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 .
Status of Claims
This is the first office action on the merits in response to the application filed on
02/12/2025.
Claims 1-20 are currently pending and have been examined.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 101
35 U.S.C. 101 reads as follows:
Whoever invents or discovers any new and useful process, machine, manufacture, or composition of matter, or any new and useful improvement thereof, may obtain a patent therefor, subject to the conditions and requirements of this title.
Claims 1-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 101 because the claimed invention is directed to a judicial exception (i.e., a law of nature, a natural phenomenon, or an abstract idea) without significantly more.
Subject Matter Eligibility Criteria – Step 1:
Claims 1-14 are directed to a system and claims 15-20 are directed toward a method. Therefore, these claims fall within the four statutory categories of invention.
Subject Matter Eligibility Criteria – Step 2A – Prong One:
Regarding Prong One of Step 2A of the Alice/Mayo test, the claim limitations are to be analyzed to determine whether, under their broadest reasonable interpretation, they “recite” a judicial exception or in other words whether a judicial exception is “set forth” or “described” in the claims. MPEP 2106.04(II)(A)(1). An “abstract idea” judicial exception is subject matter that falls within at least one of the following groups: a) certain methods of organizing human activity, b) mental processes, and/or c) mathematical concepts. MPEP 2106.04(a).
Representative independents claims 1, 9, and 15 include limitations that recite at least one abstract idea.
Claim 1 is directed to the abstract idea of “a network electronic interface through which electronic content is received, the electronic content comprising a plurality of transactions for receipt by a plurality of users associated with a plurality of user accounts of the supply chain system, where each transaction has both a blockchain component and a ranking component; at least one memory that comprises a first plurality of memory addresses that are arranged as a plurality of user accounts, each account associated with a user and a second plurality of memory addresses associates the plurality of user accounts with transactions and associated objects; and at least one processor for cooperation with the memory and the network interface, the processor configured to analyze the object in an initial state and the object's current ranking and then determine if a new block and associated object's blockchain needs to be generated as part of the ongoing plurality of transactions occurring within a supply chain electronic communication system.” Under its broadest reasonable interpretation, this claim is managing supply-chain transactions by using ranking components for users and objects to control and update supply-chain transaction activity, and hence falls under organizing human activity (i.e., as fundamental economic practices).
Claim 9 is directed to the abstract idea of “a network electronic interface through which electronic content is received, the electronic content comprising a plurality of transactions for receipt by a plurality of users associated with a plurality of user accounts of the supply chain system, where each transaction has both a blockchain component and a ranking component; at least one memory that comprises a first plurality of memory addresses that are arranged as a plurality of user accounts, each account associated with a user and a second plurality of memory addresses associates the plurality of user accounts with transactions and associated objects; and at least one processor for cooperation with the memory and the network interface, the processor configured to analyze the object in an initial state and the object's current ranking and then determine if a new block and associated object's blockchain needs to be generated as part of the ongoing plurality of transactions occurring within a supply chain electronic communication system that is applied to each function in a supply chain that includes procurement, production, storage, transportation and delivery of the object for optimization of the supply chain.” Under its broadest reasonable interpretation, this claim is managing supply-chain transactions by using ranking components for users and objects to control and update supply-chain transaction activity, and hence falls under organizing human activity (i.e., as fundamental economic practices).
Claim 15 is directed to the abstract idea of “generating electronic content is received, the electronic content comprising a plurality of transactions for receipt by a plurality of users associated with a plurality of user accounts of the supply chain system, where each transaction has both a blockchain component and a ranking component with a network electronic interface; utilizing a first plurality of memory addresses that are arranged as a plurality of user accounts, each account associated with a user and a second plurality of memory addresses associates the plurality of user accounts with transactions and associated objects with at least one memory; and analyzing the object in an initial state and the object's current ranking and then determine if a new block and associated object's blockchain needs to be generated as part of the ongoing plurality of transactions occurring within a supply chain electronic communication system with at least one processor that cooperates with the memory and the network interface.” Under its broadest reasonable interpretation, this claim is managing supply-chain transactions by using ranking components for users and objects to control and update supply-chain transaction activity, and hence falls under organizing human activity (i.e., as fundamental economic practices).
Dependent Claims:
Claim 2 recites: wherein the user can only modify the object if the integrity level of the user is greater than or higher than the integrity level of the object; further describes the abstract idea of organizing human activity (i.e., as fundamental economic practices).
Claim 3 recites: wherein the user at a specific clearance level cannot write data to an object at a higher classification level; further describes the abstract idea of organizing human activity (i.e., as fundamental economic practices).
Claim 4 recites: wherein the user can only modify the object if the integrity level of the user is greater than or higher than the integrity level of the object and the user, at a specific clearance level, cannot write data to an object at a higher classification level; further describes the abstract idea of organizing human activity (i.e., as fundamental economic practices).
Claim 5 recites: further comprising an initial rank of the user that is determined by an existing user and updated based on operational characteristics of the user; further describes the abstract idea of organizing human activity (i.e., as fundamental economic practices).
Claim 6 recites: further comprising an initial rank of the object that is determined by an immutable property of the object or the user making the initial rank determination; further describes the abstract idea of organizing human activity (i.e., as fundamental economic practices).
Claim 7 recites: further comprising an initial rank of the user that is determined by security principles; further describes the abstract idea of organizing human activity (i.e., as fundamental economic practices).
Claim 8 recites: further comprising integrity ranked smart contracts; further describes the abstract idea of organizing human activity (i.e., as fundamental economic practices).
Claim 10 recites: further includes the at least one processor determining at least one of cost, lead time, and quality for the object; further describes the abstract idea of organizing human activity (i.e., as fundamental economic practices).
Claim 11 recites: further includes objects are selected from the group consisting of actors, stock, supervisors, products, shipments, certificates, and transporters, and subjects are selected from the group consisting of actors smart contracts, supervisors smart contracts, products smart contracts, shipments smart contracts, certificates smart contracts and transporters smart contracts; further describes the abstract idea of organizing human activity (i.e., as fundamental economic practices).
Claim 12 recites: further includes the at least one processor optimizing the user, or the object based on system-wide performance metrics, wherein the system-wide performance metrics are selected from the group consisting of integrity, quality, cost, and lead time; further describes the abstract idea of organizing human activity (i.e., as fundamental economic practices).
Claims 13 and 20 recites: wherein the optimized user or optimized object combined with smart contracts optimizes supply chain operations to provide safety, traceability, and efficiency; further describes the abstract idea of organizing human activity (i.e., as fundamental economic practices).
Claim 14 recites: wherein the supply chain includes a supply chain in at least one of the following fields of manufacturing, food, agriculture, pharmaceutical, and healthcare to provide safety, traceability, and efficiency; further describes the abstract idea of organizing human activity (i.e., as fundamental economic practices).
Claim 16 recites: further comprising determining an initial rank of the user by an existing user and updated based on operational characteristics of the user; further describes the abstract idea of organizing human activity (i.e., as fundamental economic practices).
Claim 17 recites: further comprising applying to both the blockchain component and the ranking component for each function in a supply chain that includes procurement, production, storage, transportation, and delivery of the object for optimization of the supply chain; further describes the abstract idea of organizing human activity (i.e., as fundamental economic practices).
Claim 18 recites: further comprising utilizing smart contracts with the processor; further describes the abstract idea of organizing human activity (i.e., as fundamental economic practices).
Claim 19: recites further comprising optimizing the user or the object based on system-wide performance metrics with the at least one processor, wherein the objects are selected from the group consisting of actors, stock, supervisors, products, shipments, certificates, and transporters and subjects are selected from the group consisting of actors smart contracts, supervisors smart contracts, products smart contracts, shipments smart contracts, certificates smart contracts and transporters smart contracts; further describes the abstract idea of organizing human activity (i.e., as fundamental economic practices).
Subject Matter Eligibility Criteria – Step 2A – Prong Two:
Claim 1, 9, and 15 recites to a generic computer as additional elements to the judicial exception in the preamble. Viewed individually and in combination, this additional element to the identified judicial exception of Step 2A.1, amounts to no more than mere instructions for managing supply-chain transactions by using ranking components for users and objects to control and update supply-chain transaction activity on a generic computer. Therefore, at Step 2A.2, these additional elements do not act in combination to integrate the abstract idea into a practical application. The additional elements of claims 1, 9, and 15 considered both individually and as an ordered combination, do not amount to significantly more than the judicial exception because the additional element of a generic computer does no more than “[s]imply appending well-understood, routine, conventional activities previously known to the industry, specified at a high level of generality, to the judicial exception, e.g., a claim to an abstract idea requiring no more than a generic computer to perform generic computer functions that are well-understood, routine and conventional activities previously known to the industry.” See MPEP 2106.05 (citing to Alice Corp. Pty. Ltd. v. CLS Bank Int'l, 573 U.S. 208, 225 (2014)).
Therefore claims 1, 9, and 15 is found ineligible under 35 U.S.C. 101.
Step 2B:
Viewed as a whole, instructions/method claims recite the concept of “organizing human activity” (i.e., as fundamental economic practices) in managing supply-chain transactions by using ranking components for users and objects to control and update supply-chain transaction activity, are performed by a generic computer. The method claims do not, for example, purport to improve the functioning of the computer itself. Nor do they effect an improvement in any other technology or technical field. Instead, the claims at issue amount to nothing significantly more than an instruction to apply the abstract idea using some unspecified, generic computer. See Alice Corp. Pty. Ltd., 573 U.S. 208. Mere instructions to apply the exception using a generic computer component and limitations to a particular field of use or technological environment cannot integrate a judicial exception into a practical application at Step 2A or provide an inventive concept in Step 2B. The use of a computer server is to merely automate and/or implement the abstract idea cannot provide significantly more than the abstract idea itself (MPEP 2106.05(I)(A)(f) & (h)). Therefore, the claim is not patent eligible.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
5. 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.
The factual inquiries set forth in Graham v. John Deere Co., 383 U.S. 1, 148 USPQ 459 (1966), that are applied for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized as follows:
1. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art.
2. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue.
3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art.
4. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness.
Claims 1-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Ramachandran et al. (US 20180285810 A1), in view of Ward et al. (US 8646044 B2), and further in view of Broveleit et al. (US 11004028 B2).
7. Regarding claims 1, Ramachandran discloses a system with integrity-ranked transactions for a supply chain electronic communication system (Para. 0002-0008)
comprising: a network electronic interface through which electronic content is received, the electronic content comprising a plurality of transactions for receipt by a plurality of users associated with a plurality of user accounts of the supply chain system, where each transaction has both a blockchain component and a ranking component, (Para. 0003-0004, The food system is an extremely complex supply chain, moving billions of pounds of food each year. Typically, food passes through farmers, distributors, processors and retailers, often traveling thousands of miles prior to arriving in the hands of a consumer. In the process, a shipment may be split, repacked or joined with another shipment, further increasing the complexity. Given the vast and nonlinear nature of the food supply chain, the food system has become opaque, with limited traceability, information sharing, or even data collection…Every actor in the food industry has a unique set of relevant variables, leading to patchy data sets when comparing across actors. Data, when collected, is often siloed within one actor in order to protect competitive information. Additionally, every actor utilizes a different technology platform, making data transfer difficult even when needed; and Para. 0006-0008, A method is provided for tracking and recording data in a food supply chain system including a computer system, a plurality of sensors, one or more blockchain ledgers implemented on the computer system that interface with the plurality of sensors, tracking data relating to the food supply chain using the plurality of sensors, and storing the tracked data using the one or more blockchain ledgers. Another embodiment provides a system, including at least one processor, and at least one non-transitory computer readable medium storing instructions translatable by the at least one processor, the instructions when translated by the at least one processor cause the system for tracking and recording data in a food supply chain system by implementing one or more blockchain ledgers that interface with a plurality of sensors, tracking data relating to the food supply chain using the plurality of sensors, and storing the tracked data using the one or more blockchain ledgers. Another embodiment provides a computer program product comprising at least one non-transitory computer readable medium storing instructions translatable by at least one processor, the instructions when translated by the at least one processor cause a system to track and record data in a food supply chain system by implementing one or more blockchain ledgers that interface with a plurality of sensors, tracking data relating to the food supply chain using the plurality of sensors, and storing the tracked data using the one or more blockchain ledgers.) and at least one processor for cooperation with the memory and the network interface, the processor configured to analyze the object in an initial state and the object's current ranking and then determine if a new block and associated object's blockchain needs to be generated as part of the ongoing plurality of transactions occurring within a supply chain electronic communication system, (Para. 0007, Another embodiment provides a system, including at least one processor, and at least one non-transitory computer readable medium storing instructions translatable by the at least one processor, the instructions when translated by the at least one processor cause the system for tracking and recording data in a food supply chain system by implementing one or more blockchain ledgers that interface with a plurality of sensors, tracking data relating to the food supply chain using the plurality of sensors, and storing the tracked data using the one or more blockchain ledgers.; and Para. 0031-0033, As described in more detail below, the present disclosure proposes a new end-to-end solution applying a software stack consisting of a blockchain, on top of which a hardware solution can plug in and upload its data along the way, creating an internet of food using sensors and other data sources. The solution described provides an infrastructure to which data can be collected in the food supply chain and recorded in a blockchain ledger, shared in the food supply chain, and validated while data privacy and security is maintained. The infrastructure described also enables applications to be created from the data and workflow and processes behind the infrastructure. The collection of this data enables virtual histories of shipments to be created, which can be used to increase efficiency, create new business practices and potentially restructure marketplaces. Although increasing traceability and data transfer in a food supply chain results in direct economic benefits, implementation is difficult. Current solutions to tracing and data capture are constrained in capacity and are costly, limiting the adoption for an already low-margin industry. Many solutions are limited in scope, capturing data at a single point along the supply chain and often tracking only a few specific variables. A solution to the traceability and data challenges currently faced by the industry may be able to record and track the wide range of data involved with an object as it moves down the supply chain collected from a range of databases and software. Additionally, the solution is able to maintain data privacy and security while at the same time allowing data to be shared on a need-to-know basis. One exemplary solution goes beyond the capture and recording of data to provide analysis and optimization to maximize freshness, minimize waste and environmental impact, and ensure a safer, more efficient food supply chain. One goal of the present disclosure is to reconnect the supply chain by telling the story of a product by promoting transparency along the entirety of the supply chain and assembling the histories of products as they move through the supply chain. The present disclosure proposes a new end-to-end solution applying a software stack consisting of a blockchain, on top of which a hardware solution can plug in and upload its data along the way, creating an internet of food using a combination of sensors and manual entries of data. Blockchain, sensors and the internet of things (loT) concept complement each other, filling in each other’s weaknesses to provide a robust solution set.)
Ramachandran does not explicitly disclose at least one memory that comprises a first plurality of memory addresses that are arranged as a plurality of user accounts, each account associated with a user and a second plurality of memory addresses associates the plurality of user accounts with transactions and associated objects.
However, Ward teaches at least one memory that comprises a first plurality of memory addresses that are arranged as a plurality of user accounts, each account associated with a user and a second plurality of memory addresses associates the plurality of user accounts with transactions and associated objects, (Abstract Section, The contemplated embodiments of the invention provide a method for implementing a mandatory integrity control (MIC) system that enforces a security policy that applies to every subject and object in the computer system, but does not require major changes to the operating system behavior for users or applications. The invention provides a novel method that selects an integrity level designator when a user authenticates to the computer system. The selected integrity level designator is then added to an existing data structure representing the security context of the user in the computer system. The security context of the user is a data structure referred to as a security token. As part of the novel method, the integrity level designator is added to the security token. The security token is applied to every process (or executing program) started by the user. The executing process with an associated security token is referred to as a subject in the integrity model. In addition, an integrity level designator is added to the existing security attributes of objects that are represented in the operating system as securable resources, such as data files. The data structure representing the existing security attributes of an object include an access control list that is part of a security descriptor. Another part of the novel method is how the integrity level designator is represented in the existing access control list. The access control list contains a list of entries that have security identifiers (or security IDs). The security IDs are data structures used to identify the users or groups granted access permissions in the DAC model. Another part of novel method is using security identifiers to represent the integrity level designator. Using security identifiers as the data structure to represent the integrity level designator allows an implementation of the integrity model with minimal change to the existing subject security token and object security descriptor that are fundamental to the operating system security mechanism. The security identifier data structures permits the definition of a very large number of integrity level designations and/or integrity compartments. A simple implementation of the novel method may introduce a small number of distinct integrity level designations representing different degrees of trustworthiness, such as low, medium, high, and system. The security reference monitor in the operating system implements the access verification checks. As part of the access verification process, a novel method uses integrity level designators in the subject security token and object security descriptor in addition to the discretionary access control information before determining the allow access permissions. The novel method includes comparing a subject's integrity level to the integrity level of an object that is to be accessed, when the subject attempts to access an object. The subject may then be granted access to the object once the MIC policy check verifies that the subject's integrity level has the appropriate relationship to the integrity level of the object, depending on the type of access requested, such as read, write or execute.)
One of ordinary skill in the art would have recognized that applying the known technique of Ramachandran to the known invention of Ward would have been recognized that the application of the technique would have yielded predictable results because the level of ordinary skill in the art demonstrated by the references applied shows the ability to incorporate memory addresses features into a similar invention. Further, it would have been recognized by those of ordinary skill in the art that modifying the method to include at least one memory that comprises a first plurality of memory addresses that are arranged as a plurality of user accounts, each account associated with a user and a second plurality of memory addresses associates the plurality of user accounts with transactions and associated objects result in an improved invention because applying said technique will ensure that supply-chain transactions are tracked using records and rankings that are connected to users and objects, thus improving the overall efficiency and performance of the invention.
8. Regarding claim 2, Ramachandran discloses wherein the user can only modify the object if the integrity level of the user is greater than or higher than the integrity level of the object.
However, Ward teaches wherein the user can only modify the object if the integrity level of the user is greater than or higher than the integrity level of the object, (Column 2/line 21, The contemplated embodiments of the invention provide a method for implementing a mandatory integrity control (MIC) system that enforces a security policy that applies to every subject and object in the computer system, but does not require major changes to the operating system behavior for users or applications. The invention provides a novel method that selects an integrity level designator when a user authenticates to the computer system. The selected integrity level designator is then added to an existing data structure representing the security context of the user in the computer system. The security context of the user is a data structure referred to as a security token. As part of the novel method, the integrity level designator is added to the security token. The security token is applied to every process (or executing program) started by the user. The executing process with an associated security token is referred to as a subject in the integrity model. In addition, an integrity level designator is added to the existing security attributes of objects that are represented in the operating system as securable resources, such as data files. The data structure representing the existing security attributes of an object include an access control list that is part of a security descriptor. Another part of the novel method is how the integrity level designator is represented in the existing access control list. The access control list contains a list of entries that have security identifiers (or security IDs). The security IDs are data structures used to identify the users or groups granted access permissions in the DAC model. Another part of novel method is using security identifiers to represent the integrity level designator. Using security identifiers as the data structure to represent the integrity level designator allows an implementation of the integrity model with minimal change to the existing subject security token and object security descriptor that are fundamental to the operating system security mechanism. The security identifier data structures permits the definition of a very large number of integrity level designations and/or integrity compartments. A simple implementation of the novel method may introduce a small number of distinct integrity level designations representing different degrees of trustworthiness, such as low, medium, high, and system.)
One of ordinary skill in the art would have recognized that applying the known technique of Ramachandran to the known invention of Ward would have been recognized that the application of the technique would have yielded predictable results because the level of ordinary skill in the art demonstrated by the references applied shows the ability to incorporate integrity levels features into a similar invention. Further, it would have been recognized by those of ordinary skill in the art that modifying the method to include wherein the user can only modify the object if the integrity level of the user is greater than or higher than the integrity level of the object result in an improved invention because applying said technique will prevent lower ranked integrity users from modifying higher-integrity objects, thus improving the overall security of the invention.
9. Regarding claim 3, Ramachandran does not explicitly disclose wherein the user at a specific clearance level cannot write data to an object at a higher classification level.
However, Ward teaches wherein the user at a specific clearance level cannot write data to an object at a higher classification level, (Column 1/line 32, A different security model from DAC, called “Mandatory Access Control” (MAC) provides a different mechanism for enforcing a security policy defined by the system that is not under the discretion of the user to change. MAC makes enforcement of security policies mandatory instead of discretionary, as with DAC. MAC allows security policies to be established by the system and require object owners and users to be subject to these policies. Once the security policies are in place, users cannot override them. Mandatory Integrity Control (MIC) applies an mandatory security policy in regards to the trustworthiness of a user or application file. A MIC security policy is narrower in scope than a MAC security policy. Instead of providing security based on the sensitivity or classification of the subject and the object as with MAC, MIC enforces access security based on the integrity of the subject and the object. MIC is designed to protect the computer system and user data from unauthorized modification by untrustworthy users, or untrustworthy code run by privileged users. MIC does not address the confidentiality of data. A typical Mandatory Integrity Control implementation enforces a policy where processes of lower trustworthiness cannot modify files or system objects of higher trustworthiness, and where subjects of high trustworthiness are not compromised by accepting input of lower trustworthiness. Traditional mandatory integrity models, while providing adequate security, have also had a number of limiting practical affects on the operation of a computer system. For example, the Biba hierarchical integrity model created in the 1970s, is a strict integrity model that limits the ability to modify an object only when a subject's integrity level dominates an object's integrity level. The Biba model also prevents a subject from reading data from a lower integrity object or writing up to a higher object integrity.…For example, certain integrity models allowed higher integrity subjects to read or execute lower integrity objects. Other integrity models permitted modification only by “certified” programs. Nevertheless, because of challenges in the design and implementation of integrity models in commercial operating systems their use has been limited.)
One of ordinary skill in the art would have recognized that applying the known technique of Ramachandran to the known invention of Ward would have been recognized that the application of the technique would have yielded predictable results because the level of ordinary skill in the art demonstrated by the references applied shows the ability to incorporate integrity levels features into a similar invention. Further, it would have been recognized by those of ordinary skill in the art that modifying the method to include wherein the user at a specific clearance level cannot write data to an object at a higher classification level result in an improved invention because applying said technique will prevent lower ranked integrity users at a specific clearance level from modifying higher-integrity objects, thus improving the overall security of the invention.
10. Regarding claim 4, Ramachandran does not explicitly disclose wherein the user can only modify the object if the integrity level of the user is greater than or higher than the integrity level of the object and the user, at a specific clearance level, cannot write data to an object at a higher classification level.
However, Ward teaches wherein the user can only modify the object if the integrity level of the user is greater than or higher than the integrity level of the object and the user, at a specific clearance level, cannot write data to an object at a higher classification level, (Column 2/line 21, The contemplated embodiments of the invention provide a method for implementing a mandatory integrity control (MIC) system that enforces a security policy that applies to every subject and object in the computer system, but does not require major changes to the operating system behavior for users or applications. The invention provides a novel method that selects an integrity level designator when a user authenticates to the computer system. The selected integrity level designator is then added to an existing data structure representing the security context of the user in the computer system. The security context of the user is a data structure referred to as a security token. As part of the novel method, the integrity level designator is added to the security token. The security token is applied to every process (or executing program) started by the user. The executing process with an associated security token is referred to as a subject in the integrity model. In addition, an integrity level designator is added to the existing security attributes of objects that are represented in the operating system as securable resources, such as data files. The data structure representing the existing security attributes of an object include an access control list that is part of a security descriptor. Another part of the novel method is how the integrity level designator is represented in the existing access control list. The access control list contains a list of entries that have security identifiers (or security IDs). The security IDs are data structures used to identify the users or groups granted access permissions in the DAC model. Another part of novel method is using security identifiers to represent the integrity level designator. Using security identifiers as the data structure to represent the integrity level designator allows an implementation of the integrity model with minimal change to the existing subject security token and object security descriptor that are fundamental to the operating system security mechanism. The security identifier data structures permits the definition of a very large number of integrity level designations and/or integrity compartments. A simple implementation of the novel method may introduce a small number of distinct integrity level designations representing different degrees of trustworthiness, such as low, medium, high, and system; and Column 1/line 32, A different security model from DAC, called “Mandatory Access Control” (MAC) provides a different mechanism for enforcing a security policy defined by the system that is not under the discretion of the user to change. MAC makes enforcement of security policies mandatory instead of discretionary, as with DAC. MAC allows security policies to be established by the system and require object owners and users to be subject to these policies. Once the security policies are in place, users cannot override them. Mandatory Integrity Control (MIC) applies an mandatory security policy in regards to the trustworthiness of a user or application file. A MIC security policy is narrower in scope than a MAC security policy. Instead of providing security based on the sensitivity or classification of the subject and the object as with MAC, MIC enforces access security based on the integrity of the subject and the object. MIC is designed to protect the computer system and user data from unauthorized modification by untrustworthy users, or untrustworthy code run by privileged users. MIC does not address the confidentiality of data. A typical Mandatory Integrity Control implementation enforces a policy where processes of lower trustworthiness cannot modify files or system objects of higher trustworthiness, and where subjects of high trustworthiness are not compromised by accepting input of lower trustworthiness.)
One of ordinary skill in the art would have recognized that applying the known technique of Ramachandran to the known invention of Ward would have been recognized that the application of the technique would have yielded predictable results because the level of ordinary skill in the art demonstrated by the references applied shows the ability to incorporate classification levels features into a similar invention. Further, it would have been recognized by those of ordinary skill in the art that modifying the method to include wherein the user can only modify the object if the integrity level of the user is greater than or higher than the integrity level of the object and the user, at a specific clearance level, cannot write data to an object at a higher classification level result in an improved invention because applying said technique will prevent lower ranked integrity users at a specific clearance level and lower integrity levels from modifying higher-integrity objects, thus improving the overall security of the invention.
11. Regarding claim 5, Ramachandran discloses further comprising an initial rank of the user that is determined by an existing user and updated based on operational characteristics of the user, (Claim 16. further comprising, for a given food supply, generating a scorecard for the given food supply, wherein the scorecard provides a score for the given food supply based on a plurality of product and process variables.; and These datasets and outcomes can be compiled into an index on which product is posted and sold. The index presents data in an agnostic format without taking a stance on desirability of certain aspects, and leaves it up to the user to generate a set of desired criteria to aid in purchasing and evaluation. These criteria can be compiled into a unique user scorecard, which can filter through postings and select products for desired traits. For example a restaurant may pride itself on serving local, sustainable food.; and Para. 0086-0088, the system may be comprised of three phases, including a scorecard phase, a supply automation phase, and a smart marketplace phase. In some embodiments, the system uses sensor data captured on a blockchain to generate a produce scorecard that will improve the understanding of risks and inefficiencies across a supply chain. Detailed examples of a produce scorecard are provided below. The system uses smart contracts (described above) stored on the blockchain to provide near real-time alerts and can automate provisioning decisions based on sensor data and scorecard results. Members of the system community can use the blockchain to communicate product availability and purchasing contracts with quality and ripening conditions monitored on the blockchain. FIG. 1 shows an exemplary system architecture diagram. In FIG. 1, a blockchain section 100 shows a public ledger, a permissioned ledger, smart contracts, and a sensor vendor. An application section 102 shows a supply-chain business rules orchestrator, an integration engine operatively coupled to various sensor vendors and cloud API's. The application section 102 also shows data normalization, scorecard engine, and analytics engine blocks, as well as a database (DBMS). An interfaces section 104 shows software as a service (SaaS) UX stack that can interface with web, tablet and phone devices and a SaaS API stack and corresponding API and blockchain explorer blocks. FIG. 2 shows various exemplary blockchain transaction types 200, including evidence, claims, certification, scorecard, ripe chain bundle, and purchase contract. Each transaction type 200 shown in FIG. 2 includes exemplary transaction parameters. For example, Evidence transaction 200 lists parameters such as data type, value, date/time, and signature. Claims transaction 200 lists parameters such as origin, taste, and quality. Certification and Scorecard transactions 200 lists parameters such as type, date/time, expiration, and scope. Chain bundle transaction 200 lists parameters such as evidence, claims, certifications, scorecards, commercial value, quantity, weight, owner, current location, destination, and status. Purchase contract transaction 200 lists parameters such as buyer, seller, chain bundle, price, and conditions. FIG. 2 also illustrates various inputs 202 that may be provided to a given transaction. Exemplary input data 202 includes sensor data, member key, claim data, evidence, certification, scorecard data, bundle data, food bundle, buyer key, seller key, price, conditions, etc. FIG. 2 also illustrates various functions 204 that may be performed for a given transaction type. Exemplary functions 204 include create, update, delete, assigned evidence, revoke, sell, consume, etc.)
12. Regarding claim 6, Ramachandran discloses further comprising an initial rank of the object that is determined by an immutable property of the object or the user making the initial rank determination, (Claim 16. further comprising, for a given food supply, generating a scorecard for the given food supply, wherein the scorecard provides a score for the given food supply based on a plurality of product and process variables.; and These datasets and outcomes can be compiled into an index on which product is posted and sold. The index presents data in an agnostic format without taking a stance on desirability of certain aspects, and leaves it up to the user to generate a set of desired criteria to aid in purchasing and evaluation. These criteria can be compiled into a unique user scorecard, which can filter through postings and select products for desired traits. For example a restaurant may pride itself on serving local, sustainable food.; and Para. 0086-0088, the system may be comprised of three phases, including a scorecard phase, a supply automation phase, and a smart marketplace phase. In some embodiments, the system uses sensor data captured on a blockchain to generate a produce scorecard that will improve the understanding of risks and inefficiencies across a supply chain. Detailed examples of a produce scorecard are provided below. The system uses smart contracts (described above) stored on the blockchain to provide near real-time alerts and can automate provisioning decisions based on sensor data and scorecard results. Members of the system community can use the blockchain to communicate product availability and purchasing contracts with quality and ripening conditions monitored on the blockchain. FIG. 1 shows an exemplary system architecture diagram. In FIG. 1, a blockchain section 100 shows a public ledger, a permissioned ledger, smart contracts, and a sensor vendor. An application section 102 shows a supply-chain business rules orchestrator, an integration engine operatively coupled to various sensor vendors and cloud API's. The application section 102 also shows data normalization, scorecard engine, and analytics engine blocks, as well as a database (DBMS). An interfaces section 104 shows software as a service (SaaS) UX stack that can interface with web, tablet and phone devices and a SaaS API stack and corresponding API and blockchain explorer blocks. FIG. 2 shows various exemplary blockchain transaction types 200, including evidence, claims, certification, scorecard, ripe chain bundle, and purchase contract. Each transaction type 200 shown in FIG. 2 includes exemplary transaction parameters. For example, Evidence transaction 200 lists parameters such as data type, value, date/time, and signature. Claims transaction 200 lists parameters such as origin, taste, and quality. Certification and Scorecard transactions 200 lists parameters such as type, date/time, expiration, and scope. Chain bundle transaction 200 lists parameters such as evidence, claims, certifications, scorecards, commercial value, quantity, weight, owner, current location, destination, and status. Purchase contract transaction 200 lists parameters such as buyer, seller, chain bundle, price, and conditions. FIG. 2 also illustrates various inputs 202 that may be provided to a given transaction. Exemplary input data 202 includes sensor data, member key, claim data, evidence, certification, scorecard data, bundle data, food bundle, buyer key, seller key, price, conditions, etc. FIG. 2 also illustrates various functions 204 that may be performed for a given transaction type. Exemplary functions 204 include create, update, delete, assigned evidence, revoke, sell, consume, etc.)
13. Regarding claim 7, Ramachandran does not explicitly disclose further comprising an initial rank of the user that is determined by security principles.
However, Ward teaches further comprising an initial rank of the user that is determined by security principles, (Column 9/line 41, FIG. 5 provides a flow diagram of an example use of a mandatory integrity control system, as contemplated by the invention. In step 501, a user downloads an executable file from the Internet. When the user attempts to launch the executable file in step 502, a new process is created with the minimum user integrity level and the minimum file integrity level in step 503. As a result, the newly created process will not execute with a higher integrity than the executable file itself, as indicated in step 504.For example, if an administrator with a high integrity level executes a low integrity program, such as a program downloaded from the Internet, the token for the newly created process will operate with the lower integrity level. Therefore, the administrator who launches the untrustworthy code is protected from any damaging or malicious acts performed by that code. Also, the user data, which is at the typical user integrity level, will be write-protected against this new process.; and Column 1/line 32, A different security model from DAC, called “Mandatory Access Control” (MAC) provides a different mechanism for enforcing a security policy defined by the system that is not under the discretion of the user to change. MAC makes enforcement of security policies mandatory instead of discretionary, as with DAC. MAC allows security policies to be established by the system and require object owners and users to be subject to these policies. Once the security policies are in place, users cannot override them. Mandatory Integrity Control (MIC) applies an mandatory security policy in regards to the trustworthiness of a user or application file. A MIC security policy is narrower in scope than a MAC security policy. Instead of providing security based on the sensitivity or classification of the subject and the object as with MAC, MIC enforces access security based on the integrity of the subject and the object. MIC is designed to protect the computer system and user data from unauthorized modification by untrustworthy users, or untrustworthy code run by privileged users. MIC does not address the confidentiality of data. A typical Mandatory Integrity Control implementation enforces a policy where processes of lower trustworthiness cannot modify files or system objects of higher trustworthiness, and where subjects of high trustworthiness are not compromised by accepting input of lower trustworthiness.)
One of ordinary skill in the art would have recognized that applying the known technique of Ramachandran to the known invention of Ward would have been recognized that the application of the technique would have yielded predictable results because the level of ordinary skill in the art demonstrated by the references applied shows the ability to incorporate ranking features into a similar invention. Further, it would have been recognized by those of ordinary skill in the art that modifying the method to include further comprising an initial rank of the user that is determined by security principles result in an improved invention because applying said technique will ensure that user’s initial rank is based off security principles, thus improving the overall security of the invention.
14. Regarding claim 8, Ramachandran as modified does not explicitly disclose further comprising integrity ranked smart contracts.
However, Broveleit teaches further comprising integrity ranked smart contracts, (Claim 13. A system for managing transport of a commodity from a point of origin to a destination, the system comprising: one or more processors configured to: receive rating information from one or more external systems, each of the one or more external systems associated with a logistics service provider; receive a request including one or more parameters associated with the transport of the commodity; dynamically generate a quote for the transport of the commodity based on the rating information and the one or more parameters included in the request; transmit the quote to a remote system via a network; receive, from the remote system via the network, an authorization of the transport of the commodity in accordance with the quote; in response to receiving the authorization from the remote system via the network, generate a smart contract for the transport of the commodity, wherein the smart contract comprises one or more milestone and one or more operations and is generated in response to receiving the authorization from the remote system, wherein the smart contract is recorded to a blockchain ledger and at least one operation of the one or more operations is automatically executed via the smart contract in response to a determination that at least one of the one or more milestones of the smart contract has been completed; monitor a status of the one or more milestones of the smart contract during transport of the commodity; determine, via the smart contract, whether one or more particular milestones of the smart contract have been completed based on the monitoring and whether a quantity of confirmation messages received from one or more logistics service providers responsible for transport of the commodity satisfies a threshold, wherein each of the confirmation messages corresponds to one of the one or more logistics service providers and includes a digital signature generated using a key specific to the corresponding logistic service provider, wherein the confirmation messages indicate changes to a current location of the commodity along a transportation route used for the transport of the commodity and a current service provider in possession of the commodity; and in response to a determination that at least one of the one or more particular milestones of the smart contract has been satisfied, automatically initiating, via the smart contract, particular operations corresponding to the at least one milestone of the smart contract; and a memory coupled to the one or more processors.)
One of ordinary skill in the art would have recognized that applying the known technique of Ramachandran as modified to the known invention of Broveleit would have been recognized that the application of the technique would have yielded predictable results because the level of ordinary skill in the art demonstrated by the references applied shows the ability to incorporate smart contracts features into a similar invention. Further, it would have been recognized by those of ordinary skill in the art that modifying the system to include further comprising integrity ranked smart contracts result in an improved invention because applying said technique will ensure supply-chain actions are automated and process quicker and more consistently, thus improving the overall efficiency and performance of the invention.
15. Regarding claim 9, Ramachandran discloses a system with integrity-ranked transactions for a supply chain electronic communication system comprising: a network electronic interface through which electronic content is received, the electronic content comprising a plurality of transactions for receipt by a plurality of users associated with a plurality of user accounts of the supply chain system, where each transaction has both a blockchain component and a ranking component, (Para. 0003-0004, The food system is an extremely complex supply chain, moving billions of pounds of food each year. Typically, food passes through farmers, distributors, processors and retailers, often traveling thousands of miles prior to arriving in the hands of a consumer. In the process, a shipment may be split, repacked or joined with another shipment, further increasing the complexity. Given the vast and nonlinear nature of the food supply chain, the food system has become opaque, with limited traceability, information sharing, or even data collection…Every actor in the food industry has a unique set of relevant variables, leading to patchy data sets when comparing across actors. Data, when collected, is often siloed within one actor in order to protect competitive information. Additionally, every actor utilizes a different technology platform, making data transfer difficult even when needed; and Para. 0006-0008, A method is provided for tracking and recording data in a food supply chain system including a computer system, a plurality of sensors, one or more blockchain ledgers implemented on the computer system that interface with the plurality of sensors, tracking data relating to the food supply chain using the plurality of sensors, and storing the tracked data using the one or more blockchain ledgers. Another embodiment provides a system, including at least one processor, and at least one non-transitory computer readable medium storing instructions translatable by the at least one processor, the instructions when translated by the at least one processor cause the system for tracking and recording data in a food supply chain system by implementing one or more blockchain ledgers that interface with a plurality of sensors, tracking data relating to the food supply chain using the plurality of sensors, and storing the tracked data using the one or more blockchain ledgers. Another embodiment provides a computer program product comprising at least one non-transitory computer readable medium storing instructions translatable by at least one processor, the instructions when translated by the at least one processor cause a system to track and record data in a food supply chain system by implementing one or more blockchain ledgers that interface with a plurality of sensors, tracking data relating to the food supply chain using the plurality of sensors, and storing the tracked data using the one or more blockchain ledgers.)
the processor configured to analyze the object in an initial state and the object's current ranking and then determine if a new block and associated object's blockchain needs to be generated as part of the ongoing plurality of transactions occurring within a supply chain electronic communication system that is applied to each function in a supply chain that includes procurement, production, storage, transportation and delivery of the object for optimization of the supply chain, (Para. 0007, Another embodiment provides a system, including at least one processor, and at least one non-transitory computer readable medium storing instructions translatable by the at least one processor, the instructions when translated by the at least one processor cause the system for tracking and recording data in a food supply chain system by implementing one or more blockchain ledgers that interface with a plurality of sensors, tracking data relating to the food supply chain using the plurality of sensors, and storing the tracked data using the one or more blockchain ledgers.; and Para. 0031, As described in more detail below, the present disclosure proposes a new end-to-end solution applying a software stack consisting of a blockchain, on top of which a hardware solution can plug in and upload its data along the way, creating an internet of food using sensors and other data sources. The solution described provides an infrastructure to which data can be collected in the food supply chain and recorded in a blockchain ledger, shared in the food supply chain, and validated while data privacy and security is maintained. The infrastructure described also enables applications to be created from the data and workflow and processes behind the infrastructure. The collection of this data enables virtual histories of shipments to be created, which can be used to increase efficiency, create new business practices and potentially restructure marketplaces.; and Para. 0039, This unification allows the blockchain to follow food products in a unique way from seed to table by recording information about a physical product as it evolves over time. For example, in some embodiments, the original data posted to the blockchain (e.g., Grower ABX seeded tomato filed 12Z on March 14) serves as a block record. As food moves along the supply chain, various types of data can be posted to the blockchain as entries in the ledger (e.g., tomatoes were harvested and packed on June 7). Another entry might record that the temperature on a truck transporting the food was 55 degrees over 274 miles traveled. These individual entries can then be associated, enriching the data associated with the shipment and essentially creating a virtual copy of the physical item. This virtual copy is the sum of the entries associated with the unique item, ultimately becoming the history of the food product through its lifecycle through the food supply chain. With this information, businesses can improve traceability, analyze environmental conditions through harvest and transportation, and gather auditable documentation on the history of a product. Additionally, retailers can track a shipment's current location and condition; food processors can better monitor storage conditions; etc. If consumers are allowed access to the data, the consumers can have visibility into data such as the grower and the grower's farming practices, food miles traveled, ripeness indicators or previews of taste.)
Ramachandran does not explicitly disclose at least one memory that comprises a first plurality of memory addresses that are arranged as a plurality of user accounts, each account associated with a user and a second plurality of memory addresses associates the plurality of user accounts with transactions and associated objects.
However, Ward teaches at least one memory that comprises a first plurality of memory addresses that are arranged as a plurality of user accounts, each account associated with a user and a second plurality of memory addresses associates the plurality of user accounts with transactions and associated objects, (Column 2/line 21, The contemplated embodiments of the invention provide a method for implementing a mandatory integrity control (MIC) system that enforces a security policy that applies to every subject and object in the computer system, but does not require major changes to the operating system behavior for users or applications. The invention provides a novel method that selects an integrity level designator when a user authenticates to the computer system. The selected integrity level designator is then added to an existing data structure representing the security context of the user in the computer system. The security context of the user is a data structure referred to as a security token. As part of the novel method, the integrity level designator is added to the security token. The security token is applied to every process (or executing program) started by the user. The executing process with an associated security token is referred to as a subject in the integrity model. In addition, an integrity level designator is added to the existing security attributes of objects that are represented in the operating system as securable resources, such as data files. The data structure representing the existing security attributes of an object include an access control list that is part of a security descriptor. Another part of the novel method is how the integrity level designator is represented in the existing access control list. The access control list contains a list of entries that have security identifiers (or security IDs). The security IDs are data structures used to identify the users or groups granted access permissions in the DAC model. Another part of novel method is using security identifiers to represent the integrity level designator. Using security identifiers as the data structure to represent the integrity level designator allows an implementation of the integrity model with minimal change to the existing subject security token and object security descriptor that are fundamental to the operating system security mechanism. The security identifier data structures permits the definition of a very large number of integrity level designations and/or integrity compartments. A simple implementation of the novel method may introduce a small number of distinct integrity level designations representing different degrees of trustworthiness, such as low, medium, high, and system. The security reference monitor in the operating system implements the access verification checks. As part of the access verification process, a novel method uses integrity level designators in the subject security token and object security descriptor in addition to the discretionary access control information before determining the allow access permissions. The novel method includes comparing a subject's integrity level to the integrity level of an object that is to be accessed, when the subject attempts to access an object. The subject may then be granted access to the object once the MIC policy check verifies that the subject's integrity level has the appropriate relationship to the integrity level of the object, depending on the type of access requested, such as read, write or execute.)
One of ordinary skill in the art would have recognized that applying the known technique of Ramachandran to the known invention of Ward would have been recognized that the application of the technique would have yielded predictable results because the level of ordinary skill in the art demonstrated by the references applied shows the ability to incorporate memory addresses features into a similar invention. Further, it would have been recognized by those of ordinary skill in the art that modifying the method to include at least one memory that comprises a first plurality of memory addresses that are arranged as a plurality of user accounts, each account associated with a user and a second plurality of memory addresses associates the plurality of user accounts with transactions and associated objects result in an improved invention because applying said technique will ensure that supply-chain transactions are tracked using records and rankings that are connected to users and objects, thus improving the overall efficiency and performance of the invention.
Ramachandran as modified does not explicitly disclose and at least one processor for cooperation with the memory and the network interface.
However, Broveleit teaches and at least one processor for cooperation with the memory and the network interface, (Claim 13. A system for managing transport of a commodity from a point of origin to a destination, the system comprising: one or more processors configured to: receive rating information from one or more external systems, each of the one or more external systems associated with a logistics service provider; receive a request including one or more parameters associated with the transport of the commodity; dynamically generate a quote for the transport of the commodity based on the rating information and the one or more parameters included in the request; transmit the quote to a remote system via a network; receive, from the remote system via the network, an authorization of the transport of the commodity in accordance with the quote; in response to receiving the authorization from the remote system via the network, generate a smart contract for the transport of the commodity, wherein the smart contract comprises one or more milestone and one or more operations and is generated in response to receiving the authorization from the remote system, wherein the smart contract is recorded to a blockchain ledger and at least one operation of the one or more operations is automatically executed via the smart contract in response to a determination that at least one of the one or more milestones of the smart contract has been completed; monitor a status of the one or more milestones of the smart contract during transport of the commodity; determine, via the smart contract, whether one or more particular milestones of the smart contract have been completed based on the monitoring and whether a quantity of confirmation messages received from one or more logistics service providers responsible for transport of the commodity satisfies a threshold, wherein each of the confirmation messages corresponds to one of the one or more logistics service providers and includes a digital signature generated using a key specific to the corresponding logistic service provider, wherein the confirmation messages indicate changes to a current location of the commodity along a transportation route used for the transport of the commodity and a current service provider in possession of the commodity; and in response to a determination that at least one of the one or more particular milestones of the smart contract has been satisfied, automatically initiating, via the smart contract, particular operations corresponding to the at least one milestone of the smart contract; and a memory coupled to the one or more processors.)
One of ordinary skill in the art would have recognized that applying the known technique of Ramachandran as modified to the known invention of Broveleit would have been recognized that the application of the technique would have yielded predictable results because the level of ordinary skill in the art demonstrated by the references applied shows the ability to incorporate interface features into a similar invention. Further, it would have been recognized by those of ordinary skill in the art that modifying the system to include and at least one processor for cooperation with the memory and the network interface result in an improved invention because applying said technique will ensure supply-chain actions are stored properly and process quicker and more consistently, thus improving the overall efficiency and performance of the invention.
16. Regarding claim 10, Ramachandran as modified does not explicitly disclose further includes the at least one processor determining at least one of cost, lead time, and quality for the object.
However, Broveleit teaches further includes the at least one processor determining at least one of cost, lead time, and quality for the object, (Claim 10. wherein rating information received from a first external system associated with a first logistics service provider comprises information that identifies a cost for one or more transportation services, container sizes available for the one or more transportation services, lanes accessible to the first logistics service provider, information associated with regulatory compliance of the first logistics service provider, points of origin and destinations serviced by the first logistics service provider, time estimates associated with transport of the commodity from the points of origin to the destinations serviced by the first logistics service provider, or a combination thereof.; and Column 8/line 38, The rating information may further identify one or more lanes in which the different logistics service providers operate, and may further include information that correlates particular types of freight transportation services and corresponding container requirements (e.g., whether a container is required and if so, the available container size(s)) to particular lanes. For example, a logistics service provider may operate in a first lane in which the logistics service provider offers truck-based freight transportation services and rail-based freight transportation services using one or more container types and sizes, and may operate in a second lane in which the logistics service provider offers boat-based freight transportation services. Each of these different services may be container-less (e.g., do not require a container) or may utilize one or more container types and sizes. The rating information may further identify points of origin and destinations serviced by the logistics service providers. The points of origin and destinations may indicate whether a logistics service provider is capable of taking possession of the commodity to be transported at particular locations, such as ports, rail stations, airports, and the like.The logistics platform 110 may be configured to derive time estimates associated with transport of commodities from the points of origin to the destinations based on information stored at the database(s) 116. For example, the logistics platform 110 may track travel and delivery times for various logistics services executed through the logistics platform 110, as described in more detail below, and may store information associated with the travel and delivery times at the database(s) 116. Based on the travel and delivery time information stored at the database(s) 116, the logistics platform may estimate a time frame for completing a requested routing. This may allow the logistics platform to predict whether particular logistics service providers are likely to meet any time frame parameters of a requested routing of a commodity. For example, where a request for transport of a commodity includes a parameter indicating the delivery needs to be completed within ten days, the logistics platform may provide one or more quotes corresponding to routings predicted to satisfy the time parameter (e.g., each of the one or more quotes may comprise a routing that utilizes one or more logistics service providers and the total time predicted time to complete the routing satisfies the time parameter of the request).
One of ordinary skill in the art would have recognized that applying the known technique of Ramachandran as modified to the known invention of Broveleit would have been recognized that the application of the technique would have yielded predictable results because the level of ordinary skill in the art demonstrated by the references applied shows the ability to incorporate decision-making features into a similar invention. Further, it would have been recognized by those of ordinary skill in the art that modifying the system to include further includes the at least one processor determining at least one of cost, lead time, and quality for the object result in an improved invention because applying said technique will ensure supply-chain actions are automated and process quicker and more consistently, thus improving the overall efficiency and performance of the invention.
17. Regarding claim 11, Ramachandran as modified does not explicitly disclose further includes objects are selected from the group consisting of actors, stock, supervisors, products, shipments, certificates, and transporters, and subjects are selected from the group consisting of actors smart contracts, supervisors smart contracts, products smart contracts, shipments smart contracts, certificates smart contracts and transporters smart contracts.
However, Broveleit teaches further includes objects are selected from the group consisting of actors, stock, supervisors, products, shipments, certificates, and transporters, and subjects are selected from the group consisting of actors smart contracts, supervisors smart contracts, products smart contracts, shipments smart contracts, certificates smart contracts and transporters smart contracts, (Column 1/line 34, These complexities have resulted in a plurality of different actors that may engage in various aspects of logistics operations. For example, and referring to FIG. 8, a diagram illustrating various actors involved in the logistics industry is shown. As shown in FIG. 8, the actors may include cargo owners 810 (also referred to as a first party logistics providers or “1PLs”), carriers 820 or “2PLs,” logistics service providers 830 (also referred to as third party logistics service providers or “3PLs,” and lead logistics providers and consultants 840 (also referred to as fourth party logistics service providers or “4PLs.” The cargo owners 810 may provide manufacturing and retailing services, but may lack the infrastructure to transport goods from a manufacturing facility or a warehouse to one or more retail locations. The carriers 820 may provide transportation services for transporting goods from a point of origin to a destination. The logistics services providers 830 may provide logistics services that facilitate transport of goods from a point of origin to a destination. The lead and logistics providers and consultants 840 may provide supply chain management services (e.g., for complex transportation of goods). In FIG. 8, line 850 represents service integration between the services of the various actors, and line 860 represents supply chain integration. For example, for simple transportation of goods, such as transporting goods from a point of origin to a destination that is relatively close (i.e., no international transport or interstate transport), a cargo owner 810 may work directly with a 1PL to arrange transport of the goods to the destination. For more complex transport of a commodity, such as when the commodity needs to be transported from a first country to a second country, the cargo owner 810 (e.g., a manufacturer or importer) may work with a 3PL or a 4PL who arranges for the transport of the commodity. Additional aspects of logistics operations and interactions between the various entities illustrated in FIG. 8 are described below.; and Column 8/line 38, The rating information may further identify one or more lanes in which the different logistics service providers operate, and may further include information that correlates particular types of freight transportation services and corresponding container requirements (e.g., whether a container is required and if so, the available container size(s)) to particular lanes. For example, a logistics service provider may operate in a first lane in which the logistics service provider offers truck-based freight transportation services and rail-based freight transportation services using one or more container types and sizes, and may operate in a second lane in which the logistics service provider offers boat-based freight transportation services. Each of these different services may be container-less (e.g., do not require a container) or may utilize one or more container types and sizes. The rating information may further identify points of origin and destinations serviced by the logistics service providers. The points of origin and destinations may indicate whether a logistics service provider is capable of taking possession of the commodity to be transported at particular locations, such as ports, rail stations, airports, and the like. The logistics platform 110 may be configured to derive time estimates associated with transport of commodities from the points of origin to the destinations based on information stored at the database(s) 116. For example, the logistics platform 110 may track travel and delivery times for various logistics services executed through the logistics platform 110, as described in more detail below, and may store information associated with the travel and delivery times at the database(s) 116. Based on the travel and delivery time information stored at the database(s) 116, the logistics platform may estimate a time frame for completing a requested routing. This may allow the logistics platform to predict whether particular logistics service providers are likely to meet any time frame parameters of a requested routing of a commodity. For example, where a request for transport of a commodity includes a parameter indicating the delivery needs to be completed within ten days, the logistics platform may provide one or more quotes corresponding to routings predicted to satisfy the time parameter (e.g., each of the one or more quotes may comprise a routing that utilizes one or more logistics service providers and the total time predicted time to complete the routing satisfies the time parameter of the request).
One of ordinary skill in the art would have recognized that applying the known technique of Ramachandran as modified to the known invention of Broveleit would have been recognized that the application of the technique would have yielded predictable results because the level of ordinary skill in the art demonstrated by the references applied shows the ability to incorporate smart contracts features into a similar invention. Further, it would have been recognized by those of ordinary skill in the art that modifying the method to include further includes objects are selected from the group consisting of actors, stock, supervisors, products, shipments, certificates, and transporters, and subjects are selected from the group consisting of actors smart contracts, supervisors smart contracts, products smart contracts, shipments smart contracts, certificates smart contracts and transporters smart contracts result in an improved invention because applying said technique will ensure that the system can be used across different supply-chain objects and smart contracts, thus improving the overall performance of the invention.
18. Regarding claim 12, Ramachandran discloses further includes the at least one processor optimizing the user, or the object based on system-wide performance metrics, wherein the system-wide performance metrics are selected from the group consisting of integrity, quality, cost, and lead time, (Para, 0006-0008, A method is provided for tracking and recording data in a food supply chain system including a computer system, a plurality of sensors, one or more blockchain ledgers implemented on the computer system that interface with the plurality of sensors, tracking data relating to the food supply chain using the plurality of sensors, and storing the tracked data using the one or more blockchain ledgers. Another embodiment provides a system, including at least one processor, and at least one non-transitory computer readable medium storing instructions translatable by the at least one processor, the instructions when translated by the at least one processor cause the system for tracking and recording data in a food supply chain system by implementing one or more blockchain ledgers that interface with a plurality of sensors, tracking data relating to the food supply chain using the plurality of sensors, and storing the tracked data using the one or more blockchain ledgers. Another embodiment provides a computer program product comprising at least one non-transitory computer readable medium storing instructions translatable by at least one processor, the instructions when translated by the at least one processor cause a system to track and record data in a food supply chain system by implementing one or more blockchain ledgers that interface with a plurality of sensors, tracking data relating to the food supply chain using the plurality of sensors, and storing the tracked data using the one or more blockchain ledgers.; and Para. 0042, One of the more powerful features of blockchain technology is what is known as a smart contract, or an automated routine triggered by data and events on the blockchain. Smart contracts are fundamentally software algorithms that are governed by real world operating rules. Samples of smart contracts range from smart invoices where payments and or incentives are automated if contract terms are met, automating irrigation systems based on real time data, or automatic alert and rerouting of a truck in transit due to temperature issues in cargo. Numerous other examples of smart contracts are also possible, as one skilled in the art would understand. In effect, supply chain partners can create libraries of smart contracts to improve supply chain practices that are based on consensus data. Overall, participants in the blockchain benefit from lower cost, shared data management, automated risk monitoring, notification and mitigation activity, optimizations, financial settlement and cash flow improvements and compliance management.)
19. Regarding claims 13 and 20, Ramachandran discloses wherein the optimized user or optimized object combined with smart contracts optimizes supply chain operations to provide safety, traceability, and efficiency, (Para. 0042, One of the more powerful features of blockchain technology is what is known as a smart contract, or an automated routine triggered by data and events on the blockchain. Smart contracts are fundamentally software algorithms that are governed by real world operating rules. Samples of smart contracts range from smart invoices where payments and or incentives are automated if contract terms are met, automating irrigation systems based on real time data, or automatic alert and rerouting of a truck in transit due to temperature issues in cargo. Numerous other examples of smart contracts are also possible, as one skilled in the art would understand. In effect, supply chain partners can create libraries of smart contracts to improve supply chain practices that are based on consensus data. Overall, participants in the blockchain benefit from lower cost, shared data management, automated risk monitoring, notification and mitigation activity, optimizations, financial settlement and cash flow improvements and compliance management.)
20. Regarding claims 14, Ramachandran discloses wherein the supply chain includes a supply chain in at least one of the following fields of manufacturing, food, agriculture, pharmaceutical, and healthcare to provide safety, traceability, and efficiency, (Para, 0006-0008, A method is provided for tracking and recording data in a food supply chain system including a computer system, a plurality of sensors, one or more blockchain ledgers implemented on the computer system that interface with the plurality of sensors, tracking data relating to the food supply chain using the plurality of sensors, and storing the tracked data using the one or more blockchain ledgers. Another embodiment provides a system, including at least one processor, and at least one non-transitory computer readable medium storing instructions translatable by the at least one processor, the instructions when translated by the at least one processor cause the system for tracking and recording data in a food supply chain system by implementing one or more blockchain ledgers that interface with a plurality of sensors, tracking data relating to the food supply chain using the plurality of sensors, and storing the tracked data using the one or more blockchain ledgers. Another embodiment provides a computer program product comprising at least one non-transitory computer readable medium storing instructions translatable by at least one processor, the instructions when translated by the at least one processor cause a system to track and record data in a food supply chain system by implementing one or more blockchain ledgers that interface with a plurality of sensors, tracking data relating to the food supply chain using the plurality of sensors, and storing the tracked data using the one or more blockchain ledgers.; and Para. 0042, One of the more powerful features of blockchain technology is what is known as a smart contract, or an automated routine triggered by data and events on the blockchain. Smart contracts are fundamentally software algorithms that are governed by real world operating rules. Samples of smart contracts range from smart invoices where payments and or incentives are automated if contract terms are met, automating irrigation systems based on real time data, or automatic alert and rerouting of a truck in transit due to temperature issues in cargo. Numerous other examples of smart contracts are also possible, as one skilled in the art would understand. In effect, supply chain partners can create libraries of smart contracts to improve supply chain practices that are based on consensus data. Overall, participants in the blockchain benefit from lower cost, shared data management, automated risk monitoring, notification and mitigation activity, optimizations, financial settlement and cash flow improvements and compliance management.
21. Regarding claim 15, Ramachandran discloses a method for utilizing integrity-ranked transactions in a supply chain electronic communication system comprising: generating electronic content is received, the electronic content comprising a plurality of transactions for receipt by a plurality of users associated with a plurality of user accounts of the supply chain system, where each transaction has both a blockchain component and a ranking component with a network electronic interface, (Para. 0034-0038, As mentioned above, the present disclosure proposes solutions to needs in the industry using technologies, such as distributed ledger technologies, to address the problems and challenges discussed above. Following is a brief description of blockchain technology. In some embodiments, blockchain technology may be used to implement the solutions discussed in this disclosure. Blockchain is an innovative technology protocol conventionally known to be invented in 2009 by an anonymous scientist or group of scientists using the pseudonym of Satoshi Nakamoto to support the Bitcoin network. In some embodiments, a blockchain is a distributed ledger technology in which all participants have a copy of the ledger to witness and verify transactions by themselves. Data is recorded as bundles, called ‘blocks,’ which are linked together by referencing the previous block, forming a ‘chain.’ Although current blockchain usage is limited to applications supporting bitcoin and cross-border payments, activity in the space is booming with over $1.4 billion dollars invested in blockchain companies in 2016, and over 90% of North American and European banks actively exploring implementation of blockchain technology over the next 2 years (PWC). Furthermore, organizations (both large and small) are exploring blockchain and ledger technologies to coordinate information and secure transactions across multiple industries such as insurance, health care, music, real estate, and more recently, supply chains…Underpinning blockchains are accounting ledgers in a classical sense in that the ledgers allow participants in a blockchain the ability to record transactions, events and activities that are associated with each entity. The blockchain serves as the fundamental infrastructure for individual data sets to plug into, allowing for data sharing from disparate actors and technologies. Individual actors use blockchain technology as a common communication and collaboration channel, thereby allowing each participant to post and authenticate information about an activity that requires validation, such as authorizing one's identity in order to authenticate a buy-sell transaction. This validation is achieved by a consensus algorithm of trust of all parties that see the data. Security of the transaction is achieved by a series of digital, cryptographic public and private “keys” that lock and unlock records for the purpose of controlling data flow and validating authenticity.)
Ramachandran does not explicitly disclose utilizing a first plurality of memory addresses that are arranged as a plurality of user accounts, each account associated with a user and a second plurality of memory addresses associates the plurality of user accounts with transactions and associated objects with at least one memory.
However, Ward teaches utilizing a first plurality of memory addresses that are arranged as a plurality of user accounts, each account associated with a user and a second plurality of memory addresses associates the plurality of user accounts with transactions and associated objects with at least one memory, (Column 2/line 21, The contemplated embodiments of the invention provide a method for implementing a mandatory integrity control (MIC) system that enforces a security policy that applies to every subject and object in the computer system, but does not require major changes to the operating system behavior for users or applications. The invention provides a novel method that selects an integrity level designator when a user authenticates to the computer system. The selected integrity level designator is then added to an existing data structure representing the security context of the user in the computer system. The security context of the user is a data structure referred to as a security token. As part of the novel method, the integrity level designator is added to the security token. The security token is applied to every process (or executing program) started by the user. The executing process with an associated security token is referred to as a subject in the integrity model. In addition, an integrity level designator is added to the existing security attributes of objects that are represented in the operating system as securable resources, such as data files. The data structure representing the existing security attributes of an object include an access control list that is part of a security descriptor. Another part of the novel method is how the integrity level designator is represented in the existing access control list. The access control list contains a list of entries that have security identifiers (or security IDs). The security IDs are data structures used to identify the users or groups granted access permissions in the DAC model. Another part of novel method is using security identifiers to represent the integrity level designator. Using security identifiers as the data structure to represent the integrity level designator allows an implementation of the integrity model with minimal change to the existing subject security token and object security descriptor that are fundamental to the operating system security mechanism. The security identifier data structures permits the definition of a very large number of integrity level designations and/or integrity compartments. A simple implementation of the novel method may introduce a small number of distinct integrity level designations representing different degrees of trustworthiness, such as low, medium, high, and system. The security reference monitor in the operating system implements the access verification checks. As part of the access verification process, a novel method uses integrity level designators in the subject security token and object security descriptor in addition to the discretionary access control information before determining the allow access permissions. The novel method includes comparing a subject's integrity level to the integrity level of an object that is to be accessed, when the subject attempts to access an object. The subject may then be granted access to the object once the MIC policy check verifies that the subject's integrity level has the appropriate relationship to the integrity level of the object, depending on the type of access requested, such as read, write or execute
One of ordinary skill in the art would have recognized that applying the known technique of Ramachandran to the known invention of Ward would have been recognized that the application of the technique would have yielded predictable results because the level of ordinary skill in the art demonstrated by the references applied shows the ability to incorporate memory addresses features into a similar invention. Further, it would have been recognized by those of ordinary skill in the art that modifying the method to include utilizing a first plurality of memory addresses that are arranged as a plurality of user accounts, each account associated with a user and a second plurality of memory addresses associates the plurality of user accounts with transactions and associated objects with at least one memory result in an improved invention because applying said technique will ensure that supply-chain transactions are tracked using records and rankings that are connected to users and objects, thus improving the overall efficiency and performance of the invention.
Ramachandran as modified does not explicitly disclose and analyzing the object in an initial state and the object's current ranking and then determine if a new block and associated object's blockchain needs to be generated as part of the ongoing plurality of transactions occurring within a supply chain electronic communication system with at least one processor that cooperates with the memory and the network interface.
However, Broveleit teaches and analyzing the object in an initial state and the object's current ranking and then determine if a new block and associated object's blockchain needs to be generated as part of the ongoing plurality of transactions occurring within a supply chain electronic communication system with at least one processor that cooperates with the memory and the network interface, (Claim 13. A system for managing transport of a commodity from a point of origin to a destination, the system comprising: one or more processors configured to: receive rating information from one or more external systems, each of the one or more external systems associated with a logistics service provider; receive a request including one or more parameters associated with the transport of the commodity; dynamically generate a quote for the transport of the commodity based on the rating information and the one or more parameters included in the request; transmit the quote to a remote system via a network; receive, from the remote system via the network, an authorization of the transport of the commodity in accordance with the quote; in response to receiving the authorization from the remote system via the network, generate a smart contract for the transport of the commodity, wherein the smart contract comprises one or more milestone and one or more operations and is generated in response to receiving the authorization from the remote system, wherein the smart contract is recorded to a blockchain ledger and at least one operation of the one or more operations is automatically executed via the smart contract in response to a determination that at least one of the one or more milestones of the smart contract has been completed; monitor a status of the one or more milestones of the smart contract during transport of the commodity; determine, via the smart contract, whether one or more particular milestones of the smart contract have been completed based on the monitoring and whether a quantity of confirmation messages received from one or more logistics service providers responsible for transport of the commodity satisfies a threshold, wherein each of the confirmation messages corresponds to one of the one or more logistics service providers and includes a digital signature generated using a key specific to the corresponding logistic service provider, wherein the confirmation messages indicate changes to a current location of the commodity along a transportation route used for the transport of the commodity and a current service provider in possession of the commodity; and in response to a determination that at least one of the one or more particular milestones of the smart contract has been satisfied, automatically initiating, via the smart contract, particular operations corresponding to the at least one milestone of the smart contract; and a memory coupled to the one or more processors.; and Column 11/line 1, The consumer receives the quotes, such as the quote 212, from the logistics platform and may select a particular one of the quotes (if multiple quotes are provided) for the requested transport of the commodity. In response to selecting the quote, the consumer may initiate transmission of an authorization message to the logistics platform 110. For example, and referring to FIG. 3, the consumer system (e.g., importer system 120 of FIGS. 1-3) may transmit an authorization message 302 to the logistics platform 110. Upon receiving the authorization message 302, the logistics platform 110 may implement blockchain technology to generate a plurality of smart contracts. For example, as shown in FIG. 3, a smart contract 310 may be generated and communicated to the Nth carrier 140N, a smart contract 308 may be generated and communicated to the carrier 140B, a smart contract 306 may be generated and communicated to the carrier 140A, and a smart contract 304 may be generated and communicated to the consumer (e.g., importer system 120). Each of the smart contracts may include one or more milestones and one or more operations that are automatically executed by the logistics platform in response to a determination that at least one of the milestones of the smart contract has been completed. In aspects, the smart contracts may be written to one or more blocks of blockchain in addition to, or as an alternative to, transmitting the smart contracts to the parties involved. If the smart contracts are written to the blockchain as an alternative to transmitting the smart contracts to the various parties involved in the transport of the commodity, information associated with the smart contracts, such as information identifying milestones and other terms of the smart contract, may be communicated to the various parties. In aspects, the blockchain may provide a ledger that may be specific to the logistics platform 110.)
One of ordinary skill in the art would have recognized that applying the known technique of Ramachandran as modified to the known invention of Broveleit would have been recognized that the application of the technique would have yielded predictable results because the level of ordinary skill in the art demonstrated by the references applied shows the ability to incorporate interface features into a similar invention. Further, it would have been recognized by those of ordinary skill in the art that modifying the method to include and analyzing the object in an initial state and the object's current ranking and then determine if a new block and associated object's blockchain needs to be generated as part of the ongoing plurality of transactions occurring within a supply chain electronic communication system with at least one processor that cooperates with the memory and the network interface result in an improved invention because applying said technique interface features.
22. Regarding claim 16, Ramachandran discloses further comprising determining an initial rank of the user by an existing user and updated based on operational characteristics of the user, (Claim 16. further comprising, for a given food supply, generating a scorecard for the given food supply, wherein the scorecard provides a score for the given food supply based on a plurality of product and process variables.; and These datasets and outcomes can be compiled into an index on which product is posted and sold. The index presents data in an agnostic format without taking a stance on desirability of certain aspects, and leaves it up to the user to generate a set of desired criteria to aid in purchasing and evaluation. These criteria can be compiled into a unique user scorecard, which can filter through postings and select products for desired traits. For example a restaurant may pride itself on serving local, sustainable food.; and Para. 0086-0088, the system may be comprised of three phases, including a scorecard phase, a supply automation phase, and a smart marketplace phase. In some embodiments, the system uses sensor data captured on a blockchain to generate a produce scorecard that will improve the understanding of risks and inefficiencies across a supply chain. Detailed examples of a produce scorecard are provided below. The system uses smart contracts (described above) stored on the blockchain to provide near real-time alerts and can automate provisioning decisions based on sensor data and scorecard results. Members of the system community can use the blockchain to communicate product availability and purchasing contracts with quality and ripening conditions monitored on the blockchain. FIG. 1 shows an exemplary system architecture diagram. In FIG. 1, a blockchain section 100 shows a public ledger, a permissioned ledger, smart contracts, and a sensor vendor. An application section 102 shows a supply-chain business rules orchestrator, an integration engine operatively coupled to various sensor vendors and cloud API's. The application section 102 also shows data normalization, scorecard engine, and analytics engine blocks, as well as a database (DBMS). An interfaces section 104 shows software as a service (SaaS) UX stack that can interface with web, tablet and phone devices and a SaaS API stack and corresponding API and blockchain explorer blocks. FIG. 2 shows various exemplary blockchain transaction types 200, including evidence, claims, certification, scorecard, ripe chain bundle, and purchase contract. Each transaction type 200 shown in FIG. 2 includes exemplary transaction parameters. For example, Evidence transaction 200 lists parameters such as data type, value, date/time, and signature. Claims transaction 200 lists parameters such as origin, taste, and quality. Certification and Scorecard transactions 200 lists parameters such as type, date/time, expiration, and scope. Chain bundle transaction 200 lists parameters such as evidence, claims, certifications, scorecards, commercial value, quantity, weight, owner, current location, destination, and status. Purchase contract transaction 200 lists parameters such as buyer, seller, chain bundle, price, and conditions. FIG. 2 also illustrates various inputs 202 that may be provided to a given transaction. Exemplary input data 202 includes sensor data, member key, claim data, evidence, certification, scorecard data, bundle data, food bundle, buyer key, seller key, price, conditions, etc. FIG. 2 also illustrates various functions 204 that may be performed for a given transaction type. Exemplary functions 204 include create, update, delete, assigned evidence, revoke, sell, consume, etc.)
23. Regarding claim 17, Ramachandran discloses further comprising applying to both the blockchain component and the ranking component for each function in a supply chain that includes procurement, production, storage, transportation, and delivery of the object for optimization of the supply chain, (Para. 0003,The food system is an extremely complex supply chain, moving billions of pounds of food each year. Typically, food passes through farmers, distributors, processors and retailers, often traveling thousands of miles prior to arriving in the hands of a consumer. In the process, a shipment may be split, repacked or joined with another shipment, further increasing the complexity. Given the vast and nonlinear nature of the food supply chain, the food system has become opaque, with limited traceability, information sharing, or even data collection.; and Para. 0038-0039, Underpinning blockchains are accounting ledgers in a classical sense in that the ledgers allow participants in a blockchain the ability to record transactions, events and activities that are associated with each entity. The blockchain serves as the fundamental infrastructure for individual data sets to plug into, allowing for data sharing from disparate actors and technologies. Individual actors use blockchain technology as a common communication and collaboration channel, thereby allowing each participant to post and authenticate information about an activity that requires validation, such as authorizing one's identity in order to authenticate a buy-sell transaction. This validation is achieved by a consensus algorithm of trust of all parties that see the data. Security of the transaction is achieved by a series of digital, cryptographic public and private “keys” that lock and unlock records for the purpose of controlling data flow and validating authenticity. This unification allows the blockchain to follow food products in a unique way from seed to table by recording information about a physical product as it evolves over time. For example, in some embodiments, the original data posted to the blockchain (e.g., Grower ABX seeded tomato filed 12Z on March 14) serves as a block record. As food moves along the supply chain, various types of data can be posted to the blockchain as entries in the ledger (e.g., tomatoes were harvested and packed on June 7). Another entry might record that the temperature on a truck transporting the food was 55 degrees over 274 miles traveled. These individual entries can then be associated, enriching the data associated with the shipment and essentially creating a virtual copy of the physical item. This virtual copy is the sum of the entries associated with the unique item, ultimately becoming the history of the food product through its lifecycle through the food supply chain. With this information, businesses can improve traceability, analyze environmental conditions through harvest and transportation, and gather auditable documentation on the history of a product. Additionally, retailers can track a shipment's current location and condition; food processors can better monitor storage conditions; etc. If consumers are allowed access to the data, the consumers can have visibility into data such as the grower and the grower's farming practices, food miles traveled, ripeness indicators or previews of taste.)
24. Regarding claims 18, Ramachandran as modified does not explicitly disclose further comprising utilizing smart contracts with the processor.
However, Broveleit teaches further comprising utilizing smart contracts with the processor, (Claim 13. A system for managing transport of a commodity from a point of origin to a destination, the system comprising: one or more processors configured to: receive rating information from one or more external systems, each of the one or more external systems associated with a logistics service provider; receive a request including one or more parameters associated with the transport of the commodity; dynamically generate a quote for the transport of the commodity based on the rating information and the one or more parameters included in the request; transmit the quote to a remote system via a network; receive, from the remote system via the network, an authorization of the transport of the commodity in accordance with the quote; in response to receiving the authorization from the remote system via the network, generate a smart contract for the transport of the commodity, wherein the smart contract comprises one or more milestone and one or more operations and is generated in response to receiving the authorization from the remote system, wherein the smart contract is recorded to a blockchain ledger and at least one operation of the one or more operations is automatically executed via the smart contract in response to a determination that at least one of the one or more milestones of the smart contract has been completed; monitor a status of the one or more milestones of the smart contract during transport of the commodity; determine, via the smart contract, whether one or more particular milestones of the smart contract have been completed based on the monitoring and whether a quantity of confirmation messages received from one or more logistics service providers responsible for transport of the commodity satisfies a threshold, wherein each of the confirmation messages corresponds to one of the one or more logistics service providers and includes a digital signature generated using a key specific to the corresponding logistic service provider, wherein the confirmation messages indicate changes to a current location of the commodity along a transportation route used for the transport of the commodity and a current service provider in possession of the commodity; and in response to a determination that at least one of the one or more particular milestones of the smart contract has been satisfied, automatically initiating, via the smart contract, particular operations corresponding to the at least one milestone of the smart contract; and a memory coupled to the one or more processors.)
One of ordinary skill in the art would have recognized that applying the known technique of Ramachandran as modified to the known invention of Broveleit would have been recognized that the application of the technique would have yielded predictable results because the level of ordinary skill in the art demonstrated by the references applied shows the ability to incorporate smart contracts features into a similar invention. Further, it would have been recognized by those of ordinary skill in the art that modifying the method to include further comprising utilizing smart contracts with the processor result in an improved invention because applying said technique will ensure supply-chain actions are automated and process quicker and more consistently, thus improving the overall efficiency and performance of the invention.
25. Regarding claim 19, Ramachandran discloses further comprising optimizing the user or the object based on system-wide performance metrics with the at least one processor, wherein the objects are selected from the group consisting of actors, stock, supervisors, products, shipments, certificates, and transporters and subjects are selected from the group consisting of actors smart contracts, supervisors smart contracts, products smart contracts, shipments smart contracts, certificates smart contracts and transporters smart contracts, (Para, 0006-0008, A method is provided for tracking and recording data in a food supply chain system including a computer system, a plurality of sensors, one or more blockchain ledgers implemented on the computer system that interface with the plurality of sensors, tracking data relating to the food supply chain using the plurality of sensors, and storing the tracked data using the one or more blockchain ledgers. Another embodiment provides a system, including at least one processor, and at least one non-transitory computer readable medium storing instructions translatable by the at least one processor, the instructions when translated by the at least one processor cause the system for tracking and recording data in a food supply chain system by implementing one or more blockchain ledgers that interface with a plurality of sensors, tracking data relating to the food supply chain using the plurality of sensors, and storing the tracked data using the one or more blockchain ledgers. Another embodiment provides a computer program product comprising at least one non-transitory computer readable medium storing instructions translatable by at least one processor, the instructions when translated by the at least one processor cause a system to track and record data in a food supply chain system by implementing one or more blockchain ledgers that interface with a plurality of sensors, tracking data relating to the food supply chain using the plurality of sensors, and storing the tracked data using the one or more blockchain ledgers.; and Para. 0042, One of the more powerful features of blockchain technology is what is known as a smart contract, or an automated routine triggered by data and events on the blockchain. Smart contracts are fundamentally software algorithms that are governed by real world operating rules. Samples of smart contracts range from smart invoices where payments and or incentives are automated if contract terms are met, automating irrigation systems based on real time data, or automatic alert and rerouting of a truck in transit due to temperature issues in cargo. Numerous other examples of smart contracts are also possible, as one skilled in the art would understand. In effect, supply chain partners can create libraries of smart contracts to improve supply chain practices that are based on consensus data. Overall, participants in the blockchain benefit from lower cost, shared data management, automated risk monitoring, notification and mitigation activity, optimizations, financial settlement and cash flow improvements and compliance management.)
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Process for Managing Escrow Payments between Multiple Parties (US 20200127843 A1) teaches a distributed project management system especially suited for construction projects and administered by third party Application Service provider (ASP) in communication with a plurality of remote client computers and providing a dashboard to each party including a general contractor dashboard that facilitates development of a smart contract based on a project template. Each party's dashboard is configured to review, negotiate and accept the project template, whereupon the ASP compiles it into a distributed private blockchain transaction ledger that is updated based on communications from the various dashboards. The ASP determines whether transactions meet a condition of the smart contract, and updates and validates the distributed transaction record ledger. All notices, reports, disbursements, and fund transfers necessary to pay all of the subcontractors and contractor are completed electronically. The process is condensed from months into mere days, it eliminates unreliable verbal notifications, and is impervious to fraud and/or mistake.
In addition to the foregoing, other aspects are described in the claims, drawings, and text. Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Davida L. King whose telephone number is (571) 272-4724. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 8am-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, Neha Patel can be reached on (571) 270-1492. 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.
/D.L.K./Examiner, Art Unit 3699
Prosecution Insights