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
Office Action is in response to the instant Application 18/867,390 filed on 11/19/2024 and Preliminary Amendments filed on 11/19/2024. Claims 16, 17, 19 and 22-24 have been canceled by the Preliminary Amendment. Claims 1-15, 18, 20, 21, 25 and 16 are pending. This Office Action is Non-Final.
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement (IDS), submitted on 2/17/2025, is in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statement is being considered by the examiner.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
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 the appropriate paragraphs of 35 U.S.C. 102 that form the basis for the rejections under this section made in this Office action:
A person shall be entitled to a patent unless –
(a)(1) the claimed invention was patented, described in a printed publication, or in public use, on sale, or otherwise available to the public before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claim(s) 1-3, 7, 8, 13-15, 18, 20, 21, 25 and 26 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Dillenberger (US 2017/0177898).
As per claim 1, Dillenberger disclosed a computer-implemented method of journaling messages sent to and/or from a first party, wherein the method comprises: determining a first message to be journaled, wherein the first message is sent to or from the first party; generating a first journaled message, wherein the first journaled message comprises a copy of the first message; storing the first journaled message and/or an encrypted version of the first journaled message at a storage location (Dillenberger, Paragraph 0037 recites “A computing node receives are request from a user or entity. The computing node is one of multiple computing nodes in a system using a blockchain protocol to share a transaction database. As described above, the transactions 250 are data to be stored in the blockchain 200 and the record blocks 210 are records that confirm when and in what sequence certain transaction became journaled as part of the blockchain 200.”);
causing a first blockchain transaction to be sent to a blockchain network to be recorded on a blockchain, wherein the first blockchain transaction comprises a first hash generated by hashing at least the first journaled message (Dillenberger, Paragraph 0041 recites “In step 308, a block or record block 210 is added that records the new transaction with additional data in the blockchain 200. A transaction ID 218, 228, which is unique to each transaction in the blockchain is included. Optionally, a timestamp 214, 222, and/or category 216, 226 of the additional data is included 216, 226. Also, a hash 292 of a previous block 212, 290 combined with the current block 222 may be included as well to make tampering or changes to the blockchain 200 difficult.”).
As per claim 2, Dillenberger discloses the method of claim 1, Dillenberger further teaches wherein the first blockchain transaction has a first transaction identifier, and wherein the first journaled message and/or the encrypted version thereof is mapped to the first transaction identifier at the storage location (Dillenberger, Paragraph 0041 recites “In step 308, a block or record block 210 is added that records the new transaction with additional data in the blockchain 200. A transaction ID 218, 228, which is unique to each transaction in the blockchain is included. Optionally, a timestamp 214, 222, and/or category 216, 226 of the additional data is included 216, 226. Also, a hash 292 of a previous block 212, 290 combined with the current block 222 may be included as well to make tampering or changes to the blockchain 200 difficult.”).
As per claim 3, Dillenberger discloses the method of claim 2, Dillenberger further teaches wherein the first blockchain transaction is recorded in a first block of the blockchain, wherein the first block has a first block number, and wherein the first journaled message and/or the encrypted version thereof is mapped to the first block number at the storage location (Dillenberger, Paragraph 0041 recites “In step 308, a block or record block 210 is added that records the new transaction with additional data in the blockchain 200. A transaction ID 218, 228, which is unique to each transaction in the blockchain is included. Optionally, a timestamp 214, 222, and/or category 216, 226 of the additional data is included 216, 226. Also, a hash 292 of a previous block 212, 290 combined with the current block 222 may be included as well to make tampering or changes to the blockchain 200 difficult.”).
As per claim 7, Dillenberger discloses the method of claim 1, Dillenberger further teaches comprising: encrypting the first journaled message to generate the encrypted version of the first journaled message; and storing the encrypted version of the first journaled message at the storage location (Dillenberger, Paragraph 0038 recites “Typically the request received is signed by a user system to include a new transaction with additional data in the blockchain, where the additional data has been encrypted with an encryption key in step 306. The encryption key may be a symmetrical key, public-private key, other cryptographic key, or a combination thereof.”)
As per claim 8, Dillenberger discloses the method of claim 1, Dillenberger further teaches wherein the encrypted version of the first journaled message is generated using a symmetric encryption scheme (Dillenberger, Paragraph 0034 recites “The data in each block 252, 272 can be encrypted with a symmetrical key, a public-private key or other cryptographic key.”).
As per claim 13, Dillenberger discloses the method of claim 1, Dillenberger further teaches wherein said determining comprises determining whether the first message satisfies one or more conditions for journaling messages (Dillenberger, Paragraph 0037 recites “A computing node receives are request from a user or entity. The computing node is one of multiple computing nodes in a system using a blockchain protocol to share a transaction database. As described above, the transactions 250 are data to be stored in the blockchain 200 and the record blocks 210 are records that confirm when and in what sequence certain transaction became journaled as part of the blockchain 200.”).
As per claim 14, Dillenberger discloses the method of claim 1, Dillenberger further teaches comprising: determining a plurality of respective messages to be journaled; generating a plurality of respective journaled messages, wherein each respective journaled message comprises a copy of the respective message; storing the plurality of respective journaled messages and/or respective encrypted versions of the respective journaled messages at the storage location; for each of the plurality of respective journaled messages, causing a respective blockchain transaction to be sent to the blockchain network to be recorded on the blockchain, wherein the respective blockchain transaction comprises a respective hash generated by hashing at least the respective journaled message (Dillenberger, Paragraph 0037 recites “A computing node receives are request from a user or entity. The computing node is one of multiple computing nodes in a system using a blockchain protocol to share a transaction database. As described above, the transactions 250 are data to be stored in the blockchain 200 and the record blocks 210 are records that confirm when and in what sequence certain transaction became journaled as part of the blockchain 200.”).
As per claim 15, Dillenberger discloses the method of claim 14, Dillenberger further teaches comprising: encrypting each respective journaled message to generate the respective encrypted version of the respective journaled message; and storing each respective encrypted version of the respective journaled message at the storage location (Dillenberger, Paragraph 0038 recites “Typically the request received is signed by a user system to include a new transaction with additional data in the blockchain, where the additional data has been encrypted with an encryption key in step 306. The encryption key may be a symmetrical key, public-private key, other cryptographic key, or a combination thereof.”)
As per claim 18, Dillenberger discloses the method of claim 1, Dillenberger further teaches comprising: receiving, from a requestor, a request to access the first journaled message; sending the first journaled message to the requestor (Dillenberger, Paragraphs 0044-0046 recites “In step 406, after the request is received with a transaction identifier 218, 228 and a decryption key from a user system to access data journaled as part of a blockchain 200. The transaction database is searched using the identifier for a corresponding block in the blockchain 200. In response to finding the corresponding block in the blockchain 200, decrypting the data using the decryption key in step 408. The data that has been decrypted is made available to the user system in step 410. A test is made in step 412 to determine if there is another request. In response to another request being received, the process returns to step 406, otherwise the process ends in step 414.”).
As per claim 20, Dillenberger discloses the method of claim 18, Dillenberger further teaches comprising: providing a first transaction identifier to the requestor, wherein the first transaction identifier is associated with the first blockchain transaction (Dillenberger, Paragraphs 0044-0046 recites “In step 406, after the request is received with a transaction identifier 218, 228 and a decryption key from a user system to access data journaled as part of a blockchain 200. The transaction database is searched using the identifier for a corresponding block in the blockchain 200. In response to finding the corresponding block in the blockchain 200, decrypting the data using the decryption key in step 408. The data that has been decrypted is made available to the user system in step 410. A test is made in step 412 to determine if there is another request. In response to another request being received, the process returns to step 406, otherwise the process ends in step 414.”).
As per claim 21, Dillenberger discloses the method of claim 18, Dillenberger further teaches comprising: causing a second blockchain transaction to be sent to the blockchain network to be recorded on the blockchain, wherein the second blockchain transaction comprises a second hash generated by double-hashing at least the first journaled message (Dillenberger, Paragraph 0033 recites “A hash function 290 and 292 is shown as part of the record blocks 210. In one implementation of a blockchain, the previously hash function 290 is input to a subsequent hash function 292, along with the transaction 1 as shown. This ensures that there has been no tampering or alteration of the data in the record blockchain.”).
Regarding claims 25 and 26, claims 25 and 26 are directed to a system and a non-transitory readable storage media associated with the method of claim 1. Claims 25 and 26 are of similar scope to claim 1, and are therefore rejected under similar rationale.
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.
This application currently names joint inventors. In considering patentability of the claims the examiner presumes that the subject matter of the various claims was commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the claimed invention(s) absent any evidence to the contrary. Applicant is advised of the obligation under 37 CFR 1.56 to point out the inventor and effective filing dates of each claim that was not commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the later invention in order for the examiner to consider the applicability of 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(C) for any potential 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) prior art against the later invention.
Claim(s) 4 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Dillenberger (US 2017/0177898) in view of Liu (US 2022/0239668).
As per claim 4, Dillenberger discloses the method of claim 1, but fails to teach wherein the first message has a first message index, and wherein the first journaled message and/or the encrypted version thereof is mapped to the first message index at the storage location.
However, in an analogous art Liu teaches wherein the first message has a first message index, and wherein the first journaled message and/or the encrypted version thereof is mapped to the first message index at the storage location (Liu, Paragraph 0078 recites “The consensus parameters may include, but are not limited to: identification information of a message transmission node (also referred to as message index information), pointer data included in a message, block data included in the message, a block hash value in the block data, and an execution result of transaction data in the block data.”).
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the invention to use Liu’s Blockchain-based message processing method and apparatus, device, and storage medium with Dillenberger’s Personal ledger blockchain because it offers the advantage of being able to help properly track and identify data in the network.
Claim(s) 5 and 6 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Dillenberger (US 2017/0177898) in view of Triola et al. (US 2019/0319948).
As per claim 5, Dillenberger discloses the method of claim 1, but fails to teach, wherein the first journaled message comprises first metadata associated with the first message.
However, in an analogous art Triola teaches wherein the first journaled message comprises first metadata associated with the first message (Triola, Paragraph 0030 recites “In another embodiment, application code may be configured for submitting, registering, transferring, recording submitting and/or storing transaction-related data, such as transaction ID, document ID and metadata (date and timestamp, author/owner) in a blockchain or other similar cryptography enabled digital ledger platforms.”).
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the invention to use Triola’s Remote authentication and identification proofing systems and methods with Dillenberger’s Personal ledger blockchain because it offers the advantage of metadata which provides essential context and information about data assets, enabling organizations to manage, locate, and utilize their data effectively.
As per claim 6, Dillenberger in combination with Triola teaches the method of claim 5, Triola further teaches wherein the first metadata comprises one or more of: a sender of the first message, a recipient of the first message, a timestamp, a message type (Triola, Paragraph 0030 recites “In another embodiment, application code may be configured for submitting, registering, transferring, recording submitting and/or storing transaction-related data, such as transaction ID, document ID and metadata (date and timestamp, author/owner) in a blockchain or other similar cryptography enabled digital ledger platforms.”).
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the invention to use Triola’s Remote authentication and identification proofing systems and methods with Dillenberger’s Personal ledger blockchain because it offers the advantage of metadata which provides essential context and information about data assets, enabling organizations to manage, locate, and utilize their data effectively.
Claim(s) 9-12 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Dillenberger (US 2017/0177898) in view of Liao et al. (US 11,283,595).
As per claim 9, Dillenberger discloses the method of claim 7, but fails to teach wherein the first journaled message has a first journaled message index, and wherein the method comprises: generating a hierarchal key structure comprising one or more layers of keys, each layer comprises one or more respective keys having respective key indexes, wherein the hierarchical key structure comprises a first branch of keys, and wherein encrypting the first journaled message comprises using a first encryption key derived from a first message key in the first branch of keys and having a first key index corresponding to the first journaled message index.
However, in an analogous art Liao teaches wherein the first journaled message has a first journaled message index, and wherein the method comprises: generating a hierarchal key structure comprising one or more layers of keys, each layer comprises one or more respective keys having respective key indexes, wherein the hierarchical key structure comprises a first branch of keys, and wherein encrypting the first journaled message comprises using a first encryption key derived from a first message key in the first branch of keys and having a first key index corresponding to the first journaled message index (Liao, Col. 9 Lines 14-27 recites “FIG. 5 illustrates a process 500 for deriving the storage key/address based on the user private key and the data cache identifier unique to the data cache, such as the data cache name. An example implementation for deriving the storage key/address implements a hierarchal deterministic key creation and transfer protocol that allows creating child keys from parent keys in a hierarchy, such as BIP32. The process begins in element 501. In element 503, the frontend client calls a procedure to obtain the user private key. In element 505, the client calls a procedure to determine a cache-specific index based on the data cache identifier. In element 507, the client calls a procedure to derive the storage key/address as a child key of the user private key, using the cache-specific identifier as the index.”).
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the invention to use Liao’s Systems And Methods For Securing Cached Data Stored Off-chain In A Blockchain-based Network with Dillenberger’s Personal ledger blockchain because it offers the advantage of increasing the amount of storage available in the context of a blockchain-based network.
As per claim 10, Dillenberger in combination with Liao teaches the method of claim 9, Liao further teaches wherein the first blockchain transaction comprises a first spendable output locked to a first payment public key, wherein the hierarchical key structure comprises a second branch of keys, wherein the first payment public key is derived from a first payment key, and wherein the first payment key is derived from a first message key in the second branch of keys and having a first key index corresponding to the first journaled message index (Liao, Col. 2 Line 61 – Col. 3 Line 8 recites “First, a blockchain consists of a series of digital “blocks” that are securely linked together in sequential order using cryptography to create a virtual chain of data. These blocks record information such as financial transactions, agreements between parties, and ownership records, as shown in FIG. 1, which provides an overview of a blockchain network 100. In block 101 of FIG. 1, a transaction to transfer a digital coin from user A to user B is initiated by user A. In block 103, the transaction is broadcast to every node in the network. In block 105, the nodes form a consensus on whether the transaction is valid. In block 107, the nodes add valid transactions to a “block.” In step 109, the block is added to the blockchain. In step 111, the transaction is complete and the digital coin transfers to user B (e.g., user B).”).
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the invention to use Liao’s Systems And Methods For Securing Cached Data Stored Off-chain In A Blockchain-based Network with Dillenberger’s Personal ledger blockchain because it offers the advantage of increasing the amount of storage available in the context of a blockchain-based network.
As per claim 11, Dillenberger in combination with Liao teaches the method of claim 10, Liao further teaches wherein the first hash is stored in the first spendable output (Liao, Col. 9 Lines 28-42 recites “FIG. 6 shows an example implementation 600 of element 505. The process begins in element 601. In element 601, the frontend client creates a hash based at least on an identifier for the data cache. The identifier can be a name of the cache, such as “cache.contacts” or “collections.contacts.” The hash can also be based on a salt (data that is used as an additional input). The salt can be secret or non-secret, depending on the implementation. The salt can be based, for example, on the user's username and/or address used to login to the frontend client or other secret or non-secret information. The data cache identifier and the salt, if included, are input to a hash function. An example hash function can include the SHA-256 algorithm. The output of hash (hereinafter, the “hash”) can be, for example, hexadecimal value. The process ends at element 605.”).
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the invention to use Liao’s Systems And Methods For Securing Cached Data Stored Off-chain In A Blockchain-based Network with Dillenberger’s Personal ledger blockchain because it offers the advantage of increasing the amount of storage available in the context of a blockchain-based network.
As per claim 12, Dillenberger in combination with Liao teaches the method of claim 10, Liao further teaches wherein the first hash is stored in an output other than the first spendable output (Liao, Col. 9 Lines 28-42 recites “FIG. 6 shows an example implementation 600 of element 505. The process begins in element 601. In element 601, the frontend client creates a hash based at least on an identifier for the data cache. The identifier can be a name of the cache, such as “cache.contacts” or “collections.contacts.” The hash can also be based on a salt (data that is used as an additional input). The salt can be secret or non-secret, depending on the implementation. The salt can be based, for example, on the user's username and/or address used to login to the frontend client or other secret or non-secret information. The data cache identifier and the salt, if included, are input to a hash function. An example hash function can include the SHA-256 algorithm. The output of hash (hereinafter, the “hash”) can be, for example, hexadecimal value. The process ends at element 605.”).
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the invention to use Liao’s Systems And Methods For Securing Cached Data Stored Off-chain In A Blockchain-based Network with Dillenberger’s Personal ledger blockchain because it offers the advantage of increasing the amount of storage available in the context of a blockchain-based network.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to RODERICK TOLENTINO whose telephone number is (571)272-2661. The examiner can normally be reached Mon- Fri 8am-4pm.
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, Luu Pham can be reached at 571-270-5002. 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.
RODERICK . TOLENTINO
Examiner
Art Unit 2439
/RODERICK TOLENTINO/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2439
Prosecution Insights