailing date of this final action and the advisory action is not mailed until after the end of the THREE-MONTH shortened statutory period, then the shortened statutory period will expire on the date the advisory action is mailed, and any extension fee pursuant to 37 CFR 1.136(a) will be calculated from the mailing date of the advisory action. In no event, however, will the statutory period for reply expire later than SIX MONTHS from the mailing date of this final action.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to HARESH PATEL whose telephone number is (571)272-3973. The examiner can normally be reached on M-F 9-5:30.
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, Jorge L. Ortiz-Criado, can be reached at (571) 272-7624. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is (571) 273-8300.
Information regarding the status of an application may be obtained from the Patent Application Information Retrieval (PAIR) system. Status information for published applications may be obtained from either Private PAIR or Public PAIR. Status information for unpublished applications is available through Private PAIR only. For more information about the PAIR system, see http://pair-direct.uspto.gov. Should you have questions on access to the Private PAIR system, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative or access to the automated information system, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000.
/HARESH N PATEL/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2496