Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status
The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA . This action is made non-final.
Claims 1-11 filed on 03/06/2025 have been reviewed and considered by this office action.
The preliminary amendments to the specification, abstract, and claims filed on 03/06/2025 have been entered.
Priority
Acknowledgment is made of applicant's claim for foreign priority based on Application No. EP 22194086.9 filed on 09/06/2022. Copies of certified papers required by 37 CFR 1.55 have been received. Priority is acknowledged under 35 USC 119(e) and 37 CFR 1.78.
Drawings
The drawings filed on 03/06/2025 have been reviewed and are considered acceptable.
Specification
The specification filed on 03/06/2025 has been reviewed and is objected to because of the following informalities:
The Abstract of the disclosure is objected to due to the phrase “FIG. 2” being included within the description. The Examiner recommends amending the abstract removing the phrase “FIG.2”. A corrected abstract of the disclosure is required and must be presented on a separate sheet, apart from any other text. See MPEP § 608.01(b).
The title of the invention is not descriptive. A new title is required that is clearly indicative of the invention to which the claims are directed. The following title is suggested: “System and Method for Validating and Updating a Product Process in Real Time Compared to a Virtual Twin using Blockchain and Identifiers.”
Appropriate correction is required.
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 therefore, subject to the conditions and requirements of this title.
Claims 1-11 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 101 because the claimed invention is directed to an abstract idea without significantly more.
Step 1: Claims 1-9 are directed to a process. Claims 10 are directed to a machine or an article of manufacture.
With respect to Claim 1:
2A Prong 1: The claim recites an abstract idea. Specifically:
determining a product status of the production process of the product by comparing the product planning data stored on the sequential distributed database with blockchain oracle data of the production process; (Mental process – determination is an observation that can be practically performed in the human mind, or by a human using a pen and paper as a physical aid – see MPEP § 2106.04(a)(2)(III))
determining a pre-product status of the production process of the pre-product by comparing the pre-product planning data stored on the sequential distributed database with blockchain oracle data of the production process; (Mental process – determination is an observation that can be practically performed in the human mind, or by a human using a pen and paper as a physical aid – see MPEP § 2106.04(a)(2)(III))
validating the product status with respect to the pre-product status; (Mental process – validation is an evaluation that can be practically performed in the human mind, or by a human using a pen and paper as a physical aid – see MPEP § 2106.04(a)(2)(III))
validation comprises comparing the product status with the pre-product status; (Mental process – validation is an evaluation that can be practically performed in the human mind, or by a human using a pen and paper as a physical aid – see MPEP § 2106.04(a)(2)(III))
determining which of the production entities has fulfilled its production plan with respect to the one or more aspects; (Mental process – determination is an observation that can be practically performed in the human mind, or by a human using a pen and paper as a physical aid – see MPEP § 2106.04(a)(2)(III))
2A Prong 2: The additional elements recited in the claim do not integrate the abstract idea into a practical application, individually or in combination.
Additional elements:
wherein the production process is the production of a product based on a pre- product; (Generally linking the use of a judicial exception to a particular technological environment or field of use – see MPEP § 2106.05(h))
wherein the pre-product and the product are produced by different production entities; (Generally linking the use of a judicial exception to a particular technological environment or field of use – see MPEP § 2106.05(h))
providing product planning data for the product with respect to the production entity producing the product; (Insignificant extra-solution activity (selecting a particular data source or type of data to be manipulated) – see MPEP § 2106.05(g))
wherein the product planning data is indicative of one or more aspects of a production plan of the product that should be fulfilled during the production process of the product; (Insignificant extra-solution activity (mere data gathering) – see MPEP § 2106.05(g))
providing pre-product planning data for the pre-product with respect to the production entity producing the pre-product; (Insignificant extra-solution activity (selecting a particular data source or type of data to be manipulated) – see MPEP § 2106.05(g))
wherein the pre-product planning data is indicative of one or more aspects of a production plan of the pre-product that should be fulfilled during the production process of the pre-product; (Insignificant extra-solution activity (mere data gathering) – see MPEP § 2106.05(g))
storing the product planning data and the pre-product planning data on a sequential distributed database; (Insignificant extra-solution activity (mere data gathering) – see MPEP § 2106.05(g))
outputting the validation for controlling the production process and pre-production process; (Adding the words “apply it” (or an equivalent) with the judicial exception, or mere instructions to implement an abstract idea on a computer, or merely uses a computer as a tool to perform an abstract idea – see MPEP § 2106.05(f))
2B: The claim does not include additional elements that are sufficient to amount to significantly more than the judicial exception.
Additional elements:
wherein the production process is the production of a product based on a pre- product; (The additional features including production of a product based on a pre-product as recited in the claim are recited so generically that they represent no more than the existence of the components that they represent no more than generally linking the use of a judicial exception to a particular technological environment or “field of use”-- see MPEP § 2106.05(h))
wherein the pre-product and the product are produced by different production entities; (The additional features including pre-product and the product are produced by different production entities as recited in the claim are recited so generically that they represent no more than the existence of the components that they represent no more than generally linking the use of a judicial exception to a particular technological environment or “field of use”-- see MPEP § 2106.05(h))
providing product planning data for the product with respect to the production entity producing the product; (Electronic recordkeeping has been deemed well‐understood, routine, and conventional functions – see MPEP § 2106.05(d)(ll))
wherein the product planning data is indicative of one or more aspects of a production plan of the product that should be fulfilled during the production process of the product; (Arranging a hierarchy of groups, sorting information, eliminating less restrictive pricing information and determining the price has been deemed well‐understood, routine, and conventional functions – see MPEP § 2106.05(d)(ll))
providing pre-product planning data for the pre-product with respect to the production entity producing the pre-product; (Electronic recordkeeping has been deemed well‐understood, routine, and conventional functions – see MPEP § 2106.05(d)(ll))
wherein the pre-product planning data is indicative of one or more aspects of a production plan of the pre-product that should be fulfilled during the production process of the pre-product; (Arranging a hierarchy of groups, sorting information, eliminating less restrictive pricing information and determining the price has been deemed well‐understood, routine, and conventional functions – see MPEP § 2106.05(d)(ll))
storing the product planning data and the pre-product planning data on a sequential distributed database; (Storing and retrieving information in memory have been deemed well‐understood, routine, and conventional functions – see MPEP § 2106.05(d)(ll))
outputting the validation for controlling the production process and pre-production process; (The additional features including outputting a validation for controlling as recited in the claim are configured to carry out the additional and abstract idea limitations may be tools that are used for the functions recited in the claim, but recited so generically that they represent no more than mere instructions “to apply” the judicial exceptions on or using a generic electronic or computer component – see MPEP § 2106.05(f) Implementing an abstract idea on generic electronic or computer components as tools to perform an abstract idea does not amount to significantly more)
Therefore, Claim 1 is ineligible.
With respect to Claim 2:
2A Prong 2: The additional elements recited in the claim do not integrate the abstract idea into a practical application, individually or in combination.
Additional elements:
generating control data for controlling a production process of the product and/or pre-product based on; (Insignificant extra-solution activity (selecting a particular data source or type of data to be manipulated) – see MPEP § 2106.05(g))
the validation of the product status with respect to the pre-product status; (Insignificant extra-solution activity (mere data gathering) – see MPEP § 2106.05(g))
2B: The claim does not include additional elements that are sufficient to amount to significantly more than the judicial exception.
Additional elements:
generating control data for controlling a production process of the product and/or pre-product based on; (Arranging a hierarchy of groups, sorting information, eliminating less restrictive pricing information and determining the price has been deemed well‐understood, routine, and conventional functions – see MPEP § 2106.05(d)(ll))
the validation of the product status with respect to the pre-product status; (Determining an estimated outcome and setting a price has been deemed well‐understood, routine, and conventional functions – see MPEP § 2106.05(d)(ll))
Therefore, Claim 2 is ineligible.
With respect to Claim 3:
2A Prong 1: The claim recites an abstract idea. Specifically:
wherein the validating of the product status with respect to the pre-product status comprises determining a balance between the product status and the pre-product status; (Mental process – determination is an observation that can be practically performed in the human mind, or by a human using a pen and paper as a physical aid – see MPEP § 2106.04(a)(2)(III))
Therefore, Claim 3 is ineligible.
With respect to Claim 4:
2A Prong 2: The additional elements recited in the claim do not integrate the abstract idea into a practical application, individually or in combination.
Additional elements:
wherein the validating of the product status with respect to the pre-product status further comprises distributing validation tokens to the production entities based on the balance; (Insignificant extra-solution activity (selecting a particular data source or type of data to be manipulated) – see MPEP § 2106.05(g))
2B: The claim does not include additional elements that are sufficient to amount to significantly more than the judicial exception.
Additional elements:
wherein the validating of the product status with respect to the pre-product status further comprises distributing validation tokens to the production entities based on the balance; (Electronic recordkeeping has been deemed well‐understood, routine, and conventional functions – see MPEP § 2106.05(d)(ll))
Therefore, Claim 4 is ineligible.
With respect to Claim 5:
2A Prong 2: The additional elements recited in the claim do not integrate the abstract idea into a practical application, individually or in combination.
Additional elements:
adding tokens to a token score of a production entity if the balance indicates that the product status or pre-product status of the production entity fulfils the production or pre-production plan less than the other entity; (Insignificant extra-solution activity (selecting a particular data source or type of data to be manipulated) – see MPEP § 2106.05(g))
2B: The claim does not include additional elements that are sufficient to amount to significantly more than the judicial exception.
Additional elements:
adding tokens to a token score of a production entity if the balance indicates that the product status or pre-product status of the production entity fulfils the production or pre-production plan less than the other entity; (Electronic recordkeeping has been deemed well‐understood, routine, and conventional functions – see MPEP § 2106.05(d)(ll))
Therefore, Claim 5 is ineligible.
With respect to Claim 6:
2A Prong 2: The additional elements recited in the claim do not integrate the abstract idea into a practical application, individually or in combination.
Additional elements:
wherein the sequential distributed database further comprises at least one of the following characteristics append-only, immutable, tamper evident and/or tamper resistant; (Generally linking the use of a judicial exception to a particular technological environment or field of use – see MPEP § 2106.05(h))
2B: The claim does not include additional elements that are sufficient to amount to significantly more than the judicial exception.
Additional elements:
wherein the sequential distributed database further comprises at least one of the following characteristics append-only, immutable, tamper evident and/or tamper resistant; (The additional features including the characteristics of the sequential distributed database as recited in the claim are recited so generically that they represent no more than the existence of the components that they represent no more than generally linking the use of a judicial exception to a particular technological environment or “field of use”-- see MPEP § 2106.05(h))
Therefore, Claim 6 is ineligible.
With respect to Claim 7:
2A Prong 2: The additional elements recited in the claim do not integrate the abstract idea into a practical application, individually or in combination.
Additional elements:
wherein the sequential distributed database refers to is a blockchain database; (Generally linking the use of a judicial exception to a particular technological environment or field of use – see MPEP § 2106.05(h))
2B: The claim does not include additional elements that are sufficient to amount to significantly more than the judicial exception.
Additional elements:
wherein the sequential distributed database refers to is a blockchain database; (The additional features including the further definition of the distributed database as a blockchain database as recited in the claim are recited so generically that they represent no more than the existence of the components that they represent no more than generally linking the use of a judicial exception to a particular technological environment or “field of use”-- see MPEP § 2106.05(h))
Therefore, Claim 7 is ineligible.
With respect to Claim 8:
2A Prong 2: The additional elements recited in the claim do not integrate the abstract idea into a practical application, individually or in combination.
Additional elements:
wherein the product planning data and the pre-product planning data refer to a planned reduction of a resource utilized in the production process and/or to a reduction of waste products generated during the production process; (Insignificant extra-solution activity (mere data gathering) – see MPEP § 2106.05(g))
2B: The claim does not include additional elements that are sufficient to amount to significantly more than the judicial exception.
Additional elements:
wherein the product planning data and the pre-product planning data refer to a planned reduction of a resource utilized in the production process and/or to a reduction of waste products generated during the production process; (Electronic recordkeeping has been deemed well‐understood, routine, and conventional functions – see MPEP § 2106.05(d)(ll))
Therefore, Claim 8 is ineligible.
With respect to Claim 9:
2A Prong 2: The additional elements recited in the claim do not integrate the abstract idea into a practical application, individually or in combination.
Additional elements:
wherein the product and pre-product planning data are stored in form of a chemical product passport; (Insignificant extra-solution activity (mere data gathering) – see MPEP § 2106.05(g))
comprising a decentral identifier identifying the product and/or pre-product and the product planning data and/or pre-product planning data; (Adding insignificant extra-solution activity to the judicial exception – see MPEP § 2106.05(g))
2B: The claim does not include additional elements that are sufficient to amount to significantly more than the judicial exception.
Additional elements:
wherein the product and pre-product planning data are stored in form of a chemical product passport; (Storing and retrieving information in memory have been deemed well‐understood, routine, and conventional functions – see MPEP § 2106.05(d)(ll))
comprising a decentral identifier identifying the product and/or pre-product and the product planning data and/or pre-product planning data; (Storing and retrieving information in memory have been deemed well‐understood, routine, and conventional functions – see MPEP § 2106.05(d)(ll))
Therefore, Claim 9 is ineligible.
With respect to Claim 10:
2A Prong 1: The claim recites an abstract idea. Specifically:
b) determining a product status of the production process of the product by comparing the product planning data stored on the sequential distributed database with blockchain oracle data of the production process; (Mental process – determination is an observation that can be practically performed in the human mind, or by a human using a pen and paper as a physical aid – see MPEP § 2106.04(a)(2)(III))
c) determining a pre-product status of the production process of the pre-product by comparing the pre-product planning data stored on the sequential distributed database with blockchain oracle data of the production process; (Mental process – determination is an observation that can be practically performed in the human mind, or by a human using a pen and paper as a physical aid – see MPEP § 2106.04(a)(2)(III))
d) validating the product status with respect to the pre-product status; (Mental process – validation is an evaluation that can be practically performed in the human mind, or by a human using a pen and paper as a physical aid – see MPEP § 2106.04(a)(2)(III))
wherein the validation comprises comparing the product status with the pre-product status; (Mental process – validation is an evaluation that can be practically performed in the human mind, or by a human using a pen and paper as a physical aid – see MPEP § 2106.04(a)(2)(III))
determining which of the production entities has fulfilled its production plan with respect to the one or more aspects; (Mental process – determination is an observation that can be practically performed in the human mind, or by a human using a pen and paper as a physical aid – see MPEP § 2106.04(a)(2)(III))
2A Prong 2: The additional elements recited in the claim do not integrate the abstract idea into a practical application, individually or in combination.
Additional elements:
wherein the production process refers to is the production of a product based on a pre-product; (Generally linking the use of a judicial exception to a particular technological environment or field of use – see MPEP § 2106.05(h))
wherein the pre-product and the product are produced by different production entities; (Generally linking the use of a judicial exception to a particular technological environment or field of use – see MPEP § 2106.05(h))
an input unit configured to; ((Generally linking the use of a judicial exception to a particular technological environment or field of use – see MPEP § 2106.05(h))
a) providing product planning data for the product with respect to the production entity producing the product; (Insignificant extra-solution activity (selecting a particular data source or type of data to be manipulated) – see MPEP § 2106.05(g))
wherein the product planning data is indicative of one or more aspects of a production plan of the product that should be fulfilled during the production process of the product; (Insignificant extra-solution activity (mere data gathering) – see MPEP § 2106.05(g))
b) providing pre-product planning data for the pre-product with respect to the production entity producing the pre-product; (Insignificant extra-solution activity (selecting a particular data source or type of data to be manipulated) – see MPEP § 2106.05(g))
wherein the pre-product planning data is indicative of one or more aspects of a production plan of the pre-product that should be fulfilled during the production process of the pre-product; (Insignificant extra-solution activity (mere data gathering) – see MPEP § 2106.05(g))
one or more processors configured to; (Generally linking the use of a judicial exception to a particular technological environment or field of use – see MPEP § 2106.05(h))
a) storing the product planning data and the pre-product planning data on a sequential distributed database; (Insignificant extra-solution activity (mere data gathering) – see MPEP § 2106.05(g))
an output unit configured to; (Generally linking the use of a judicial exception to a particular technological environment or field of use – see MPEP § 2106.05(h))
output the validation for controlling the production process and pre-production process; (Adding the words “apply it” (or an equivalent) with the judicial exception, or mere instructions to implement an abstract idea on a computer, or merely uses a computer as a tool to perform an abstract idea – see MPEP § 2106.05(f))
2B: The claim does not include additional elements that are sufficient to amount to significantly more than the judicial exception.
Additional elements:
wherein the production process refers to is the production of a product based on a pre-product; (The additional features including production of a product based on a pre-product as recited in the claim are recited so generically that they represent no more than the existence of the components that they represent no more than generally linking the use of a judicial exception to a particular technological environment or “field of use”-- see MPEP § 2106.05(h))
wherein the pre-product and the product are produced by different production entities; (The additional features including pre-product and the product are produced by different production entities as recited in the claim are recited so generically that they represent no more than the existence of the components that they represent no more than generally linking the use of a judicial exception to a particular technological environment or “field of use”-- see MPEP § 2106.05(h))
-an input unit configured to; (The additional features including an input unit as recited in the claim are recited so generically that they represent no more than the existence of the components that they represent no more than generally linking the use of a judicial exception to a particular technological environment or “field of use”-- see MPEP § 2106.05(h))
a) providing product planning data for the product with respect to the production entity producing the product; (Electronic recordkeeping has been deemed well‐understood, routine, and conventional functions – see MPEP § 2106.05(d)(ll))
wherein the product planning data is indicative of one or more aspects of a production plan of the product that should be fulfilled during the production process of the product; (Arranging a hierarchy of groups, sorting information, eliminating less restrictive pricing information and determining the price has been deemed well‐understood, routine, and conventional functions – see MPEP § 2106.05(d)(ll))
b) providing pre-product planning data for the pre-product with respect to the production entity producing the pre-product; (Electronic recordkeeping has been deemed well‐understood, routine, and conventional functions – see MPEP § 2106.05(d)(ll))
wherein the pre-product planning data is indicative of one or more aspects of a production plan of the pre-product that should be fulfilled during the production process of the pre-product; (Arranging a hierarchy of groups, sorting information, eliminating less restrictive pricing information and determining the price has been deemed well‐understood, routine, and conventional functions – see MPEP § 2106.05(d)(ll))
one or more processors configured to; (The additional features including a processor as recited in the claim are recited so generically that they represent no more than the existence of the components that they represent no more than generally linking the use of a judicial exception to a particular technological environment or “field of use”-- see MPEP § 2106.05(h))
a) storing the product planning data and the pre-product planning data on a sequential distributed database; (Storing and retrieving information in memory have been deemed well‐understood, routine, and conventional functions – see MPEP § 2106.05(d)(ll))
an output unit configured to; (The additional features including an output unit as recited in the claim are recited so generically that they represent no more than the existence of the components that they represent no more than generally linking the use of a judicial exception to a particular technological environment or “field of use”-- see MPEP § 2106.05(h))
output the validation for controlling the production process and pre-production process; (The additional features including outputting a validation for controlling as recited in the claim are configured to carry out the additional and abstract idea limitations may be tools that are used for the functions recited in the claim, but recited so generically that they represent no more than mere instructions “to apply” the judicial exceptions on or using a generic electronic or computer component – see MPEP § 2106.05(f) Implementing an abstract idea on generic electronic or computer components as tools to perform an abstract idea does not amount to significantly more)
Therefore, Claim 10 is ineligible.
With respect to Claim 11:
2A Prong 2: The additional elements recited in the claim do not integrate the abstract idea into a practical application, individually or in combination.
Additional elements:
wherein the computer program product comprises program code causing an apparatus to execute the method according to claim 1; (Adding the words “apply it” (or an equivalent) with the judicial exception, or mere instructions to implement an abstract idea on a computer, or merely uses a computer as a tool to perform an abstract idea – see MPEP § 2106.05(f))
2B: The claim does not include additional elements that are sufficient to amount to significantly more than the judicial exception.
Additional elements:
wherein the computer program product comprises program code causing an apparatus to execute the method according to claim 1; (The additional features including computer program product causing an apparatus to execute as recited in the claim are configured to carry out the additional and abstract idea limitations may be tools that are used for the functions recited in the claim, but recited so generically that they represent no more than mere instructions “to apply” the judicial exceptions on or using a generic electronic or computer component – see MPEP § 2106.05(f) Implementing an abstract idea on generic electronic or computer components as tools to perform an abstract idea does not amount to significantly more)
Therefore, Claim 11 is ineligible.
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 therefore, subject to the conditions and requirements of this title.
Claim 11 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 101 because the claimed invention is directed to non-statutory subject matter. The claim does not fall within at least one of the four categories of patent eligible subject matter because Claim 11 defines “A computer program product” directing to a software per se.
Examiner Note: The rejection for the 101 can be overcome by amending the claim to:
A computer program product stored on a non-transitory computer-readable medium, that when executed by a computer causes the computer to perform the method according to claim 1.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status.
The following is a quotation of the appropriate paragraphs of 35 U.S.C. 102 that form the basis for the rejections under this section made in this Office action:
A person shall be entitled to a patent unless –
(a)(1) the claimed invention was patented, described in a printed publication, or in public use, on sale, or otherwise available to the public before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claims 1-3, 6-8, 10, and 11 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Stucker et al. (US 20190037012 A1, here in Stucker).
Regarding claim 1, Stucker teaches a computer implemented method for planning of a production process (see FIG.3),
wherein the production process is the production of a product ([0135] first end product 320) based on a pre- product ([0135] first starting product 318.1),
wherein the pre-product and the product are produced by different production entities ([0135] The production system 300 comprises two production locations 301.1, 302.2 in form of two factory buildings 301.1, 302.2.The first factory building 302.1 may have a distance (e.g. some kilometres) to the second factory building 302.2.),
Examiners Note: As illustrated in FIG.3 pre-product is produced at factory 302.1, product is produced at factory 302.2.
wherein the method comprises:
providing product planning data for the product with respect to the production entity producing the product ([0140] Alternatively or additionally, based on an agreement, the peer-to-peer application 324 can (directly) provide a control data set to the storage unit 338 with instructions to deliver a specific amount of starting material 318.1; [0142] Similar to the above first (and second) production unit 304, the further production unit 308 comprising a peer-to-peer module 326 can be configured to produce a further product 320, in particular, a first end product 320.),
wherein the product planning data is indicative of one or more aspects of a production plan of the product that should be fulfilled during the production process of the product ([0139] At least some of the peers of the peer-to-peer network 322 can evaluate the status parameter of the first storage unit 338.; [0139] All status information may be based on status parameter(s) provided by the units and/or based on transaction agreements.),
providing pre-product planning data for the pre-product with respect to the production entity producing the pre-product ([0139] indicate that the first starting material 318.1 will not be needed in a future time period, the peer-to-peer application 324 may control/inform the generation unit 336 such that the generation of the first starting material 318.1 is reduced and/or delivered to another unit.),
wherein the pre-product planning data is indicative of one or more aspects of a production plan of the pre-product that should be fulfilled during the production process of the pre-product ([0136] In other words, the peer-to-peer module 326 of the generation unit 336 is a node 326 of the peer-to-peer network 322. The generation of the raw material, e.g. by mining a raw material, is controlled and/or monitored by a peer-to-peer network 322 providing a peer-to-peer application 324),
storing the product planning data and the pre-product planning data ([0148] Further data, such as status data of the first product 320 can be read out of the tag 343 and written to the peer-to-peer application 324.) on a sequential distributed database (the sequential distributed database is illustrated as peer-to-peer application 324; [0081] The block chain according to the present embodiment is particularly a decentralized, peer-to-peer-based register in which all data related to a production process and other messages sent be peer-to-peer modules can be logged.),
determining a product status of the production process of the product ([0139] For instance, if the status parameter indicates that the inventory is almost full (e.g. 90% or more) and/or other status parameter(s); [0139] All status information may be based on status parameter(s) provided by the units and/or based on transaction agreements.) by comparing the product planning data stored on the sequential distributed database with blockchain oracle data of the production process ([0170] The present block chain 524 is particularly adapted to receive messages from a peer-to-peer module of a previously described production unit, mobile transport unit, delivery unit, storage unit, computing unit or from another peer-to-peer device/unit of another participant of the peer-to-peer network.)
determining a pre-product status of the production process of the pre-product ([0139] status parameter(s) of the production system 300 indicate that the first starting material 318.1 will not be needed in a future time period; [0139] All status information may be based on status parameter(s) provided by the units and/or based on transaction agreements.) by comparing the pre-product planning data stored on the sequential distributed database with blockchain oracle data of the production process ([0170] The present block chain 524 is particularly adapted to receive messages from a peer-to-peer module of a previously described production unit, mobile transport unit, delivery unit, storage unit, computing unit or from another peer-to-peer device/unit of another participant of the peer-to-peer network.), and validating the product status with respect to the pre-product status ([0170] Furthermore, the block chain 524 is configured to generate messages e.g. based on a validation process and/or caused by a peer-to-peer module.),
Examiner’s Note: Stucker further teaches ”[0189] process status message 574 comprising (current) status data (at least one status parameter) about a specific production process. The at least one peer-to-peer module of the at least one production unit (preferably each peer-to-peer module of each unit, e.g. production unit, storage unit, mobile transport unit, quality monitoring unit, etc., involved in the production of the desired product) can write detected status parameter values relating to the production of said product into the block chain 524, such as message 574.”
wherein validation comprises comparing the product status with the pre-product status and determining which of the production entities has fulfilled its production plan with respect to the one or more aspects ([0144] For instance, if the result of the quality evaluation meets at least one predefined requirement, such as a predefined quality parameter limit, the product 320 can be forwarded to a delivery unit 344.), and outputting the validation for controlling the production process and pre-production process ([0144] if the result is such that a rework cannot remove the lack of quality of the product 320, the product 320 can be scrapped and/or recycled by respective (not shown) scrapping or recycling units. All these (not shown) units may also comprise a peer-to-peer module.).
Regarding claim 2, Stucker teaches the method according to claim 1,
Stucker further teaches wherein the method further comprises generating control data for controlling a production process of the product and/or pre-product based on the validation of the product status with respect to the pre-product status ([0184] By way of example, a control data set message 572 can be generated and read e.g. by the peer-to-peer module of the production unit.).
Examiner’s Note: Stucker further teaches the concept of a ‘smart contract’ using block chain technology “[0172] In the present block chain 524 different types of messages and data sets, respectively, for example, within a smart contract (algorithm and/or storage at the block chain 524) can be processed and/or stored. By way of example, the message 570 comprises a generated production transaction agreement.”
The generated production transaction agreement includes components desired product (para 175), having the production unit providers including control data. Upon the validation of the transaction agreement Stucker teaches “[0184] The generated smart contract 570 can cause transmitting of a particular control data set in order to produce the desired product of the production transaction agreement 570.”
Regarding claim 3, Stucker teaches the method according to claim 1,
Stucker further teaches wherein the validating of the product status with respect to the pre-product status comprises determining a balance between the product status and the pre-product status ([0139] On the other hand, generation of the starting material 318.1 can be e.g. increased by the peer-to-peer application 324 if the status parameter indicates that the stock is low and/or the demand for the first starting material 318.1 is high.)
Regarding claim 6, Stucker teaches the method according to claim 1,
Stucker further teaches wherein the sequential distributed database further comprises at least one of the following characteristics append-only, immutable, tamper evident and/or tamper resistant ([0079] In order to store new information in a tamper-proof way, the peer-to-peer application can comprise encryption means and/or signature means and/or verification means)
Regarding claim 7, Stucker teaches the method according to claim 1,
Stucker further teaches wherein the sequential distributed database refers to is a blockchain database ([0034] The peer-to-peer application, such as a block chain, is then used to facilitate access management to the data by handling the encryption keys.)
Regarding claim 8, Stucker teaches the method according to claim 1,
Stucker further teaches wherein the product planning data and the pre-product planning data refer to a planned reduction of a resource utilized in the production process and/or to a reduction of waste products generated during the production process ([0139] if the status parameter indicates that the inventory is almost full (e.g. 90% or more) and/or other status parameter(s) of the production system 300 indicate that the first starting material 318.1 will not be needed in a future time period, the peer-to-peer application 324 may control/inform the generation unit 336 such that the generation of the first starting material 318.1 is reduced and/or delivered to another unit.).
Regarding claim 10, Stucker teaches an apparatus ([0075] In particular, all peer-to-peer modules and all other computers of the peer-to-peer network can preferably read all information in the peer-to-peer application formed as a register) for planning of a production process (see FIG. 3),
wherein the production process refers to is the production of a product ([0135] first end product 320) based on a pre-product ([0135] first starting product 318.1),
wherein the pre-product and the product are produced by different production entities ([0135] The production system 300 comprises two production locations 301.1, 302.2 in form of two factory buildings 301.1, 302.2.The first factory building 302.1 may have a distance (e.g. some kilometres) to the second factory building 302.2.),
Examiners Note: As illustrated in FIG.3 pre-product is produced at factory 302.1, product is produced at factory 302.2.
wherein the apparatus comprises:
an input unit configured to ([0075] Preference is also that all peer-to-peer modules and all other computers of the peer-to-peer network can send messages to or write messages to the peer-to-peer application.; [0075] In particular, every computer node including e.g. the first peer-to-peer module and/or the second peer-to-peer module can comprise the peer-to-peer application. The decentralized register may be read at least by each participant of the peer-to-peer network.)
a) providing product planning data for the product with respect to the production entity producing the product ([0140] Alternatively or additionally, based on an agreement, the peer-to-peer application 324 can (directly) provide a control data set to the storage unit 338 with instructions to deliver a specific amount of starting material 318.1; [0142] Similar to the above first (and second) production unit 304, the further production unit 308 comprising a peer-to-peer module 326 can be configured to produce a further product 320, in particular, a first end product 320.),
wherein the product planning data is indicative of one or more aspects of a production plan of the product that should be fulfilled during the production process of the product([0139] At least some of the peers of the peer-to-peer network 322 can evaluate the status parameter of the first storage unit 338.; [0139] All status information may be based on status parameter(s) provided by the units and/or based on transaction agreements.), and
b) providing pre-product planning data for the pre-product with respect to the production entity producing the pre-product ([0139] indicate that the first starting material 318.1 will not be needed in a future time period, the peer-to-peer application 324 may control/inform the generation unit 336 such that the generation of the first starting material 318.1 is reduced and/or delivered to another unit.),
wherein the pre-product planning data is indicative of one or more aspects of a production plan of the pre-product that should be fulfilled during the production process of the pre-product ([0136] In other words, the peer-to-peer module 326 of the generation unit 336 is a node 326 of the peer-to-peer network 322. The generation of the raw material, e.g. by mining a raw material, is controlled and/or monitored by a peer-to-peer network 322 providing a peer-to-peer application 324),
one or more processors configured to ([0075] A decentralized register can be readable at least by a part of the participants of the peer-to-peer network. In particular, every computer node including e.g. the first peer-to-peer module and/or the second peer-to-peer module can comprise the peer-to-peer application. In particular, all peer-to-peer modules and all other computers of the peer-to-peer network can preferably read all information in the peer-to-peer application formed as a register.)
Examiner’s Note: Stucker teaches the embodiment is used by a distributed computer network. One in the ordinary skill of art recognizes a computer necessitates a processor.
a) storing the product planning data and the pre-product planning data ([0148] Further data, such as status data of the first product 320 can be read out of the tag 343 and written to the peer-to-peer application 324.) on a sequential distributed database (the sequential distributed database is illustrated as peer-to-peer application 324; [0081] The block chain according to the present embodiment is particularly a decentralized, peer-to-peer-based register in which all data related to a production process and other messages sent be peer-to-peer modules can be logged.),
b) determining a product status of the production process of the product ([0139] For instance, if the status parameter indicates that the inventory is almost full (e.g. 90% or more) and/or other status parameter(s); [0139] All status information may be based on status parameter(s) provided by the units and/or based on transaction agreements.) by comparing the product planning data stored on the sequential distributed database with blockchain oracle data of the production process ([0170] The present block chain 524 is particularly adapted to receive messages from a peer-to-peer module of a previously described production unit, mobile transport unit, delivery unit, storage unit, computing unit or from another peer-to-peer device/unit of another participant of the peer-to-peer network.),
c) determining a pre-product status of the production process of the pre-product ([0139] status parameter(s) of the production system 300 indicate that the first starting material 318.1 will not be needed in a future time period; [0139] All status information may be based on status parameter(s) provided by the units and/or based on transaction agreements.) by comparing the pre-product planning data stored on the sequential distributed database with blockchain oracle data of the production process [0170] The present block chain 524 is particularly adapted to receive messages from a peer-to-peer module of a previously described production unit, mobile transport unit, delivery unit, storage unit, computing unit or from another peer-to-peer device/unit of another participant of the peer-to-peer network.),
and d) validating the product status with respect to the pre-product status ([0170] Furthermore, the block chain 524 is configured to generate messages e.g. based on a validation process and/or caused by a peer-to-peer module.),
Examiner’s Note: Stucker further teaches ”[0189] process status message 574 comprising (current) status data (at least one status parameter) about a specific production process. The at least one peer-to-peer module of the at least one production unit (preferably each peer-to-peer module of each unit, e.g. production unit, storage unit, mobile transport unit, quality monitoring unit, etc., involved in the production of the desired product) can write detected status parameter values relating to the production of said product into the block chain 524, such as message 574.”
wherein the validation comprises comparing the product status with the pre-product status and determining which of the production entities has fulfilled its production plan with respect to the one or more aspects ([0144] For instance, if the result of the quality evaluation meets at least one predefined requirement, such as a predefined quality parameter limit, the product 320 can be forwarded to a delivery unit 344.), and an output unit ([0075] The decentralized register may be read at least by each participant of the peer-to-peer network.; [0074] According to a further embodiment, the peer-to-peer application can be a decentralized register or a shared database storing transaction and data with given certain proofs or signatures. In addition to transactions and data, the decentral register can store computer code that can be invoked by a transaction to the address of the code in so called ‘smart contracts’. ) configured to output the validation for controlling the production process and pre-production process ([0144] if the result is such that a rework cannot remove the lack of quality of the product 320, the product 320 can be scrapped and/or recycled by respective (not shown) scrapping or recycling units. All these (not shown) units may also comprise a peer-to-peer module.).
Regarding claim 11, Stucker teaches a computer program product for planning of a production process, wherein the computer program product comprises program code ([0023] For instance, the peer-to-peer application comprises means, such as a smart contract comprising computer code which can be capable of causing transmitting of at least one first control data set to the production unit.) means for causing an apparatus to execute the method according to claim 1 (see Claim 1 rejection)
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 103 which forms the basis for all obviousness rejections set forth in this Office action:
A patent for a claimed invention may not be obtained, notwithstanding that the claimed invention is not identically disclosed as set forth in section 102, if the differences between the claimed invention and the prior art are such that the claimed invention as a whole would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which the claimed invention pertains. Patentability shall not be negated by the manner in which the invention was made.
Claims 4 and 5 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Stucker, in view of Neumayer et al. (US 20200057992 A1, herein Neumayer).
Regarding claim 4, Stucker teaches the method according to claim 3,
Stucker does not explicitly teach the claim limitations set forth in Claim 4.
Neumayer teaches a “[abstract] distributed leger to capture information regarding shipment and evaluations of the suppliers of these shipments”
Neumayer further teaches wherein the validating of the product status with respect to the pre-product status further comprises distributing validation tokens ([0077] At 502, transactional data regarding a shipment of goods from a supplier to a client is received from a client..) to the production entities based on the balance ([0048] The ledger service 228 may also integrate with an Enterprise Resource Planning (ERP) system for each client in the consortium to facilitate the creation and execution a smart contracts in the supplier evaluation system 200. An ERP system integrates business functions into one complete system to streamline processes and information across an organization. Example business functions include inventory, order management, accounting, human resources, customer relationship management (CRM), and so forth. In some implementations, each data point of supplier evaluation data is signed on a technical level by the party who made the entry on the blockchain (e.g. with a private certificate).).
Examiner’s Note: Neumayer further teaches [0076] For clarity of presentation, the description that follows generally describes process 5 in the context of FIGS. 1-4B and 6. As illustrated in FIG.2 the distributed leger 230 coupled with leger service 228.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to adapt the distributed system of Stucker to incorporate the teachings of Neumayer so as to include including identifiers and scores regarding the status of the network. Doing so would allow a trusted and reliable process to determine suppliers and manufacturers. (Neumayer [0026] clients are able to evaluate potential suppliers before engaging in business with them.).
Regarding claim 5, Stucker teaches the method according to claim 4,
Stucker does not explicitly teach the claim limitations set forth in Claim 5.
Neumayer further teaches wherein the distributing of validation tokens comprises adding tokens to a token score of a production entity ([0080] At 508, a new transaction entry for the transactional data is persisted to the distributed ledger. The new transaction entry includes the score values for each of the KPIs and the overall rating.) if the balance indicates that the product status or pre-product status of the production entity fulfils the production or pre-production plan less than the other entity ([see FIG. 5; [0078] At 504, a score value for each of a plurality of KPIs is determined based on the transactional data. In some implementations, the KPIs include delivery time accuracy, delivery quantity accuracy, and price accuracy. From 504, the process 500 proceeds to 506.; [0079] At 506, an overall rating for the supplier is determined based on a weighted aggregate of the score values and previously determined score values for previous shipments from the supplier to at least one of a plurality of clients.)
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to adapt the distributed system of Stucker to incorporate the teachings of Neumayer so as to include including identifiers and scores regarding the status of the network. Doing so would allow a trusted and reliable process to determine suppliers and manufacturers. (Neumayer [0026] clients are able to evaluate potential suppliers before engaging in business with them.).
Claim 9 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Stucker, in view of Westerkamp et al. (Tracing Manufacturing Processes Using Blockchain - Based Token Compositions, herein Westerkamp).
Regarding claim 9, Stucker teaches the method according to claim 1,
Stucker does not explicitly teach the claim limitations set forth in Claim 9.
Westerkamp teaches an exemplary implementation using a sawmill production unit using logs and glue (pg. 171 section 4. Implementation)
Westerkamp teaches wherein the product and pre-product planning data are stored in form of a chemical product passport ([page 169 section 3 Concept] The concept is based on two key ideas: representing physical goods in the form of digital tokens, and recipes that enable their transformation.) comprising a decentral identifier ([page 170 algorithm 1] see tokenId in Algorithm 1)identifying the product and/or pre-product and the product planning data and/or pre-product planning data ([page 169 section 3.2 paragraph 2] When minting a token, the number of units within the batch, as well as the used components' information needs to be passed, as exemplified in Algorithm1.)
Examiner’s Note: The limitation of “chemical product passport” is interpreted in light of Applicant’s Specification [page 8 line 5-8] “The term "chemical product passport" is to be understood broadly in the present case and comprises a digital representation of chemical product planning data.”
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to adapt the blockchain of distributed networks of Stucker to incorporate the teachings of Westerkamp so as to include identifiers on the products. Doing so would allow comprehensive tracking and monitoring of the production process (Westerkamp [pg. 185 conclusion] Defining compositions for production and enforcing them by using smart contracts enable the documentation of consumed resources in the production process.).
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
US 20240295683 A1 – control device for optimizing energy management and energy monitoring of an industrial site
US 20230385965 A1 – Blockchain network for a smart contract using a distributed network of user devices
US 20230059811 A1 – Blockchain database storing a product data to determine and maintain information about a product over the lifetime of a product
US 20200210946 A1 – Monitor and track using distributed blockchain to in real time
US 20180096175 A1 – Distributing shipping network using blockchain and track movement and conditions of packages.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Jason Choi whose telephone number is (571) 270 0512. The examiner can normally be reached Mon-Thurs 8:00-6:00 EST.
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, Robert Fennema can be reached at (571)272-2748. 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.
/J.J.C./Examiner, Art Unit 2117
/ROBERT E FENNEMA/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2117
