CTNF 18/881,581 CTNF 99233 Detailed Action This office action is in response to applicant’s submission filed on January 6, 2025. Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status 07-03-aia AIA 15-10-aia The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA. Information Disclosure Statement The information disclosure statements (IDS) submitted on January 22, 2025 and February 23, 2026 and have been considered. The submissions are in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, initialed and dated copies of Applicant’s IDS forms 1449 are attached to the instant Office action. Drawings The drawings filed on January 6, 2025 have been accepted. The drawings were searched for informalities. Specification The specification filed on January 6, 2025 has been accepted. The specification was searched for informalities. Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102 07-03-fti AIA The present application is being examined under the pre-AIA first to invent provisions. 07-06 AIA 15-10-15 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. 07-07-aia AIA 07-07 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 – 07-08-aia AIA (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. 07-15 AIA Claim s 1-7, 9, and 11-16 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102( a)(1 ) as being anticipated by WO 2018/217788 A1 to McManus et al. (hereinafter, “McManus”) . Regarding claim 1, McManus discloses: A computer-implemented method for verifying a transfer of a material between a material owner and a material recipient in a decentral network comprising a distributed ledger that comprises multiple member nodes and a distributed ledger application (“ An illustrative example of adding a transaction to a blockchain-based distributed ledger is given. An example of a transaction is transferring the ownership of a physical material from party A to party B ” [0047]), the method including the steps of: - transmitting, by a requestor, a material transaction request to the distributed ledger application (“ A node initiates the transaction by broadcasting a proposed transaction to the other nodes of the blockchain ” [0047]), the material transaction request comprising material data associated with the material (“ The material information database 620 may store material information acquired during distributed ledger transactions, such as material information 227a, 227b, 327a, and 327b ” [0090]), and cryptographic credential(s) of the material owner and optionally the cryptographic credential(s) of the material recipient associated with the transfer of the material (“ The proposed transaction is signed by the private keys associated with party A and party B. The other nodes receive the proposed transaction and verify whether the transaction is properly authorized by party A using the digital signature process ” [0047]); and - receiving confirmation, or denial of a commitment of the material transaction request as material transaction to the distributed ledger (“ The nodes also verify whether party B is accepting the transfer of ownership by verifying the digital signature of party B. When these verifications, or 'validation', is complete, the transaction is broadcasted to be recorded in the current block. If the nodes reach a consensus to record this transaction, the transaction becomes a part of the newly updated distributed ledger 126 reflecting the transfer of ownership ” [0047]), wherein the distributed ledger application is configured to:- receive the material transaction request from the requestor,- verify the transfer of the material associated with the material transaction request by validating the cryptographic credential(s) of the material owner and optionally the cryptographic credential(s) of the material recipient contained in the material transaction request,- commit - if the transfer of the material is verified - the material transaction request as material transaction to the distributed ledger and transmit the confirmation of commitment of the material transaction request, or - transmit - if the transfer of the material is not verified - the denial of commitment of the material transaction request (“ The other nodes receive the proposed transaction and verify whether the transaction is properly authorized by party A using the digital signature process. The nodes further check their respective copy of the blockchain ledger to confirm that the physical material in party A's ledger matches the expectations for that material, in accordance with the material information 127, by verifying the digital signature 128 corresponding to the material information 127. The nodes also verify whether party B is accepting the transfer of ownership by verifying the digital signature of party B. When these verifications, or 'validation', is complete, the transaction is broadcasted to be recorded in the current block. If the nodes reach a consensus to record this transaction, the transaction becomes a part of the newly updated distributed ledger 126 reflecting the transfer of ownership ” [0047] [Examiner notes that this text shows both verifying the transfer using the signature and committing if the transfer is verified]). Regarding claim 2, McManus discloses: wherein the material is a discrete or indiscrete material and/or wherein the material is a chemical raw material, and/or wherein the material is transferred in a linear production process or in a circular process (“ physical material ” [0004]; “ raw material ” [0013]). Regarding claim 3, McManus discloses: wherein the material data comprises transaction meta data and optionally the amount of the material transferred from the material owner to the material recipient, optionally, wherein transaction meta data includes a material identifier, at least one material classification, material production data or a combination thereof, the material identifier optionally including a digital representation pointing to a material data set or parts thereof (“ Material information 127 can be used to determine the identity, quality, or provenance of a physical material... Examples of material information 127 include spectral signatures or hundreds of values for channels of a spectrum of electromagnetic radiation emitted by the physical material in response to an irradiation of the physical material ” [0032-0033]). Regarding claim 4, McManus discloses: wherein the material data set is received from a data providing service and/or wherein the material data set comprises a decentral identifier and data related to the material, optionally, wherein the material data set further comprises data related to one or more authentication mechanisms associated with the decentral identifier or is related to one or more authorization mechanisms associated with the decentral identifier (“ In general, the reference library may be a public database, or a private database with access control. In some scenarios, it may be desirable to limit public access to the reference library. Material information entries of the reference samples can be used by the verification server 160 in various ways to verify identity or provenance of an unknown material ” [0036]; “ A database of the complete material information data of the assets being issued can be maintained in various ways. In some implementations, the database may be a private database maintained by the verification server 160. In some implementations, the database may be stored in a private portion of the distributed ledger 126. In some implementations, the database may be maintained as a secondary blockchain separate from the primary blockchain that records the issuance and tracks subsequent verification events of the asset. The primary blockchain can include a pointer to the secondary block chain for retrieving the complete material information ” [0051]). Regarding claim 5, McManus discloses: wherein the data related to the material comprises one or more digital representation(s) pointing to a/the material data set or parts thereof, optionally, wherein the material data set comprises the material name, the material ID, the material composition, chemical and/or physical properties of the material, emission data of the material, recyclate content of the material, bio-based content of the material, further material production data, material declaration data, chemical material safety data, certificate of analysis data associated with the material, or a combination thereof (“ In some implementations, the material information 127 contained within the distributed ledger 126 can be a cryptographic hash of the complete material information data, such as hundreds of values for channels of a spectrum. The full data that uniquely identifies a material may be stored elsewhere (e.g., verification server 160) and retrieved using the hash value. In some implementations, the material information 127 contained within the distributed ledger 126 can be a pointer to a data entry that includes partial or complete material information 127. The data entry may be located outside of the distributed ledger 126. Examples of the pointer include a universal resource locator (URL), a network address, an index into a table of information (e.g., names, values) and an address of an entry on another distributed ledger. In some implementations, the material information 127 includes the full data that uniquely identifies the material ” [0033]). Regarding claim 6, McManus discloses: wherein the cryptographic credential(s) of the material owner comprise(s) the public key, and optionally the private key and/or the cryptographic signature of the material owner, and/or wherein the cryptographic credential(s) of the material recipient comprise(s) the public key, and optionally the private key and/or the cryptographic signature of the material recipient (“ The other nodes receive the proposed transaction and verify whether the transaction is properly authorized by party A using the digital signature process. The nodes further check their respective copy of the blockchain ledger to confirm that the physical material in party A's ledger matches the expectations for that material, in accordance with the material information 127, by verifying the digital signature 128 corresponding to the material information 127. The nodes also verify whether party B is accepting the transfer of ownership by verifying the digital signature of party B. When these verifications, or 'validation', is complete, the transaction is broadcasted to be recorded in the current block. If the nodes reach a consensus to record this transaction, the transaction becomes a part of the newly updated distributed ledger 126 reflecting the transfer of ownership ” [0047]; “ A cryptographic proof can replace the need for a trusted third party in a blockchain. A cryptographic proof can be obtained in multiple different ways, including use of public-key cryptography. Public-key cryptography, a type of asymmetric cryptography, is a cryptographic system that uses a public-private pair of encryption keys. Public keys are disseminated widely, but private keys are held in secret by the respective owners. The encryption key pair 162 of the verification server 160 is an example of a public-private pair of encryption keys. To send a secure message to another person, one uses the recipient's public key to encrypt the message using a pre-determined algorithm. The encrypted message can then only be decrypted by the recipient in possession of the matching private key. This process can be used in reverse to produce a digital signature 128. In other words, a signee can use his or her private key to encrypt a 'signature' (e.g., signee's name), which can then be decrypted by the matching public key to recover the signature. Successful decryption using the public key proves that the signature was truly signed by the signee as asserted) ” [0043]. Regarding claim 7, McManus discloses: wherein the confirmation or the denial of commitment of the material transaction request is received by the requestor (“ Nodes of the blockchain ledger may generate a new block and reach a consensus, at which point a confirmation may be sent back to the computer. In some implementations, a confirmation request may have to be sent by the computer to the nodes of the blockchain ledger ” [0083]). Regarding claim 9, McManus discloses: wherein the distributed ledger comprises material transactions, each material transaction being associated with a transfer of a material from a material owner to a material recipient, said material transactions including a transaction identity and material data associated with the material (“ An illustrative example of adding a transaction to a blockchain-based distributed ledger is given. An example of a transaction is transferring the ownership of a physical material from party A to party B. A node initiates the transaction by broadcasting a proposed transaction to the other nodes of the blockchain. The proposed transaction is signed by the private keys associated with party A and party B. The other nodes receive the proposed transaction and verify whether the transaction is properly authorized by party A using the digital signature process. The nodes further check their respective copy of the blockchain ledger to confirm that the physical material in party A's ledger matches the expectations for that material, in accordance with the material information 127, by verifying the digital signature 128 corresponding to the material information 127. The nodes also verify whether party B is accepting the transfer of ownership by verifying the digital signature of party B. When these verifications, or 'validation', is complete, the transaction is broadcasted to be recorded in the current block. If the nodes reach a consensus to record this transaction, the transaction becomes a part of the newly updated distributed ledger 126 reflecting the transfer of ownership ” [0047]; “ Material information 127 can be used to determine the identity, quality, or provenance of a physical material. Identity, for example, can be determined from identifying the elemental composition of a material by collecting and analyzing the material's spectral signature, which can be decomposed to the spectral signatures of each constituent element. Quality of a material can depend on what kind of processing was performed on the material. For example, steel may be thermally processed to improve its strength, and different thermal processing gives the processed materials different spectral signatures. This information can be used to determine the quality of a material ” [0032]). Regarding claim 11, McManus discloses: wherein validating the cryptographic credential(s) of the material owner and the cryptographic credential(s) of the material recipient includes validating the cryptographic signature of the material owner and the material recipient (“ The other nodes receive the proposed transaction and verify whether the transaction is properly authorized by party A using the digital signature process. The nodes further check their respective copy of the blockchain ledger to confirm that the physical material in party A's ledger matches the expectations for that material, in accordance with the material information 127, by verifying the digital signature 128 corresponding to the material information 127. The nodes also verify whether party B is accepting the transfer of ownership by verifying the digital signature of party B. When these verifications, or 'validation', is complete, the transaction is broadcasted to be recorded in the current block. If the nodes reach a consensus to record this transaction, the transaction becomes a part of the newly updated distributed ledger 126 reflecting the transfer of ownership ” [0047]). Regarding claim 12, McManus discloses: wherein the distributed ledger application is stored on each member node of the distributed ledger, and/or wherein the distributed ledger application is a smart contract (“ FIG. 5 shows an example of a distributed ledger system 500 containing smart contracts for physical materials. The distributed ledger 126 includes a smart contract 510 and a payment account 520 ” [0085]; “ In general, a distributed ledger system can be set up with different data structures, data types, transaction types, permission levels, access control, data segregation, etc. to suit the needs of different applications ” [0091]). Claim 13 recites substantially the same limitation as claim 1, in the form of an apparatus for implementing the corresponding method, therefore it is rejected under the same rationale. Examiner notes that “one or more computer-readable media having stored thereon computer-executable instructions that are structured such that, when executed by the one or more computing nodes, they cause the apparatus to perform the following steps:” limitation is taught by McManus, “ A computer readable medium can include storage device 124 and memory 123, which stores instructions that implement various distributed ledger and material verification operations that can be run on the processor 122 ” [0027]. Claim 14 recites substantially the same limitation as claim 1, in the form of a method for implementing the corresponding method, therefore it is rejected under the same rationale. Regarding claim 15, McManus discloses: a computer element with instructions, which, when the instructions are executed on one or more computing node(s), cause an apparatus to carry out the steps of the method of claim 1 (“ A computer readable medium can include storage device 124 and memory 123, which stores instructions that implement various distributed ledger and material verification operations that can be run on the processor 122 ” [0027]). Regarding claim 16, McManus discloses: A computer element with instructions which are configured to be carried out by the apparatus of claim 13 (“ A computer readable medium can include storage device 124 and memory 123, which stores instructions that implement various distributed ledger and material verification operations that can be run on the processor 122 ” [0027]) . Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103 07-06 AIA 15-10-15 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. 07-20-aia AIA 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. 07-21-aia AIA Claim s 8 and 10 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over WO 2018/217788 A1 to McManus et al. (hereinafter, “McManus”) in view of US 2019/0036712 A1 to Qiu . Regarding claim 8, McManus discloses the system of claim 1. McManus does not disclose : wherein validating the cryptographic credential(s) of the material owner comprises retrieving a list containing cryptographic credential(s) and comparing the cryptographic credential(s) of the material owner with the cryptographic credential(s) contained in the retrieved list, optionally, wherein the transfer of the material is verified if the cryptographic credential(s) contained in the material transaction request is/are not matching the cryptographic credential(s) contained in the retrieved list. However, Qiu discloses : wherein validating the cryptographic credential(s) of the material owner comprises retrieving a list containing cryptographic credential(s) and comparing the cryptographic credential(s) of the material owner with the cryptographic credential(s) contained in the retrieved list, optionally, wherein the transfer of the material is verified if the cryptographic credential(s) contained in the material transaction request is/are not matching the cryptographic credential(s) contained in the retrieved list (“ It can be seen that, in this implementation, the certificate revocation list is published to the blockchain, so that when receiving the transaction request, the node directly reads the certificate revocation list from the local ledger and verifies whether the digital certificate of the transaction initiation node is a revoked digital certificate. Compared with a technical solution in the existing technology that a node sends a digital certificate of the transaction initiation node to the CA, and the CA verifies the permission of the digital certificate based on a stored revocation list, and returns a verification result to the node, there is no need to remotely request a verification service of the CA in this implementation of the present application. As such, digital certificate verification costs can be effectively reduced, and the transaction efficiency can be improved ” [0094]; “ The digital certificate can include a version, a serial number, a signature algorithm type, issuer information, a validity period, an issuer, an issued public key, a CA digital signature, other information, etc. ” [0054] [Examiner notes here the list containing cryptographic credentials is seen as the revocation list of digital certificate which is used to see if there is a match within that list. Examiner also notes that the digital certificate is the cryptographic credential here because it proves identity and authorization since it binds an identity to a public key that enables verification of that identity through a trusted digital signature]). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify McManus with the added structure of Qiu in order for the system to be able to efficiently validate the cryptographic credential(s) of the material owner. Regarding claim 10, McManus discloses the system of claim 9. McManus does not disclose : wherein validating the cryptographic credential(s) of the material owner includes retrieving a list containing transaction identities of material transactions and comparing the transaction identity associated with the material transaction request with the transaction identities contained in the retrieved list, optionally, wherein the transfer of the material is verified if the transaction identity associated with the received material transaction request is not matching a transaction identity contained in the retrieved list. However, Qiu discloses : wherein validating the cryptographic credential(s) of the material owner includes retrieving a list containing transaction identities of material transactions and comparing the transaction identity associated with the material transaction request with the transaction identities contained in the retrieved list, optionally, wherein the transfer of the material is verified if the transaction identity associated with the received material transaction request is not matching a transaction identity contained in the retrieved list (“ At 1708, in response to the digital certificate management system determining the consensus verification result is greater than or equal to the predetermined threshold value, the digital certificate management system stores the digital certificate in the blockchain associated with the blockchain network. In particular, the digital certificate management system (the blockchain network of nodes) stores the digital certificate and the data identifying the transaction request from the certificate authority in response to the result of the consensus verification from the digital certificate management system being greater than or equal to the predetermined threshold value. The digital certificate management system can store the digital certificate and the data identifying the transaction request in a local ledger or blockchain of the blockchain network. Each of the nodes can access its own node to read and write to the local ledger. Additionally, each node should have the same local ledger or blockchain in the digital local management system. The digital certificate management system logs a date and time for the execution of the transaction request. The digital certificate management system provides an indication to the certificate authority that the transaction has executed. After 1708, method 1700 stops ” [0192] [Examiner notes that the blockchain ledger stores data identifying prior transaction requests (list of transaction identities). During consensus verification, a received transaction is validated against the existing ledger state, which necessarily requires evaluating the transaction's identifying data to previously stored transactions. A transaction is only stored upon successful consensus, which implies that the transaction does not duplicate or conflict with prior transactions. Accordingly, the consensus process inherently performs a comparison between the transaction identity of the received request and stored transaction identities and verifies the transaction when no match is found]). It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify McManus with the added structure of Qiu in order for the system to be able to efficiently validate the cryptographic credential(s) of the material owner . Conclusion 07-96 AIA The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant’s disclosure : Stollman et al. ( US 2022/0277261 A1 ) teaches techniques for a system for tracking and recording the chain-of-custody for assets within a supply chain that creates a non-repudiatable electronic log of each custody transfer at each transfer point from initial creation, to final transfer or disposal. In one embodiment, the system uses encryption technology to register assets that are to be transferred and whose chain of custody is to be ensured. Through use of encryption key pairs and blockchain encryption technology, an electronic document is created in an encrypted transaction log updated at each change of custody point. At each such change of custody point, the new custodians who receive the product are provided with the information generated by the originator. By way of one example, because the system tracks all inputs and outputs to the system at each change of custody point, any alteration in product quantities are immediately identified, and a chain-of-custody integrity problem is identified. Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to SARON MATTHEWOS WORKU whose telephone number is (703)756-1761. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday, 9:30 am - 6:30pm. 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, Linglan Edwards can be reached on 571-270-5440. 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. /SARON MATTHEWOS WORKU/Examiner, Art Unit 2408 /MORSHED MEHEDI/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2408 Application/Control Number: 18/881,581 Page 2 Art Unit: 2408 Application/Control Number: 18/881,581 Page 3 Art Unit: 2408 Application/Control Number: 18/881,581 Page 4 Art Unit: 2408 Application/Control Number: 18/881,581 Page 5 Art Unit: 2408 Application/Control Number: 18/881,581 Page 6 Art Unit: 2408 Application/Control Number: 18/881,581 Page 7 Art Unit: 2408 Application/Control Number: 18/881,581 Page 8 Art Unit: 2408 Application/Control Number: 18/881,581 Page 9 Art Unit: 2408 Application/Control Number: 18/881,581 Page 10 Art Unit: 2408 Application/Control Number: 18/881,581 Page 11 Art Unit: 2408 Application/Control Number: 18/881,581 Page 12 Art Unit: 2408 Application/Control Number: 18/881,581 Page 13 Art Unit: 2408 Application/Control Number: 18/881,581 Page 14 Art Unit: 2408 Application/Control Number: 18/881,581 Page 15 Art Unit: 2408
Prosecution Insights