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 .
Continued Examination Under 37 CFR 1.114
A request for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, including the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e), was filed in this application after final rejection. Since this application is eligible for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114. Applicant's submission filed on 09/10/2025 has been entered.
Response to Amendment
The amendment filed 10/16/2025 has been entered. Claims 17, and 35-36 have been amended. Claim 1-16 remain canceled. Claims 17-46 remain pending in the application.
Applicant arguments have overcome the objections to the Claims previously set forth in the Final Office Action mailed on 08/14/2025. The objection has been withdrawn in view of the amended claims.
Response to Arguments
Regarding Applicant’s arguments, on page 13-16 of the remark filed on 09/10/2025, on the newly amended limitations of independent Claims 17: “subsequently presenting, by the User, the digital wallet and the third portion, the third portion retrieved from the third memory location; reconstituting a copy of the confidential user data from the retrieved first and second portions and from the retrieved third portion presented by the User, and;.”, arguments are persuasive.
Therefore, the 35 U.S.C. 103 rejection Robell et al. (U.S Pub. No. 20230281604) and Stolbikov et al. (U.S Pub. No. 20210124812) further in view of Tang et al. (U.S Pub. No. 20230108366)), has been withdrawn. However, upon further consideration, a new ground(s) of rejection is made under 35 U.S.C. § 103 in view of the following prior art: Obstfeld et al. (U.S Pub. No. 20250036793) and Chui et al. (U.S Pub. No. 20200159890) in conjunction with Robell et al. (U.S Pub. No. 20230281604) and Stolbikov et al. (U.S Pub. No. 20210124812)). Please refer to the 35 U.S.C. 103 section below for a detailed explanation.
For the reasons stated above and the new ground(s) of rejection under 35 U.S.C. 103 below, Examiner respectfully disagrees with Applicant’s argument, see Applicant’s Remarks Page 13-16, regarding allowance of the application. Examiner asserts that claims 17-46 are rejected for the reasons stated above in conjunction with the new ground(s) of rejection under 35 U.S.C. 103 below.
Conclusion: Robell-Stolbikov-Obstfeld-Chui teaches the aforementioned limitations of independent claims 17 and 37 rendering the claim limitations obvious before the effective date of the claimed invention.
Claim Objections
Claims 17-23, 27-28, 30-31, 34-41, 43 and 45-46 are objected to because of the following informalities:
In regards to Claims 17-23, 27-28, 30-31, 34-41, 43, and 45-46 , the applicant recites the limitations “User”, “Data Provider”, “Servicer” “Interplanetary File System”, “KYC Provider”, “Internet” , the MPEP Section 608.01(m) states that Each claim begins with a capital letter and ends with a period. Periods may not be used elsewhere in the claims except for abbreviations. Examiner states that all limitations that have capital letters must be rephrased to adhere to proper form of claims with lowercase letters. Appropriate correction is required.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 103 which forms the basis for all obviousness rejections set forth in this Office action:
A patent for a claimed invention may not be obtained, notwithstanding that the claimed invention is not identically disclosed as set forth in section 102, 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 17, 20-21, 24-26,31-32, 36-40, 42 and 45, is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Robell et al. (U.S Pub. No. 20230281604, hereinafter referred to as “Robell”), Stolbikov et al. (U.S Pub. No. 20210124812, hereinafter referred to as “Stolbikov”) and Obstfeld et al. (U.S Pub. No. 20250036793, hereinafter referred to as “Obstfeld”) further in view of Chui et al. (U.S Pub. No. 20200159890, hereinafter referred to as “Chui”)
In regards to Claim 17, Robell teaches a computerized method comprising: receiving confidential user data associated with a User into a memory; (Par. (0015); confidential user data (identity documents such as social security, passport, work ID, driver’s license etc.), (Par. (0024-0027); receiving ID info such as identity documents and storing ID info in storage devices), (Figure 1 labels user, social security, passport, driver’s license; user sending confidential user data to plurality of locations for storing), (Par. (0042); receiving confidential user data (accepting inputs corresponding to identity documents))
storing the first portion in a first memory location; (Par. (0039); encrypting and storing ID info in blockchain and uploads to file system/private data storage corresponding to client wallet device)
encoding a memory storage address associated with a selected one of the first or second memory locations to generate encoded address information; (Par. (0050) and (0062, 0066)); NFT ID includes metadata that has IPFS address that points to storage location), (Par. (0050); encryption standards used for inputs of NFT ID that include IPFS address))(Examiner note: In the instant application the specification states on page 11 lines 1-10 defines encoded memory storage address to be an encoded IPFS address and therefore it will be broadly and reasonably interpreted as such)
minting a non-fungible asset (NFA) that includes the encoded address information and a non-confidential data payload associated with the User, the NFA associated with a distributed blockchain; (Par. (0050); minting the NFT Ids that have encrypted standards and one or more blockchains used to generate mint NFT ID), (Par. (0050); NFT ID that is minted includes IPFS address), (Par. (0268); non-confidential data payload (payload data in transaction)), (Par. (0085); minting corresponding to transaction with payload data), (Par. 0079); minting of NFT associated with receiving transaction with payload and triggering the minting/creation with NFT))
linking the NFA to a digital wallet of the User; (Par. (0028-0030); NFT carried in digital wallet)
permanently destroying access to the confidential user data by at least a selected one of deleting a selected one of the first or second portions from the associated first or second memory location, or deleting by the User of the third component, or destroying an encryption key used to generate the encoded address information stored in the NFA. (Par. (0026) deleting information from database such as ID info and destroying the stored info within a predefined time)
Robell does not explicitly teach partitioning the confidential user data into at least a first portion, a second portion and a third portion; storing the second portion in a different, second memory location; providing the third portion to the User for storage, by the User, in a different, third memory location; subsequently presenting, by the User, the digital wallet and the third portion, the third portion retrieved from the third memory location; subsequently accessing the confidential user data by retrieving the encoded address information from the NFA, retrieving the first and second portions from the first and second memory locations, reconstituting a copy of the confidential user data from the retrieved first and second portions and from the retrieved third portion presented by the User, and providing the copy of the confidential user data to an authorized party via a secure communications link; and
Wherein Stolbikov teaches partitioning the confidential user data into at least a first portion, a second portion and a third portion; (Par. (0044); confidential user data (digital license of user device)), (Par. (0003-0005); segmenting license token of user devices), (Par. (0033); dividing the digital license and storing plurality of segments), (Par. (0030); third portion (dividing the digital license to a plurality of segments))
storing the second portion in a different, second memory location; (Par. (0030-0033); digital license that is divided and partitioned stored in second devices)
providing the third portion to the User for storage, by the User, in a different, third memory location; (Par. (0030-0033); plurality of divided segments transmitted stored in first second and third storage devices)), (Par. (0057-0059); plurality of storage nodes obtaining portions of data))
providing the copy of the confidential user data to an authorized party via a secure communications link; and (Par. (0063); sending copy of license token to requesting device over data network that is encrypted)
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Robell to incorporate the teaching of Stolbikov to utilize the above feature because of the analogous concept of confidential data of the users associated with authorized parties, with the motivation of implementing a partition and reconstituting to create correlation and discourage attackers from replication or fraud based on each partition and its unique data. This helps maintain the integrity of the system as a whole and provides efficient verification of sensitive data. (Stolbikov Par. (0064))
Robell and Stolbikov do not explicitly teach subsequently presenting, by the User, the digital wallet and the third portion, the third portion retrieved from the third memory location; subsequently accessing the confidential user data by retrieving the encoded address information from the NFA, reconstituting a copy of the confidential user data from the retrieved first and second portions and from the retrieved third portion presented by the User, and retrieving the first and second portions from the first and second memory locations,
Wherein Obstfeld teaches subsequently presenting, by the User, the digital wallet and the third portion, the third portion retrieved from the third memory location; (Par. (0048); wallet and data object is provided to device), (Par. (0040); third portion retrieved from the third memory (first, seconds and third portions retrieved from first second and third distributed ledger storage locations))
subsequently accessing the confidential user data by retrieving the encoded address information from the NFA, (Par. (0035); access digital assets using wallet with one or more addresses used to received data))
retrieving the first and second portions from the first and second memory locations, (Par. (0040-0041); first and second portions of data object are retrieved from ledger
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Robell and Stolbikov to incorporate the teaching of Obstfeld to utilize the above feature because of the analogous concept of confidential data verification using blockchain technologies and transferring of tokens, with the motivation of solving the concerns of data security when user data is distributed. (Obstfeld Par. (0002))
Robell, Stolbikov and Obstfeld do not explicitly teach reconstituting a copy of the confidential user data from the retrieved first and second portions and from the retrieved third portion presented by the User, and
Wherein Chui teaches reconstituting a copy of the confidential user data from the retrieved first and second portions and from the retrieved third portion presented by the User, and (Par. (0046); reconstructing sharded copy of digital asset), (Par. (0040 and 0050-0051); retrieved first and second sharded copy used for reconstructing), (Par. (0044); retrieved from a third portion presented by the user (plurality of sharded copies stored in plurality of nodes)), (Par. (0050); each shard in plurality of sharded copies may be retrieved, reassembled and presented to users)
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Robell, Stolbikov and Obstfeld to incorporate the teaching of Chui to utilize the above feature because of the analogous concept of blockchain technologies, with the motivation of verifying the authenticity of data and digital assets stored based on portion of data. (Chui Par. (0003))
In regards to Claim 20, the combination of Robell, Stolbikov, Obstfeld and Chui teach the method of claim 17, Robell further teaches the method of claim 17, wherein the NFA is a blockchain-based pointer record linked to the digital wallet of the User. (Par. (0066-0069); digital wallet corresponding to address linked and transaction on blockchain), (Par. (0079); wallet address linked to location on blockchain)
In regards to Claim 21, the combination of Robell, Stolbikov, Obstfeld and Chui teach the method of claim 17, Robell further teaches the method of claim 20, wherein the blockchain-based pointer record is a first record and the digital wallet is a first wallet, (Par. (0066-0069); digital wallet corresponding to address linked and transaction on blockchain), (Par. (0079); wallet address linked to location on blockchain)
wherein updated confidential user data associated with the User are processed to generate an updated, second record with second encoded address information in a second wallet, and (Par. (0028-0032); plurality of digital wallets and updating records associated with blockchain and wallets), (Figure 3 labels 310 and 360; second wallet (admin and client wallets)), (Par. (0071); generate an updated second record (automatically calculate royalty and transfer payment amount to the wallet with transaction fees on blockchain (updated amount)), (Par. (0053); generate an updated, second record (updates corresponding to address and updates associated with state of transfer, royalties, payment etc.)(Par. (0079); second record with second encoded address information in a second wallet ( generated transaction/data with client wallet 310 and IPFS address and storage location)
wherein a redirecting, third record is stored in the first wallet to redirect to the second wallet. (Figure 5 labels “5.3b Metadata 413”, 403, 402 and 310; metadata (5.3b Metadata 413) and records 403 corresponding to NFT are redirected to wallet 310), (Par. (0084-0086); metadata then stored on blockchain minted as record and transferred record sent to wallet)), (Par. (0066)l; third record (plurality of blocks and records stored on blockchain)
In regards to Claim 24, the combination of Robell, Stolbikov, Obstfeld and Chui teach the method of claim 17, Robell further teaches the method of claim 17, wherein the blockchain-based pointer record comprises a non-fungible token (NFT) which stores first information in an unencrypted form, second information in an encrypted form, and a hash value generated responsive to the first information and the second information. (Par. (0066; blockchain pointer corresponding to NFT ID with first portion (transaction) in unencrypted form), (Par. (0081) second information in encrypted form (NFT ID is then encrypted and uploaded)), (Par. (0048); hash generated corresponding to NFT ID with transaction and ID info), (Par. (0031); block with hash, transaction data and timestamp with block ID that is encrypted)
In regards to Claim 25, the combination of Robell, Stolbikov, Obstfeld and Chui teach the method of claim 17, Robell further teaches the method of claim 17, wherein the encoded address information is an address of remote server memory node at which a selected one of the first or second portions is stored. (Par. (0050) and (0062, 0066)); the encoded address information (NFT ID includes metadata that has IPFS address that points to storage location), (Par. (0092); remote servers ), (Par. (0144); remote system corresponding to devices and NFT/blockchain service with metadata and addresses)
In regards to Claim 26, the combination of Robell, Stolbikov, Obstfeld and Chui teach the method of claim 17, Robell further teaches the method of claim 17, further comprising steps of: identifying an elapsed time interval during which the confidential user data are to remain accessible; (Par. (0026); predefined period of time before destroyed info and deletion of ID info in database corresponding to NFT)
initiating a timer responsive to the minting of the NFA, the timer associated with the elapsed time interval; and (Par. (0071-0072); timestamp corresponding to minting of NFT ID; time corresponding to each time NFT is accessed and used)
performing the permanently destroying access step responsive to an indication from the timer of a conclusion of the elapsed time interval. (Par. (0026); destroying and deleting of stored info in database of ID info associated with NFT after predefined period of time)
In regards to Claim 31, the combination of Robell, Stolbikov, Obstfeld and Chui teach the method of claim 17, Robell further teaches the method of claim 17, wherein the first memory location is a local server and the second memory location is a remote server, (Par. (0092); servers 320 and remote system 690)
wherein the remote server comprises an Interplanetary File System (IPFS) memory node, and (Par. (0039); IPFS with client and admin devices), (Par. (0063); IPFS microservice), (Figure 6 labels 600 and 690; computer node 600 and remote server 690), (Par. (0050); computer node of blockchain each with IPFS address)
the encoded address information is generated by the IPFS memory node. (Par. (0050); computer node of blockchain each with IPFS address)
In regards to Claim 32, the combination of Robell, Stolbikov, Obstfeld and Chui teach the method of claim 17, Robell further teaches The method of claim 17, wherein the first portion is encrypted prior to storage at the first memory location, (Par. (0039); encrypting then uploading ID info into blockchain and file system/private data storage)
Robell does not explicitly teach wherein the second portion is encrypted prior to storage at the second memory location, wherein each of the encrypted first and second portions are subsequently decrypted to provide the reconstructed user data, and wherein at least one hash function is used to generate at least one hash value responsive to the first and second portions that is subsequently used to confirm the reconstructed user data matches the received user data.
Wherein Stolbikov teaches wherein the second portion is encrypted prior to storage at the second memory location, ((Par. (0029-0033); digital license that is divided/ partitioned is encrypted, decrypted and stored in second devices)
wherein each of the encrypted first and second portions are subsequently decrypted to provide the reconstructed user data, and (Par. (0029-0033); segments of digital license of the plurality of digital license are decrypted, reconstructed and distributed to multiple participants)
wherein at least one hash function is used to generate at least one hash value responsive to the first and second portions that is subsequently used to confirm the reconstructed user data matches the received user data. (Par. (0057); hash used corresponding to digital license and segments), (Par. (0062-0064); hash is referenced for decrypting then reconstructing/reconstituting segments of digital license)
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Robell, Obstfeld and Chui to incorporate the teaching of Stolbikov for the reasons discussed in independent claim 17 stated above.
In regards to Claim 36, the combination of Robell, Stolbikov, Obstfeld and Chui teach the method of claim 17, Robell further teaches the method of claim 1, wherein the confidential user data associated with the User is generated by steps comprising: supplying, by the User, at least one confidential document having personally identifiable information associated with the User; (Par. (0015); identity documents include passport, birth certificate, social security etc. provided), (Par. (0026); background report (generated reports and statistics of user), (Par. (0042); KYC data and reports of medical, mortgage statements etc.)
generating, by a third party verification provider, a confidential background report based on the at least one confidential document; and Par. (0026); background report (generated reports and statistics of user), (Par. (0042); KYC data and reports of medical, mortgage statements etc.)
combining the personally identifiable information and the confidential background report to form the confidential user data, (Par. (0042-0045); collected data from user device includes combination of background reports (mortgage statements, utility bills, medical data) with PII (name , address, phone number etc.))
wherein a portion of each of the personally identifiable information and a portion of the confidential background report is incorporated into each of the first portion and the second portion. (Par. (0042-0045); in the wallet device includes first and second input portion data with electronic documents and identity data)
In regards to Claim 37, Robell teaches a method, comprising: generating confidential user data responsive to personally identifiable information supplied by a User and confidential background report information supplied by a KYC Provider based on the personally identifiable information; (Par. (0015); confidential user data (identity documents such as social security, passport, work ID, driver’s license etc.), (Par. (0024-0027); creating and receiving ID info such as identity documents and storing ID info in storage devices), (Par. (0062 and 0110); gaining access))(Par. (0015); identity documents include passport, birth certificate, social security etc.), (Par. (0026); background report (generated reports and statistics of user), (Par. (0042); KYC data and reports of medical, mortgage statements etc.)
using at least one programmable processor of a Data Provider to perform the following operations in response to the generating of the confidential user data: storing the confidential user data in a computer memory of the Data Provider; Par. (0039); encrypting and storing ID info in blockchain and uploads to file system/private data storage corresponding to client wallet device)
encoding a memory storage address associated with the second memory location to generate encoded address information; (Par. (0050) and (0062, 0066)); NFT ID includes metadata that has IPFS address that points to storage location), (Par. (0050); encryption standards used for inputs of NFT ID that include IPFS address))(Examiner note: In the instant application the specification states on page 11 lines 1-10 defines encoded memory storage address to be an encoded IPFS address and therefore it will be broadly and reasonably interpreted as such)
minting a non-fungible asset (NFA) that includes the encoded address information and a non-confidential data payload associated with the User, the NFA associated with a distributed blockchain; and (Par. (0050); minting the NFT Ids that have encrypted standards and one or more blockchains used to generate mint NFT ID), (Par. (0050); NFT ID that is minted includes IPFS address), (Par. (0268); non-confidential data payload (payload data in transaction)), (Par. (0085); minting corresponding to transaction with payload data), (Par. 0079); minting of NFT associated with receiving transaction with payload and triggering the minting/creation with NFT))
linking the NFA to a digital wallet of the User; (Par. (0028-0030); NFT carried in digital wallet)
subsequently presenting, by the User, the digital wallet to a web portal to initiate a transaction between the User and a Servicer; and (Par. (0042-0044); NFT with wallet devices include third portion of data for access (NFT with vaccination records, biometric data, social media profile etc.), (Par. (0040-0043); accessing by admin using the digital wallet plurality of portions of PII)
Robell does not explicitly teach partitioning the confidential user data into at least a first portion, a second portion and a third portion; directing storage of the first portion in a first memory location; directing storage of the second portion in a different, second memory location; directing transfer of the third portion to the User for storage, by the User, in a different, third memory location; using the at least one programmable processor of the Data Provider to perform the following operations in response to the presenting of the digital wallet: retrieving the first portion from the first memory location; retrieving the encoded address information from the NFA; using the retrieved encoded address information from the NFA to retrieve the second portion from the second memory location; receiving the third portion from the User, the third portion retrieved from the third memory location; reconstituting a copy of the confidential user data from the retrieved first and second portions and from the retrieved third portion presented by the User; and providing the copy of the confidential user data to the Servicer via a secure communications link.
Wherein Stolbikov teaches partitioning the confidential user data into at least a first portion, a second portion and a third portion; Par. (0044); confidential user data (digital license of user device)), (Par. (0003-0005); segmenting license token of user devices), (Par. (0033); dividing the digital license and storing plurality of segments), (Par. (0030); third portion (dividing the digital license to a plurality of segments))
directing storage of the first portion in a first memory location; (Par. (0030-0033); digital license that is divided and partitioned stored in first devices)
directing storage of the second portion in a different, second memory location; directing transfer of the third portion to the User for storage, by the User, in a different, third memory location; (Par. (0030-0033); plurality of divided segments transmitted stored in first second and third storage devices)), (Par. (0057-0059); plurality of storage nodes obtaining portions of data))
using the at least one programmable processor of the Data Provider to perform the following operations in response to the presenting of the digital wallet: retrieving the first portion from the first memory location; (Par. (0030-0033); plurality of divided segments transmitted stored in first second and third storage devices)),
providing the copy of the confidential user data to the Servicer via a secure communications link. (Par. (0063); sending copy of license token to requesting device over data network that is encrypted)
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Robell to incorporate the teaching of Stolbikov to utilize the above feature because of the analogous concept of confidential data of the users associated with authorized parties, with the motivation of implementing a partition and reconstituting to create correlation and discourage attackers from replication or fraud based on each partition and its unique data. This helps maintain the integrity of the system as a whole and provides efficient verification of sensitive data. (Stolbikov Par. (0064))
Robell and Stolbikov do not explicitly teach retrieving the encoded address information from the NFA; using the retrieved encoded address information from the NFA to retrieve the second portion from the second memory location; receiving the third portion from the User, the third portion retrieved from the third memory location; reconstituting a copy of the confidential user data from the retrieved first and second portions and from the retrieved third portion presented by the User; and
Wherein Obstfeld teaches receiving the third portion from the User, the third portion retrieved from the third memory location; (Par. (0048); wallet and data object is provided to device), (Par. (0040); third portion retrieved from the third memory (first, seconds and third portions retrieved from first second and third distributed ledger storage locations))
retrieving the encoded address information from the NFA; ((Par. (0035); access digital assets using wallet with one or more addresses used to received data))
using the retrieved encoded address information from the NFA to retrieve the second portion from the second memory location; (Par. (0040-0041); first and second portions of data object are retrieved from ledger A and B)), (Par. (0035); one or more addresses used to retrieve data))
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Robell and Stolbikov to incorporate the teaching of Obstfeld to utilize the above feature because of the analogous concept of confidential data verification using blockchain technologies and transferring of tokens, with the motivation of solving the concerns of data security when user data is distributed. (Obstfeld Par. (0002))
Robell, Stolbikov and Obstfeld do not explicitly teach reconstituting a copy of the confidential user data from the retrieved first and second portions and from the retrieved third portion presented by the User; and
Wherein Chui teaches reconstituting a copy of the confidential user data from the retrieved first and second portions and from the retrieved third portion presented by the User; and (Par. (0046); reconstructing sharded copy of digital asset), (Par. (0040 and 0050-0051); retrieved first and second sharded copy used for reconstructing), (Par. (0044); retrieved from a third portion presented by the user (plurality of sharded copies stored in plurality of nodes)), (Par. (0050); each shard in plurality of sharded copies may be retrieved, reassembled and presented to users)
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Robell, Stolbikov and Obstfeld to incorporate the teaching of Chui to utilize the above feature because of the analogous concept of blockchain technologies, with the motivation of verifying the authenticity of data and digital assets stored based on portion of data. (Chui Par. (0003))
In regards to Claim 38, the combination of Robell, Stolbikov, Obstfeld and Chui teach the method of claim 37, Stolbikov further teaches wherein the confidential user data is further partitioned into a fourth portion, wherein the fourth portion is directed to the Servicer for storage, by the Servicer, in a different, fourth memory location, and (Par. (0030-0033); plurality of divided segments stored in first second, third storage devices and fourth devices)(Figure 1 labels 110; plurality of storage devices))
wherein the copy of the confidential user data is further reconstituted using the fourth portion as supplied by the Servicer.(Par. (0062-0070); license management corresponding to reconstructing portions and segments of digital license)
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Robell, Obstfeld and Chui to incorporate the teaching of Stolbikov to utilize the above feature because of the analogous concept of confidential data of the users associated with authorized parties, with the motivation of implementing a partition and reconstituting to create correlation and discourage attackers from replication or fraud based on each partition and its unique data. This helps maintain the integrity of the system as a whole and provides efficient verification of sensitive data. (Stolbikov Par. (0064))
In regards to Claim 39, the combination of Robell, Stolbikov, Obstfeld and Chui teach the method of claim 37, Robell further teaches the method of claim 37, wherein the first memory location constitutes a portion of the memory of the Data Provider, and (Par. (0043 and 0099)); service provider corresponding to devices and storage)
wherein the second memory location constitutes a portion of a memory of a remote server coupled to the memory of the Data Provider via the Internet. (Par. (0092); remote servers ), (Par. (0144); remote system corresponding to devices and NFT/blockchain service with metadata and addresses), (Par. (0098); via the internet)
In regards to Claim 40, the combination of Robell, Stolbikov, Obstfeld and Chui teach the method of claim 17, Robell further teaches the method of claim 37, wherein the digital wallet is a first wallet, wherein updated confidential user data associated with the User are processed to generate an updated, second NFA with second encoded address information in a second wallet, and (Par. (0028-0032); plurality of digital wallets and updating records associated with blockchain and wallets), (Figure 3 labels 310 and 360; second wallet (admin and client wallets)), (Par. (0071); generate an updated second record (automatically calculate royalty and transfer payment amount to the wallet with transaction fees on blockchain (updated amount)), (Par. (0053); generate an updated, second record (updates corresponding to address and updates associated with state of transfer, royalties, payment etc.)(Par. (0079); second record with second encoded address information in a second wallet ( generated transaction/data with client wallet 310 and IPFS address and storage location)
wherein a redirecting, third NFA is generated and stored in the first wallet, the third NFA providing a link to the second wallet. (Figure 5 labels “5.3b Metadata 413”, 403, 402 and 310; metadata (5.3b Metadata 413) and records 403 corresponding to NFT are redirected to wallet 310), (Par. (0084-0086); metadata then stored on blockchain minted as record and transferred record sent to wallet)), (Par. (0066)l; third record (plurality of blocks and records stored on blockchain)
In regards to Claim 42, claim 42 recites similar limitations to dependent claim 26 and the teaching of Robell, Stolbikov, Obstfeld and Chui address all the limitations discussed in dependent claim 26 and are thereby rejected under the same grounds.
In regards to Claim 45, claim 45 recites similar limitations to dependent claim 31 and the teaching of Robell, Stolbikov, Obstfeld and Chui address all the limitations discussed in dependent claim 31 and are thereby rejected under the same grounds.
Claim 18, 34-35 and 46, is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Robell et al. (U.S Pub. No. 20230281604, hereinafter referred to as “Robell”), Stolbikov et al. (U.S Pub. No. 20210124812, hereinafter referred to as “Stolbikov”)
Obstfeld et al. (U.S Pub. No. 20250036793, hereinafter referred to as “Obstfeld”) and Chui et al. (U.S Pub. No. 20200159890, hereinafter referred to as “Chui”) further in view of Lakshmanan et al. (U.S Pub. No. 20200394621, hereinafter referred to as “Lakshmanan”)
In regards to Claim 18, the combination of Robell, Stolbikov, Obstfeld and Chui
teach the method of claim 17, Robell further teaches the method of claim 17, wherein the confidential user data comprises personally identifiable information supplied by and a background report on the User supplied by a third party verification provider, and (Par. (0015); identity documents include passport, birth certificate, social security etc.), (Par. (0026); background report (generated reports and statistics of user), (Par. (0042); KYC data and reports of medical, mortgage statements etc.)
Robell, Stolbikov, Obstfeld and Chui do not explicitly teach wherein the partitioning of the confidential user data into the at least first and second portions comprises a partitioning operation that prevents reconstitution of any of the personally identifiable information from the confidential user data associated with the User from a single one of the first or second portions.
Wherein Lakshmanan teaches wherein the partitioning of the confidential user data into the at least first and second portions comprises a partitioning operation that prevents reconstitution of any of the personally identifiable information from the confidential user data associated with the User from a single one of the first or second portions. (Par. (0026-0029); splitting the sensitive data into segments and preventing from reconstructing sensitive data X between first and second portions X.sub 1 and X.sub 2 to identify users A and B), (Par. (0024); personally identifiable information (sensitive data corresponding to bank number, identification of customer)
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Robell, Stolbikov, Obstfeld and Chui to incorporate the teaching of Lakshmanan to utilize the above feature because of the analogous concept of portioning and segmenting confidential data verification, with the motivation of creating trustworthiness for customers with sensitive consumer data and preventing data based on vulnerabilities on transaction and payment information of users to provide and enhanced security system and safeguard confidential data. (Lakshmanan Par. (0003-0005))
In regards to Claim 34, the combination of Robell, Stolbikov, Obstfeld and Chui teach the method of claim 17, Stolbikov further teaches wherein the reconstituted confidential user data comprises a Servicer entitled data portion and a User entitled data portion, and (Par. (0062-0064); reconstituted of confidential user data (segments of digital licenses tokens reconstituted), (Par. (0057-0060); digital license token includes information of servicer entitled data (Microsoft windows software product data) and user entitled data portion (user identifier of participants/owners))
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Robell to incorporate the teaching of Stolbikov to utilize the above feature because of the analogous concept of confidential data of the users associated with authorized parties, with the motivation of implementing a partition and reconstituting to create correlation and discourage attackers from replication or fraud based on each partition and its unique data. This helps maintain the integrity of the system as a whole and provides efficient verification of sensitive data. (Stolbikov Par. (0064))
Robell, Stolbikov, Obstfeld and Chui do not explicitly teach wherein the method further comprises granting access, for the Servicer, to the Servicer entitled data portion of the reconstituted confidential user data while preventing access, for the Servicer, to the User entitled data portion of the reconstituted confidential user data.
Wherein Lakshmanan teaches wherein the method further comprises granting access, for the Servicer, to the Servicer entitled data portion of the reconstituted confidential user data while preventing access, for the Servicer, to the User entitled data portion of the reconstituted confidential user data. (Par. (0026-0029); splitting the sensitive data into segments and preventing from reconstructing sensitive data X between first and second portions X.sub 1 and X.sub 2 to identify users A and B), (Par. (0024); personally identifiable information (sensitive data corresponding to bank number, identification of customer)
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Robell, Stolbikov, Obstfeld and Chui to incorporate the teaching of Lakshmanan to utilize the above feature because of the analogous concept of portioning and segmenting confidential data verification, with the motivation of creating trustworthiness for customers with sensitive consumer data and preventing data based on vulnerabilities on transaction and payment information of users to provide and enhanced security system and safeguard confidential data. (Lakshmanan Par. (0003-0005))
In regards to Claim 34, the combination of Robell, Stolbikov, Obstfeld and Chui teach the method of claim 17, Robell further teaches the method of claim 1, wherein the Servicer entitled data portion is associated with a Servicer and comprises background check information obtained by a third party verification provider associated with the Servicer. (Par. (0062 and 0110); gaining access))(Par. (0015); identity documents include passport, birth certificate, social security etc.), (Par. (0026); background report (generated reports and statistics of user), (Par. (0042); KYC data and reports of medical, mortgage statements etc.)
Robell does not explicitly teach wherein the authorized party is the User, wherein the reconstituted confidential user data comprises a Servicer entitled data portion and a User entitled data portion, wherein the method further comprises granting access, for the User, to the User entitled data portion of the reconstituted confidential user data while preventing access, for the User, to the Servicer entitled data portion of the reconstituted confidential user data, and
Wherein Stolbikov teaches wherein the authorized party is the User, wherein the reconstituted confidential user data comprises a Servicer entitled data portion and a User entitled data portion, wherein the method further comprises (Par. (0062-0064); reconstituted of confidential user data (segments of digital licenses tokens reconstituted), (Par. (0057-0060); digital license token includes information of servicer entitled data (Microsoft windows software product data) and user entitled data portion (user identifier of participants/owners))
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Robell to incorporate the teaching of Stolbikov to utilize the above feature because of the analogous concept of confidential data of the users associated with authorized parties, with the motivation of implementing a partition and reconstituting to create correlation and discourage attackers from replication or fraud based on each partition and its unique data. This helps maintain the integrity of the system as a whole and provides efficient verification of sensitive data. (Stolbikov Par. (0064))
Robell, Stolbikov, Obstfeld and Chui do not explicitly teach granting access, for the User, to the User entitled data portion of the reconstituted confidential user data while preventing access, for the User, to the Servicer entitled data portion of the reconstituted confidential user data, and
Wherein Lakshmanan teaches granting access, for the User, to the User entitled data portion of the reconstituted confidential user data while preventing access, for the User, to the Servicer entitled data portion of the reconstituted confidential user data, and (Par. (0026-0029); splitting the sensitive data into segments and preventing from reconstructing sensitive data X between first and second portions X.sub 1 and X.sub 2 to identify users A and B), (Par. (0024); personally identifiable information (sensitive data corresponding to bank number, identification of customer)
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Robell, Stolbikov, Obstfeld and Chui to incorporate the teaching of Lakshmanan to utilize the above feature because of the analogous concept of portioning and segmenting confidential data verification, with the motivation of creating trustworthiness for customers with sensitive consumer data and preventing data based on vulnerabilities on transaction and payment information of users to provide and enhanced security system and safeguard confidential data. (Lakshmanan Par. (0003-0005))
In regards to Claim 46, claim 46 recites similar limitations to dependent claim 34 and the teaching of Robell, Stolbikov, Obstfeld, Chui and Lakshmanan address all the limitations discussed in dependent claim 34 and are thereby rejected under the same grounds.
Claim 19, is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Robell et al. (U.S Pub. No. 20230281604, hereinafter referred to as “Robell”), Stolbikov et al. (U.S Pub. No. 20210124812, hereinafter referred to as “Stolbikov”) Obstfeld et al. (U.S Pub. No. 20250036793, hereinafter referred to as “Obstfeld”) and Chui et al. (U.S Pub. No. 20200159890, hereinafter referred to as “Chui”) further in view of Wen et al. (U.S Pub. No. 20240394389, hereinafter referred to as “Wen”)
In regards to Claim 19, the combination of Robell, Stolbikov, Obstfeld and Chui teach the method of claim 17, Robell further teaches the method of claim 17, wherein the confidential user data are arranged as a sequence of blocks which are interleaved among the first portion and the at least one additional portion. (Par. (0031-0035); blocks linked together in series corresponding to NFT ID and another portion that includes unique identifier, timestamp etc.))
Robell, Stolbikov, Obstfeld and Chui do not explicitly teach wherein X% of the confidential user data are provided in the first portion and 100-X% of the confidential user data are provided in at least one additional portion including the second portion, and
Wherein Wen teaches wherein X% of the confidential user data are provided in the first portion and 100-X% of the confidential user data are provided in at least one additional portion including the second portion, and (Par. (0076); percentage of personal information of user is blurred for privacy, 100% of confidential data (all portions of a person in image are blurred) X% of confidential user data (upper half of a person in the image is blurred)
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Robell, Stolbikov, Obstfeld and Chui to incorporate the teaching of Wen to utilize the above feature because of the analogous concept of portioning and segmenting confidential data verification, with the motivation of controlling the privacy and access of sensitive data by creating threshold and percentage based portions of data to discourage attackers attempting to predict or intercept private data and securely protect the identity of users. (Wen Par. (0013-0015))
Claims 22 and 41, is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Robell et al. (U.S Pub. No. 20230281604, hereinafter referred to as “Robell”), Stolbikov et al. (U.S Pub. No. 20210124812, hereinafter referred to as “Stolbikov”) Obstfeld et al. (U.S Pub. No. 20250036793, hereinafter referred to as “Obstfeld”) and Chui et al. (U.S Pub. No. 20200159890, hereinafter referred to as “Chui”) further in view of Campos et al. (U.S Pub. No. 20240378593, hereinafter referred to as “Campos”)
In regards to Claim 22, the combination of Robell, Stolbikov, Obstfeld and Chui do not explicitly teach wherein the User is a first User, and the method further comprises transferring ownership of the first wallet from the first User to a different, second User while the first User retains ownership of the second wallet.
Wherein Campos teaches wherein the User is a first User, and the method further comprises transferring ownership of the first wallet from the first User to a different, second User while the first User retains ownership of the second wallet. (Par. (0111-0113 and 0115); transferring of transaction corresponding to ownership (loan NFT etc.) to second user device), (Par. (0029); while the first User retains ownership of the second wallet (user may own a first wallet and second wallet)), (Par. (0074-0076); while the first User retains ownership of the second wallet. ( first wallet of user is linked to second wallet), (Par. (0034-0035); first user retains ownership of the second wallet (verifying whether the user owns the NFT held in the second wallet))
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Robell, Stolbikov, Obstfeld and Chui to incorporate the teaching of Campos to utilize the above feature because of the analogous concept of confidential data in NFT’s and the transfer of ownership using a blockchain ledger, with the motivation of transferring ownership without concerns of harm, risk or forgery based on the verification. By retaining ownership of multiple wallet the user can be assured valued property such as NFT or digital assets can be securely protected through the blockchain network and a trail of log can be reviewed on transfer and transaction history with authenticated users. (Campos Par. (0028-0030))
In regards to Claim 41, the combination of Robell, Stolbikov, Obstfeld and Chui do not explicitly teach wherein the User is a first User, and the method further comprises transferring ownership of the digital wallet from the first User to a different, second User.
Wherein Campos teaches wherein the User is a first User, and the method further comprises transferring ownership of the digital wallet from the first User to a different, second User. (Par. (0111-0113 and 0115); transferring of transaction corresponding to ownership (loan NFT etc.) to second user device), (Par. (0029); while the first User retains ownership of the second wallet (user may own a first wallet and second wallet)), (Par. (0074-0076); while the first User retains ownership of the second wallet. ( first wallet of user is linked to second wallet), (Par. (0034-0035); first user retains ownership of the second wallet (verifying whether the user owns the NFT held in the second wallet))
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Robell, Stolbikov, Obstfeld and Chui to incorporate the teaching of Campos to utilize the above feature because of the analogous concept of confidential data in NFT’s and the transfer of ownership using a blockchain ledger, with the motivation of transferring ownership without concerns of harm, risk or forgery based on the verification. By retaining ownership of multiple wallet the user can be assured valued property such as NFT or digital assets can be securely protected through the blockchain network and a trail of log can be reviewed on transfer and transaction history with authenticated users. (Campos Par. (0028-0030))
Claim 23, is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Robell et al. (U.S Pub. No. 20230281604, hereinafter referred to as “Robell”), Stolbikov et al. (U.S Pub. No. 20210124812, hereinafter referred to as “Stolbikov”) Obstfeld et al. (U.S Pub. No. 20250036793, hereinafter referred to as “Obstfeld”) and Chui et al. (U.S Pub. No. 20200159890, hereinafter referred to as “Chui”) further in view of Jethmalani et al. (U.S Pub. No. 20230298001, hereinafter referred to as “Jethmalani”)
In regards to Claim 23, the combination of Robell, Stolbikov, Obstfeld and Chui teach the method of claim 17, Robell further teaches the method of claim 20, wherein the User is a first User, the blockchain- based pointer record is a first record and the digital wallet is a first main wallet owned by the first User, (Par. (0066-0069); digital wallet corresponding to address linked and transaction on blockchain), (Par. (0079); wallet address linked to location on blockchain)
wherein a second blockchain-based pointer record is minted responsive to confidential user data associated with a second User and linked to a second main wallet owned by the second User, and (Par. (0028-0032); plurality of digital wallets and updating records associated with blockchain and wallets), (Figure 3 labels 310 and 360; second wallet (admin and client wallets)), (Par. (0084-0086); metadata then stored on blockchain minted as record and transferred record sent to second wallet)),
Robell, Stolbikov, Obstfeld and Chui do not explicitly teach wherein the method further comprises generating an associated wallet that is owned by both the first User and the second User, the associated wallet having a redirecting blockchain- based pointer record that points to each of the respective first and second blockchain-based pointer records in the first and second main wallets.
Wherein Jethmalani teaches wherein the method further comprises generating an associated wallet that is owned by both the first User and the second User, (Par. (0105); shared wallet between service provider and registered users of the service provider)
the associated wallet having a redirecting blockchain- based pointer record that points to each of the respective first and second blockchain-based pointer records in the first and second main wallets. (Par. (0105); shared users and service provider with wallet corresponding to transactions and sale of NFT), (Par. (0080); wallet application transfers transaction data to first and second user), (Par. (0092); transaction data includes pointer records (identification)), (Par. (0107-0108); first and second digital wallets with transaction data and identifiers that are broadcasted)
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Robell, Stolbikov, Obstfeld and Chui to incorporate the teaching of Jethmalani to utilize the above feature because of the analogous concept of transfer of confidential data and ownership in blockchain using NFT’s, with the motivation of creating a wallet that is owned by multiple users to create synchronization and enhanced verification based on the linking wallets. This helps identify confidential records in the blockchain associated with the wallets and prevents further harm or attacks on the system based on the comparisons and links. (Jethmalani Par. (0003-0005))
Claim 27, is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Robell et al. (U.S Pub. No. 20230281604, hereinafter referred to as “Robell”), Stolbikov et al. (U.S Pub. No. 20210124812, hereinafter referred to as “Stolbikov”) Obstfeld et al. (U.S Pub. No. 20250036793, hereinafter referred to as “Obstfeld”) and Chui et al. (U.S Pub. No. 20200159890, hereinafter referred to as “Chui”) further in view of Rhonda et al. (U.S Pub. No. 20170250972, hereinafter referred to as “Rhonda”)
In regards to Claim 27, the combination of Robell, Stolbikov, Obstfeld and Chui teach the method of claim 17, Robell further teaches the method of claim 17, wherein the authorized party is a Servicer associated with the User, (Par. (0092); Web NFT ID service corresponds to individual users based on blockchain)
Robell, Stolbikov, Obstfeld and Chui do not explicitly teach wherein the confidential user data are reconstituted responsive to a request by the Servicer, and wherein the Servicer uses the reconstituted confidential user data to verify an identity of the User in compliance with a governmental regulatory requirement prior to engaging in a transaction with the User.
Wherein Rhonda teaches wherein the confidential user data are reconstituted responsive to a request by the Servicer, and (Par. (0167)l; request by web service such as social networking website or ecommerce corresponding to RP server), (Par. (0405); RP server associated with web service with reconstruction of data)
wherein the Servicer uses the reconstituted confidential user data to verify an identity of the User in compliance with a governmental regulatory requirement prior to engaging in a transaction with the User. (Par. (0124-0130); verifying the identity of user with government agency account number corresponding to transaction), (Par. (0166-0167); verifying with government agency prior to request)
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Robell, Stolbikov, Obstfeld and Chui to incorporate the teaching of Rhonda to utilize the above feature because of the analogous concept of transfer of confidential data using blockchain technologies, with the motivation of implementing a Servicer that reconstructs and reconstitutes data to prevent vulnerabilities or harm and create an enhanced verification that is unpredictable and in return helps maintain the integrity and identity of users based on the government regulations. (Rhonda Par. (0003-0004 and 0166))
Claims 28 and 43, is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Robell et al. (U.S Pub. No. 20230281604, hereinafter referred to as “Robell”), Stolbikov et al. (U.S Pub. No. 20210124812, hereinafter referred to as “Stolbikov”)
Obstfeld et al. (U.S Pub. No. 20250036793, hereinafter referred to as “Obstfeld”) and Chui et al. (U.S Pub. No. 20200159890, hereinafter referred to as “Chui”) further in view of Wisnovsky et al. (U.S Pub. No. 20180260212, hereinafter referred to as “Wisnovsky”)
In regards to Claim 28, the combination of Robell, Stolbikov, Obstfeld and Chui do not explicitly teach wherein the first memory location is a first storage server physically located within a jurisdiction in which the User is located, and wherein the second memory location is a second storage server physically located outside the jurisdiction in which the User is located.
Wherein Wisnovsky teaches wherein the first memory location is a first storage server physically located within a jurisdiction in which the User is located, and (Par. (0026);l server with location located within range of single building)
wherein the second memory location is a second storage server physically located outside the jurisdiction in which the User is located. (Par. (0026); servers distributed location in cities away from single building)
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Robell, Stolbikov, Obstfeld and Chui to incorporate the teaching of Wisnovsky to utilize the above feature because of the analogous concept of transfer of confidential data using blockchain technologies, with the motivation of utilizing various servers and storage within a particular range and physically outside of jurisdiction to create parity and discourage attackers attempting to access a server within a jurisdiction. By having multiple storages in various location the system is safeguarded from modification or harm. (Wisnovsky Par. (0012-0014 and 0026))
In regards to Claim 43, claim 43 recites similar limitations to dependent claim 28 and the teaching of Robell, Stolbikov, Obstfeld, Chui and Wisnovsky address all the limitations discussed in dependent claim 28 and are thereby rejected under the same grounds.
Claims 29 and 44, is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Robell et al. (U.S Pub. No. 20230281604, hereinafter referred to as “Robell”), Stolbikov et al. (U.S Pub. No. 20210124812, hereinafter referred to as “Stolbikov”) Obstfeld et al. (U.S Pub. No. 20250036793, hereinafter referred to as “Obstfeld”) and Chui et al. (U.S Pub. No. 20200159890, hereinafter referred to as “Chui”) further in view of Irazabal et al. (U.S Pub. No. 20200382283, hereinafter referred to as “Irazabal”)
In regards to Claim 29, the combination of Robell, Stolbikov, Obstfeld and Chui do not explicitly teach wherein the confidential user data are partitioned using an interleaving scheme where blocks of the confidential user data are non-consecutively assigned to the respective at least first and second portions in accordance with a block assignment table, the block assignment table incorporated into and stored with the at least first and second portions.
Wherein Irazabal teaches wherein the confidential user data are partitioned using an interleaving scheme where blocks of the confidential user data are non-consecutively assigned to the respective at least first and second portions in accordance with a block assignment table, (Par. (0106); confidential user data (metadata with original file)), (Figure 7C labels 778, 776, 774 and 772; blocks with confidential user data (metadata with file inside block) with first and second portions, (value and header information), (Par. (0094-0095); wherein the confidential user data are partitioned using an interleaving scheme where blocks (blocks of blockchain are segmented into multiple segments non-consecutively), (Par. (0075-0078); non-consecutive blocks with metadata and user original file are logged into ledger)
the block assignment table incorporated into and stored with the at least first and second portions. (Par. (0075-0079); blockchain ledger with logs that include block with metadata, header and value in each nonconsecutive block)
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Robell, Stolbikov, Obstfeld and Chui to incorporate the teaching of Irazabal to utilize the above feature because of the analogous concept of transfer of confidential data using blockchain technologies, with the motivation of utilizing non-consecutive blocks and assigning on a table/ledger the portions to create a frame of reference and be able to identify validate confidential data from possible tampered or altered ones. (Irazabal Par. (0003-0004))
In regards to Claim 44, claim 44 recites similar limitations to dependent claim 29 and the teaching of Robell, Stolbikov, Obstfeld, Chui and Irazabal address all the limitations discussed in dependent claim 29 and are thereby rejected under the same grounds.
Claim 30, is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Robell et al. (U.S Pub. No. 20230281604, hereinafter referred to as “Robell”), Stolbikov et al. (U.S Pub. No. 20210124812, hereinafter referred to as “Stolbikov”) Obstfeld et al. (U.S Pub. No. 20250036793, hereinafter referred to as “Obstfeld”) and Chui et al. (U.S Pub. No. 20200159890, hereinafter referred to as “Chui”) further in view of Jin et al. (U.S Pub. No. 20230376941, hereinafter referred to as “Jin”)
In regards to Claim 30, the combination of Robell, Stolbikov, Obstfeld and Chui do not explicitly teach connecting, by the User, the NFA to a web portal, the web portal executing a smart contract to reconstruct and access the confidential user data to facilitate access, by the User, of at least one software-based service associated with the web portal.
Wherein Jin teaches connecting, by the User, the NFA to a web portal, the web portal executing a smart contract to reconstruct and access the confidential user data to facilitate access, by the User, of at least one software-based service associated with the web portal. (Par. (0042); secure Web sandbox software wallet key and reconstructing user wallet), (Par. (0049); accessing of user wallet key and data), (Par. (0034); smart contract and blockchain), (Par. (0042-0043); software-based service (secure web sandbox)
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Robell, Stolbikov, Obstfeld and Chui to incorporate the teaching of Jin to utilize the above feature because of the analogous concept of transfer of confidential data using blockchain technologies, with the motivation of safeguarding and addressing concerns of leaks of sensitive data by using secure web portal and services to create continuity and facilitate access to prevent theft fraud or exposure. (Jin Par. (0003-0005))
Claim 33, is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Robell et al. (U.S Pub. No. 20230281604, hereinafter referred to as “Robell”), Stolbikov et al. (U.S Pub. No. 20210124812, hereinafter referred to as “Stolbikov”) Obstfeld et al. (U.S Pub. No. 20250036793, hereinafter referred to as “Obstfeld”) and Chui et al. (U.S Pub. No. 20200159890, hereinafter referred to as “Chui”)further in view of Speasl et al. (U.S Pub. No. 20210409489, hereinafter referred to as “Speasl”)
In regards to Claim 33, the combination of Robell, Stolbikov, Obstfeld and Chui teach the method of claim 17, Robell further teaches the method of claim 17, further comprising storing the encryption key used to generate the encoded address information in a keystore memory, and (Par. (0036-0039); wallet storing encryption keys corresponding to address and IFPS address for access)
Robell, Stolbikov, Obstfeld and Chui do not explicitly teach subsequently destroying the encryption key from the keystore memory.
Wherein Speasl teaches subsequently destroying the encryption key from the keystore memory. (Par. (0022 and 0025); destroying private key from memory)
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Robell, Stolbikov, Obstfeld and Chui to incorporate the teaching of Speasl to utilize the above feature because of the analogous concept of transfer of confidential data and ownership in blockchains, with the motivation of destroying encryption keys to protect digital assets and confidential data from leaks, modification or fraud. By having a system in place to dispose of encryption keys after use helps creates trust and integrity in the network and verifies data by identifying authorized changes based on the keys used. (Speasl Par. (0017-0018))
Relevant Prior Art
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
POTTIER; Remy (U.S Pub. No. 20230281336) “CONTROLLING PERSONAL INFORMATION”. Considered this reference because it addressed confidential data and controlling information using partitions of data.
Sharma; Anirudh Kumar (U.S Pub. No. 20230247053) “SYSTEM FOR SECURE CHANNEL SELECTION FOR MULTI-FACTOR AUTHENTICATION USING NON-FUNGIBLE ELECTRONIC RESOURCES”. Considered this application because it relates to NFT’s in blockchain and transferring ownership of sensitive information and data.
ORTIZ; Edison U. (U.S Pub. No. 20230140341) “SYSTEMS AND METHODS FOR SECURE TOKENIZED CREDENTIALS”. Considered this application because it addressed tokenization and verification techniques based on government and banking regulations.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to HASSAN A HUSSEIN whose telephone number is (571)272-3554. The examiner can normally be reached on 7:30am-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, Eleni Shiferaw can be reached on (571)272-3867. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300.
Information regarding the status of an application may be obtained from the Patent Application Information Retrieval (PAIR) system. Status information for published applications may be obtained from either Private PAIR or Public PAIR. Status information for unpublished applications is available through Private PAIR only. For more information about the PAIR system, see 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.
/H.A.H./Examiner, Art Unit 2497
/HARUNUR RASHID/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2497
Prosecution Insights