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 . This office action is in response to the amendment filed on 5/22/2026. Claims 8-11, 15-18, 22-24, and 27-34, with 27-34 are currently pending in the filing of 5/22/2026, with claims 27-34 presently being newly added, and claims 12-14, 19-21, and 25-26 presently being cancelled. Claims 8-26 were pending in the previous filing of 11/27/2024.
Response to Applicant’s Amendments / Arguments Regarding 35 U.S.C. § 103
The applicant’s remarks, on pages 6-9 of the response / amendment, the applicant argues the features which allegedly distinguish over the previously cited references cited in the 35 U.S.C. § 103 rejections.
Applicant’s arguments have been considered but are moot in view of the new ground(s) of rejection.
Previous Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The applicant’s amendments to claims 8-21 have overcome the previous rejections under 35 USC § 112. Therefore, the previous rejections under 35 USC § 112 have been withdrawn.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 103 which forms the basis for all obviousness rejections set forth in this Office action:
A patent for a claimed invention may not be obtained, notwithstanding that the claimed invention is not identically disclosed as set forth in section 102, if the differences between the claimed invention and the prior art are such that the claimed invention as a whole would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which the claimed invention pertains. Patentability shall not be negated by the manner in which the invention was made.
Claims 8-11, 15-18, 22-24, 27-28, and 31-34 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over US 20230275751 to Sneider et al. (hereinafter Sneider), in view of US 20230259640 to Metzler et al. (hereinafter Metzler), in view of US 20190333056 to Wilkinson et al. (hereinafter Wilkinson).
Regarding claim 8, Sneider teaches,
A method for managing access control to a digital asset, the method comprising: ([0003-8] teach access control using blockchains and NFTs.)
receiving an indication that a non-fungible token (NFT) on a blockchain is selected to act as an authentication credential, ([0005-8] teaches blockchains using NFTs. Claim 12 explicitly teaches non-fungible token (NFT)) wherein the NFT is associated with an NFT identifier that uniquely identifies the NFT on the blockchain; (Examiner notes that NFT inherently includes an identifier that points to a location on the blockchain.) (Wilkenson, further discussed below, also teaches tokens with identifiers to id the asset in [0088-89], and at [0048] teaches JWT with payload that includes blockchain address.)
receiving, via a centralized node, user data; ([0007-8] teaches decentralized web that provides encryption services, permissions, to decrypt the content, such as videos, images, and music behind chain conditions such as NFTs. Abstract, teaches that the decentralized nodes are multiple nodes. [0046] teaches centralized servers. Fig. 1 teaches invention nodes 102 \ “centralized node” that connect between user and blockchain, while [0029-30] teaches a Lit node.)
causing, using the user data, the generation of encrypted user data, wherein the encrypted user data is only unlocked using an NFT access credential associated with the NFT, ([0007-8] teaches decentralized web that provides encryption services, permissions, to decrypt the content, such as videos, images, and music behind chain conditions such as NFTs. See also [0012] teaching on-chain access control conditions to encrypt and lock content behind on-chain conditions.) wherein the NFT access credential comprises the NFT identifier; (See discussion above regarding NFT inherently including identifier of blockchain location and also discussed in Wilkenson.)
causing ([0007-8] teaches decentralized web that provides encryption services, permissions, to decrypt the content, such as videos, images, and music behind chain conditions such as NFTs. Abstract, teaches that the decentralized nodes are multiple nodes, and also teaches encryption services provided by the decentralized web / blockchains. While removal / deletion is not explicitly taught in Sneider, this feature would be well known in the art of encryption where unencrypted data is erased once encryption is performed.)
receiving, via the centralized node and from a user device, an access request for the encrypted user data, wherein the access request is associated with a cryptographic wallet, ([0008] teaches a request to obtain the JWT that provisions access to dynamic content. [0012] teaches request a network signed JWT. [0022] teaches a user wanting access to a resource 104 of fig. 1, where the user signs a message using their wallet to prove ownership of the wallet, where a decryption key or network signature / JWT is provided to the user. Fig. 14 & [0064] teach requests a network signature, which signs JWT. ) Applicant’s printed publication at [0044-45] describes a string / cookie / JSON web token (JWT) that is matched to allow unlocking of streaming.)
causing a challenge request to be presented via the user device; (fig. 14 & [0069-71] teach wallet signatures are supplied using EIP 4361, which is a challenge-response where the challenge that includes a nonce is issued by the server to the user, also teaches presenting a wallet signature and AuthSig and the use of checkAndSignAuthMessage( ) function. See also [0063-67] for further description of fig. 14 and JWT acquisition including requests a network signature, which signs JWT. See also [0046] teaching “user requests and obtains a JWT using the requesting network signature process”.)
receiving a signature to the challenge, wherein the signature is generated using the cryptographic wallet; ([0070] teaches wallet signature. See discussion above of fig. 14 and [0069-71].)
providing, based on validation that the cryptographic wallet owns the NFT, a credential string to the user device, ([0008] teaches a request to obtain the JWT that provisions access to dynamic content. [0022] teaches that [0022] teaches a user wanting access to a resource 104 of fig. 1, where the user signs a message using their wallet to prove ownership of the wallet, where a decryption key or network signature / JWT is provided to the user. See discussion above of fig. 14 & [0069-71] teaching the challenge-response using signatures. [0074] & [0082-83] teach the signed JWT errors. See also fig. 12 & [0047] example of owner Alice renting to Bob.) (See discussion above of applicant’s printed publication at [0044-45] describes a string being a JSON token / JWT) wherein the credential string comprises a web token cached in a web browser of the user device; and ([0069-74] teach JWTs and JWT being used by browser. JWTs are used for logins and permissions and are JSON web tokens.)
allowing decryption and consumption of the encrypted user data based … ([0008] & [0012] teach decryption of static content locked by chain conditions, where the chain conditions are NFTs and JWT provides access to content behind the chain conditions. [0058] & [0063] teach decryption based on NFT possession or ownership. [0097] teaches the use of threshold cryptographic functions in the Lit protocol)
… determining, by the . ([0046] & fig. 11 teaches server validating claim using JWT / JSON web token. ([0007-8] teaches decentralized web service that provides permissions to decrypt the content / “encrypted user data”.)
Sneider fails to explicitly teach deletion of unencrypted data,
However, Metzler teaches,
causing removal or deletion of the unencrypted user data from the centralized node; ([0343] teaches once file has been encrypted, the encryption module 222 may delete any unencrypted copies of the file located on the client computing device 102 and/or the primary storage device 104.)
Before the effective filing date of the invention, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to combine the teachings of Sneider, which teaches non-fungible tokens (NFTs) that are used to control access to encrypted content and JTWs that provide access to the encrypted content ([0005-9]), with Metzler, which also teaches non-fungible tokens (NFTs) being used to control access to encrypted content (Abstract), and additionally teaches once file has been encrypted, the encryption module 222 may delete any unencrypted copies of the file located on the client computing device 102 and/or the primary storage device 104 ([0343]). One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to perform such an addition to provide Sneider with the added ability to delete un-encrypted content after encryption, as taught by Metzler, for the purpose of increasing security by eliminating un-encrypted content and increasing computational efficiency by removing unnecessary content from the system to preserve memory.
Sneider and Metzler fail to explicitly teach a centralized node performing matching / authentication using web tokens / JWTs associated with encrypted / hashed user data for accessing a blockchain,
However, Wilkinson teaches,
… determining, by the centralized node, that a cryptographic payload of the web token matches a corresponding entry in a private node database that associates the . (Wilkinson, [0047-48] & fig. 5 teach checking credentials using access tokens / JWTs. JSON web token / JWT includes additional fields, including blockchain address and data representing the identity of the user. See also, [0049-50]. [0034-36] teaches node using access token used to manage access / authentication using hashed user data. [0043] teaches asset identifier 309.)
Before the effective filing date of the invention, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to combine the teachings of, Sneider, which teaches non-fungible tokens (NFTs) that are used to control access to encrypted content and JTWs that provide access to the encrypted content ([0005-9]), with Metzler, which also teaches non-fungible tokens (NFTs) being used to control access to encrypted content (Abstract), and additionally teaches once file has been encrypted, the encryption module 222 may delete any unencrypted copies of the file located on the client computing device 102 and/or the primary storage device 104 ([0343]), with Wilkenson, which also teaches tokens and JWTs used for access / authentication ([0047-48]), and additionally teaches using access tokens / JWTs to perform comparison for access / authentication ([0034-35] & [0047-48]). One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to perform such an addition to provide Sneider and Metzler with the added ability to associated token identifier with encrypted user data, as taught by Wilkenson, for the purpose of increasing security and increasing computational efficiency by using tokens to perform authentication.
Regarding claim 9, Sneider, Metzler, and Wilkinson teach,
The method of claim 8, wherein the user device comprises a web browser and the credential string is stored as a token on the web browser. (Sneider, [0035] teaches that the web browser is used to delegate access using the JWT. [0067] teaches the JWT is a token.)
Regarding claim 10, Sneider, Metzler, and Wilkinson teach,
The method of claim 8, wherein the credential string comprises a first party object. (Sneider, [0029] teaches ownership being delegated by the smart contract that is identified with ETH token contract address and token id. Fig. 12 & [0047] teaches example of owner renting an asset. [0012-13] teaches JWT / “credential string” provisioning that provides access and authorization to dynamic content, including access where owners can create locked NFTs and provisioning access given only to NFT owners. [0023] teaches the JWT being used to access or grant access and update content.) (Examiner asserts that first party objects is data owned firsthand that is different than the consumer / audience.)
Regarding claim 11, Sneider, Metzler, and Wilkinson teach,
The method of claim 8, wherein the credential string comprises a first party cookie. (Sneider, [0029] teaches the token being used for authentication.) (Examiner asserts that first party cookies are well known as those used for logging into an account, such as cookies that maintain passwords or other credentials)
Regarding claim 15, Sneider, Metzler, and Wilkinson teach,
A method for managing access control to a digital asset, the method comprising:
receiving, via a node associated with a digital rights management system, an indication of a select non-fungible token (NFT) on a blockchain; (Metzler, [0003] teaches intellectual property rights in copyrighted material being controlled by NFTs)
receiving, via the node, a digital asset;
encrypting the digital asset to form an encrypted asset, wherein decryption of the encrypted asset is based on the select NFT;
storing a credential indication that the select NFT is representative of an authentication credential for the encrypted asset; ([0007-8] teaches storing of permissions and encrypted resources on a public network where NFT conditions and JWT tokens are used to access the encrypted resources.)
receiving, from a user device associated with a cryptographic wallet, a request to access the encrypted asset;
causing a challenge request to be presented via the user device;
receiving a signature to the challenge, wherein the signature is based on the cryptographic wallet;
providing, based on validation that the cryptographic wallet owns the select NFT, a credential string to the user device; and
allowing decryption and consumption of the encrypted asset based on a comparison of the credential indication and credential string meeting a matching threshold.
Claim 15 is rejected using the same basis of arguments used to reject claim 8 above.
Regarding claim 16, Sneider, Metzler, and Wilkinson teach,
The method of claim 15, wherein the user device comprises a web browser and the credential string is stored as a token on the web browser.
Claim 16 is rejected using the same basis of arguments used to reject claim 9 above.
Regarding claim 17, Sneider, Metzler, and Wilkinson teach,
The method of claim 15, wherein the credential string comprises a first party object.
Claim 17 is rejected using the same basis of arguments used to reject claim 10 above.
Regarding claim 18, Sneider, Metzler, and Wilkinson teach,
The method of claim 15, wherein the credential string comprises a first party cookie.
Claim 18 is rejected using the same basis of arguments used to reject claim 11 above.
Regarding claim 22, Sneider, Metzler, and Wilkinson teach,
A method for managing access control to a digital asset, the method comprising:
receiving, via a node associated with a digital rights management system, an indication of a select encrypted asset that is encrypted based on a select non-fungible token (NFT) on a blockchain;
receiving, from a user device associated with a cryptographic wallet, a request to access the encrypted asset;
causing a challenge request to be presented via the user device;
receiving a signature to the challenge, wherein the signature is based on the cryptographic wallet;
validating, based on the signature, that a user owns a select non-fungible token; and
allowing decryption and consumption of the encrypted digital asset based on the validating that a user owns a select non-fungible token.
Claim 22 is rejected using the same basis of arguments used to reject claim 8 & 15 above.
Regarding claim 23, Sneider, Metzler, and Wilkinson teach,
The method of claim 22, wherein the user device comprises a web browser and the credential string is stored as a token on the web browser.
Claim 23 is rejected using the same basis of arguments used to reject claim 9 above.
Regarding claim 24, Sneider, Metzler, and Wilkinson teach,
The method of claim 22, wherein the credential string comprises a first party cookie.
Claim 24 is rejected using the same basis of arguments used to reject claim 11 above.
Regarding claim 27, Sneider, Metzler, and Wilkinson teach,
The method of claim 8, wherein the web token comprises an authentication token. (Wilkinson, [0048] teaches access token is JSON web token / JWT.)
Regarding claim 28, Sneider, Metzler, and Wilkinson teach
The method of claim 8, wherein the web token comprises a signed authentication token. (Wilkinson, [0048] teaches access token is JSON web token / JWT. [0050] teaches signed access token uses to authenticate.)
Regarding claim 31, Sneider, Metzler, and Wilkinson teach,
The method of claim 15, wherein the web token comprises an authentication token.
Claim 31 is rejected using the same basis of arguments used to reject claim 27 above.
Regarding claim 32, Sneider, Metzler, and Wilkinson teach,
The method of claim 15, wherein the web token comprises a signed authentication token.
Claim 32 is rejected using the same basis of arguments used to reject claim 28 above.
Regarding claim 33, Sneider, Metzler, and Wilkinson teach,
The method of claim 22, wherein the web token comprises an authentication token.
Claim 33 is rejected using the same basis of arguments used to reject claim 27 above.
Regarding claim 34, Sneider, Metzler, and Wilkinson teach,
The method of claim 22, wherein the web token comprises a signed authentication token.
Claim 34 is rejected using the same basis of arguments used to reject claim 28 above.
Claim 29 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Sneider, in view of Metzler, in view of Wilkinson, in view of US 20210097508 to Papanikolas (hereinafter Papanikolas).
Regarding claim 29, Sneider, Metzler, and Wilkinson teach,
The method of claim 8, further comprising:
monitoring, by the centralized node, events related to the NFT identifier on the blockchain using an event listener; and (Sneider, [0069] & [0112]) (Additionally, Papanikolas which is further discussed below, teaches event monitoring at Abstract & [0089-90].)
Sneider, Metzler, and Wilkinson fail to explicitly teach changing ownership using event monitoring,
However, Papanikolas teaches,
updating the private node database responsive to a detected event related to the NFT identifier, wherein the updating reflects a change in ownership or status of the NFT on the blockchain.
(Papanikolas, Abstract & [0089-90] teach NFTs where the events are monitored and ownership is changed.)
Before the effective filing date of the invention, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to combine the teachings of, Sneider, which teaches non-fungible tokens (NFTs) that are used to control access to encrypted content and JTWs that provide access to the encrypted content ([0005-9]), with Metzler, which also teaches non-fungible tokens (NFTs) being used to control access to encrypted content (Abstract), and additionally teaches once file has been encrypted, the encryption module 222 may delete any unencrypted copies of the file located on the client computing device 102 and/or the primary storage device 104 ([0343]), with Wilkenson, which also teaches tokens and JWTs used for access / authentication ([0047-48]), and additionally teaches using access tokens / JWTs to perform comparison for access / authentication ([0034-35] & [0047-48]), with Papanikolas, which also teaches NFTs (Abstract), and additionally teaches monitoring events related to the token / token ID of the NFT and updating an ownership database (Abstract & [0089-90]). One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to perform such an addition to provide Sneider, Metzler, and Wilkinson with the added ability to monitor events related to the NFTs to update ownership on the blockchain, as taught by Papanikolas, for the purpose of maintain security while increasing computational efficiency by monitoring events that require updates tot the blockchain.
Claim 30 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Sneider, in view of Metzler, in view of Wilkinson, in view of US 20130125175 to Hao et al. (hereinafter Hao).
Regarding claim 30, Sneider, Metzler, and Wilkinson teach,
The method of claim 8, wherein the encrypted user data comprises an encrypted stream of content segments, and (Sneider, [0008] teaches encrypted content that may be decrypted based on NFT.)
wherein allowing decryption and consumption of the encrypted user data comprises (Sneider, [0008])
Sneider, Metzler, and Wilkinson fail to explicitly teach allocating bandwidth of content that has to be decrypted,
However, Hao teaches,
wherein allowing decryption and consumption of the encrypted user data comprises unlocking a bandwidth of the encrypted stream to deliver the content segments to the user device responsive to the determining. (Hao, [0086] teaches decryption key for license provided with allocation of bandwidth to see video content.)
Before the effective filing date of the invention, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to combine the teachings of, Sneider, which teaches non-fungible tokens (NFTs) that are used to control access to encrypted content and JTWs that provide access to the encrypted content ([0005-9]), with Metzler, which also teaches non-fungible tokens (NFTs) being used to control access to encrypted content (Abstract), and additionally teaches once file has been encrypted, the encryption module 222 may delete any unencrypted copies of the file located on the client computing device 102 and/or the primary storage device 104 ([0343]), with Wilkenson, which also teaches tokens and JWTs used for access / authentication ([0047-48]), and additionally teaches using access tokens / JWTs to perform comparison for access / authentication ([0034-35] & [0047-48]), with Hao, which also teaches encrypted content being distributed ([0034-35]), and additionally teaches allocating bandwidth and providing a decryption key for the content ([0086]). One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to perform such an addition to provide Sneider, Metzler, and Wilkinson with the added ability to allocate bandwidth of the encrypted content, as taught by Hao, for the purpose of increasing security of the content through encryption while increasing network efficiency by controlling the allocation of bandwidth for the encrypted content.
Conclusion
Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, 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 nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) 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 BRIAN WILLIAM AVERY whose telephone number is (571)272-3942. The examiner can normally be reached on 9AM-5PM.
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, Farid Homayounmehr can be reached on (571)272-3739.
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 https://ppair-my.uspto.gov/pair/PrivatePair. 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.
/B.W.A./
/MAUNG T LWIN/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2495
Prosecution Insights