DETAILED ACTION
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 .
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statements (IDS’s) submitted on 2/5/2026 and 3/23/2026 are in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statements are being considered by the examiner.
Claim Status
The claims filed 4/14/2026 have been entered.
Claims 1-20 are pending.
Claims 1, 8, and 15 are independent.
Claims 1, 2, 8, and 15 are currently amended.
Claims 3-7, 9-14, and 16-20 are original.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 4/14/2026 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
Claim Objections
The prior objection to claim 2 is withdrawn in view of the current amendments.
35 U.S.C. 103
Applicant’s arguments regarding the prior rejection of the claim 1 under 35 U.S.C. 103 over Kwon (US 2012/0172026 A1) in view of Keith (US 2006/0224544 A1), further in view of Durvasula (US 2018/0075453 A1) have been considered but are not persuasive.
Applicant argues that merely stating that a VPN can be used for communication does not teach or suggest “a private network connection associated with digital currency issuance” or “establishing, by the user device via a private network, a private network connection” that is performed “in response to installing the digital wallet application (see Remarks, pg. 9).
The argument is not persuasive. In response to applicant's arguments against the references individually, one cannot show nonobviousness by attacking references individually where the rejections are based on combinations of references. See In re Keller, 642 F.2d 413, 208 USPQ 871 (CCPA 1981); In re Merck & Co., 800 F.2d 1091, 231 USPQ 375 (Fed. Cir. 1986). Durvasula is relied upon for teaching the use of a virtual private network connection with devices having digital wallets in payment networks utilizing distributed ledgers. Kwon is relied upon for teaching installation of the digital wallet application. Accordingly, the claimed limitation of establishing a private network connection “in response to installing the digital wallet application” is taught by the combined teachings of Durvasula and Kwon. Here, the clam language “in response to installing…” reasonably encompasses actions that occur upon or as a consequence of the installation, including subsequent use of the installed application. Thus, use of the digital wallet application following installation satisfies the claim language.
Applicant further argues that the cited references do not teach, disclose, or suggest “establishing … a private network connection” in which the “private network restricts access to the private network connection based on at least in part on the hardware requirement and successfully hardening the user device”, as recited in claim 1. Applicant argues that Durvasula is entirely silent regarding any hardware requirement or successful hardening of a user device (see Remarks, pg. 9).
The argument is not persuasive. Applicant again argues against the references individually rather than addressing the combined teachings of the cited references. Here, the combination of Durvasula, Kwon, and Keith teaches establishing a private network connection in which the private network restricts access to the connection based at least in part on the hardware requirement and successful hardening of the user device. Specifically, Kwon teaches that the installation is based on one or more system/hardware requirements, while Keith teaches hardening a user device. Accordingly, the combined teachings disclose restricting access to the private network connection based at least in part on the hardware requirement and hardening of the user device. Because the installation is based on system/hardware requirements and the device is hardened during installation, subsequent access to the private network is necessarily based, at least in part, on those installation conditions. Thus, the combined teachings satisfy the limitation that the private network restricts access to the network connection based at least in part on the hardware requirement and successful hardening of the user device.
Applicant further argues that Kwon does not teach or suggest “a hardware requirement” because Kwon merely states that available applications may be filtered by mobile device attributes that can include “hardware specifications” (see Remarks, pg. 9).
The argument is not persuasive. Kwon teaches filtering applications based on received mobile device attributes, including hardware specifications, such that only applications compatible with the device are made available for installation (see para. 0068-0070). This filtering necessarily verifies that the user device satisfies the applicable hardware requirements before further installation proceeds. Accordingly, the installation is based on verification that the user device meets one or more system requirements, as claimed. As recited in the claims, installation broadly encompasses the overall installation process, including acquiring or downloading the application.
Applicant further argues that Keith does not teach or suggest “successfully hardening the user device” because Keith merely discusses “perform[ing] … pre-installation checks ensure that the net program or hardware will not conflict with any of the preexisting setup”, and that “after installation of the new program or hardware, if there are any conflicts that went undetected, then the reporting mechanism will send feedback to the server 502, so that the expert system library is able to learn of the issue and in the future is able to prevent such a conflict from occurring.” (see Remarks, pg. 10).
The argument is not persuasive. Keith teaches that, during the installation process, the user device is evaluated to determine whether it satisfies the prerequisite requirements for installation. If the device does not satisfy those requirements, Keith teaches performing remedial actions, including installing an operating system patch, before permitting the installation of the requested application (see para. 0028, 0034). Thus, Keith teaches modifying the user device during the installation process by updating the operating system to satisfy the installation requirement. Accordingly, Keith teaches successfully hardening the user device as part of the installation process.
For the above reasons, the rejections under 35 U.S.C. 103 are maintained herein.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 103 which forms the basis for all obviousness rejections set forth in this Office action:
A patent for a claimed invention may not be obtained, notwithstanding that the claimed invention is not identically disclosed as set forth in section 102, if the differences between the claimed invention and the prior art are such that the claimed invention as a whole would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which the claimed invention pertains. Patentability shall not be negated by the manner in which the invention was made.
Claims 1-3, 7-10, and 14-17 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kwon (US 2012/0172026 A1) in view of Keith (US 2006/0224544 A1), further in view of Durvasula (US 2018/0075453 A1).
Regarding independent claims 1, 8, and 15, Kwon discloses a method of configuring digital currency nodes utilizing a one-tier model, the method comprising:
transmitting, by a user device via an application provider system, an installation request comprising authentication information (see para. 0035-0036);
downloading, by the user device, a digital wallet application (see para. 0037);
installing, by the user device, the digital wallet application based on one or more system requirements (see para. 0038-0039), wherein installing comprises:
verifying the user device meets the one or more system requirements, wherein the one or more system requirements comprises at least a hardware requirement (see para. 0068-0070);
With respect to claim 8, Kwon additionally discloses a system comprising: at least one processing circuit having at least one processor coupled to at least one memory (see para. 0028).
With respect to claim 15, Kwon additionally discloses a non-transitory processor-readable medium comprising instructions (see para. 0017).
Kwon does not explicitly disclose, but Keith teaches:
hardening the user device comprising at least one of:
scanning and removing an installed application or a stored file;
testing one or more network connections; or
updating an operating system of the user device (see para. 0028);
in response to successfully hardening the user device, storing and configuring the application on the user device (see para. 0034);
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the method, system, and product of Kwon to include the features taught by Keith in order to ensure new software installations operate correctly and do not conflict with existing hardware and software (see Keith, para. 0017).
Kwon does not explicitly disclose, but Durvasula teaches:
generating a public and private key pair associated with the digital wallet application, wherein the digital wallet application is configured to perform digital currency exchanges utilizing the public and private key pair (see para. 0045, 0050, wherein the public key is the wallet address);
authenticating the digital wallet application with a financial computing system based on the public key of the public and private key pair (see para. 0045, 0050); and
in response to installing the digital wallet application, establishing, by the user device via a private network, a private network connection associated with digital currency issuance, wherein the private network restricts access to the private network connection based on at least in part on the hardware requirement and successfully hardening the user device (see para. 0031, e.g. virtual private network (VPN)).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the method, system, and product of Kwon to include the features of Durvasula for benefits of blockchain such as publicly verifiable transaction history and transparency (see Durvasula para. 0040, 0061). Note that the recitation “in response to installing the digital wallet application” broadly encompasses actions performed during or as a consequence of the overall installation process, including subsequent operation of the installed application. Accordingly, the combination of Durvasula, Kwon, and Keith teaches establishing the private network connection in response to installing the digital wallet application. The combination further teaches that the private network restricts access to the connection based at least in part on the verified hardware requirements and successful hardening of the user device, both of which are established during the installation process.
Regarding claims 2, 9, and 16, Durvasula teaches automatically syncing, by the user device in real-time via the private network, data of the digital wallet application with a digital wallet database of the processing circuit (see para, 0034, 0053, wherein the wallet app communications continuously with wallet service and digital currency issuer system, wherein balances, transaction state, and wallet metadata are synchronized as transactions occur).
Regarding claims 3, 10, and 17, Durvasula teaches wherein establishing the private network connection is further in response to authenticating a login by the user device into the digital wallet application (see para. 0046).
Regarding claims 7 and 14, Durvasula teaches wherein the user device is a node of a plurality of nodes on the private network, and wherein the private network connection is on a parent network of a plurality of user devices (see paras. 0010, 0033).
Claims 4-6, 11-13, and 18-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kwon (US 2012/0172026 A1) in view of Keith (US 2006/0224544 A1), further in view of Durvasula (US 2018/0075453 A1), further in view of Sha (US 2017/0109190 A1).
Regarding claims 4, 11, and 18, Kwon does not explicitly disclose, but Sha teaches wherein the application is a virtual appliance comprising a pre-configured virtual machine image (VMI), and wherein the digital wallet application comprises virtual machine monitor (VMM) code configured to execute the virtual appliance (see para. 0083-0085, wherein hypervisor is a VMM).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the method of Kwon to include the features of Sha for enhanced security (see Sha, para. 0061)
Regarding claims 5, 12, and 19, Sha teaches wherein the private network is a virtual private network (VPN) without a publicly accessible endpoint or internet routable internet protocol (IP) address, and wherein the virtual appliance of the user device is assigned a private IP address (see para. 0076, i.e. computing device in the private cloud).
Regarding claims 6, 13, and 20, Kwon discloses wherein the public and private key pair is used in signing and verifying digital currency exchanges utilizing the digital wallet application (see para. 0045, 0050), and wherein authenticating the digital wallet application further comprising cross-referencing a certificate system storing a plurality of public keys (see paras. 0010, 0033, wherein blockchain cross-references a certificate system by acting as a decentralized, immutable, and publicly verifiable registry for the cryptographic hashes and public keys).
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Freedman (US 2011/0252240 A1) discloses methods and apparatuses that enroll a wireless device into an enterprise service with a management server addressed in a management profile. The enrollment may grant a control of configurations of the wireless device to the management server via the management profile. In response to receiving a notification from the management server, a trust of the notification may be verified against the management profile. If the trust is verified, a network session may be established with the management server. The network session may be secured via a certificate in the management profile. Management operations may be performed for management commands received over the secure network session to manage the configurations transparently to a user of the wireless device according to the control.
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 ERIC T WONG whose telephone number is (571)270-3405. The examiner can normally be reached 9am-5pm M-F.
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, Michael W Anderson can be reached at 571-270-0508. 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.
/ERIC T WONG/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3693
ERIC WONG
Primary Examiner
Art Unit 3693
Prosecution Insights