CTNF 19/197,079 CTNF 70419 DETAILED ACTION Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status 07-03-aia AIA 15-10-aia The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA. Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 101 07-04-01 AIA 07-04 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 Standard When considering subject matter eligibility under 35 U.S.C. 101, it must be determined whether the claim is directed to one of the four statutory categories of invention, i.e., process, machine, manufacture, or composition of matter. Specifically, claim 13 is directed to a system. Claims 1 and 20 are directed to a method. Each of the claims falls under one of the four statutory classes of invention. If the claim does fall within one of the statutory categories, it must then be determined whether the claim is directed to a judicial exception (i.e., law of nature, natural phenomenon, and abstract idea). The bolded items noted below are not part of the abstract idea. Claim 1 recites: A block chain-based transaction processing method, performed by a block chain node , and comprising: determining a smart contract configured for processing a transaction; determining a target resident contract process according to flag values corresponding to resident contract processes recorded in a maintenance array, each of the flag values indicating an execution state of a corresponding resident contract process, and a maximum number of resident contract processes recorded in the maintenance array being a maximum number of contract processes supported by a docker deployed in the block chain node ; replacing, in the maintenance array, the target resident c ontract process with a target contract process corresponding to the smart contract , and modifying a target flag value corresponding to the target contract process to a first value, the first value characterizing that a corresponding contract process is in an executed state; and transmitting the transaction to the target contract process for processing. Claim 2 recites: determining whether the target contract process is one of the resident contract processes ; and performing, in response to that the target contract process is not one of the resident contract processes , the operation of determining the target resident contract process according to the flag values corresponding to the resident contract processes recorded in the maintenance array. Claim 3 recites: transmitting, in response to that the target contract process is one of the resident contract processes , after the target flag value corresponding to the target contract process in the maintenance array is modified to the first value, the transaction to the target contract process for processing. Claim 4 recites: acquiring a number of current resident contract processes in the docker ; and performing, in response to that the number of current resident contract processes in the docker is not less than the maximum number of contract processes supported by the docker , the operation of determining the target resident contract process according to the flag values corresponding to the resident contract processes recorded in the maintenance array. Claim 5 recites: using, in response to that the number of current resident contract processes in the docker is less than the maximum number of contract processes supported by the docker, the target contract process as the resident contract process, and recording the target contract process in the maintenance array; and modifying, in the maintenance array, the target flag value corresponding to the target contract process to the first value, and using a next element position of an element position where the target contract process is located as a cursor position, the cursor position characterizing an element position at which detection of the target resident contract process starts. Claim 6 recites: wherein the determining a target resident contract process according to flag values corresponding to resident contract processes recorded in a maintenance array comprises: acquiring a flag value of a cursor position in the maintenance array, the cursor position characterizing an element position in the maintenance array at which detection of the target resident contract process starts; and determining, in response to that the flag value of the cursor position is a second value, a resident contract process corresponding to the cursor position as the target resident contract process, the second value characterizing that a corresponding contract process is in a non- executed state; and the method further comprises: determining, after the target flag value corresponding to the target contract process is modified to the first value, a next element position located in the target contract process in the maintenance array as a new cursor position. Claim 7 recites: modifying, in response to that the flag value of the cursor position is not the second value, the flag value of the cursor position to the second value, and determining a next element position of the cursor position as the new cursor position; and jumping to the operation of acquiring the flag value of the cursor position in the maintenance array. Claim 8 recites: determining a start element position of the maintenance array as the cursor position in response to that the cursor position determined in the maintenance array is out of bounds. Claim 9 recites: detecting an average missing time interval of contract processes and an average missing processing time of contract processes in the block chain node , wherein the average missing time interval of the contract processes characterizes an average time interval between occurrences of missing of smart contract processes in the block chain node , and the average missing processing time of the contract processes characterizes a time cycle of restarting a missing contract process in the block chain node ; and determining the maximum number of contract processes supported by the docker based on the average missing time interval of contract processes and the average missing processing time of contract processes . Claim 10 recites: wherein the determining the maximum number of contract processes supported by the docker based on the average missing time interval of contract processes and the average missing processing time of contract processes comprises: determining a number of resident contract processes in the docker when a ratio of the average missing time interval of contract processes to the average missing processing time of contract processes is 1; and using the number of resident contract processes as the maximum number of contract processes supported by the docker. Claim 11 recites: querying whether the smart contract is installed on the block chain node ; determining, in response to that the smart contract is already installed on the block chain node, whether the target contract process is one of the resident contract processes ; and performing, in response to that the smart contract is not installed on the block chain node , prompt processing indicating that the contract does not exist. Clam 12 recites: wherein the querying whether the smart contract is installed on the block chain node comprises: acquiring a smart contract list corresponding to the block chain node, the smart contract list recording a contract name of a smart contract already installed on the block chain node ; and searching the smart contract list for the contract name corresponding to the smart contract . Claim 13 recites: A block chain-based transaction processing apparatus for a block chain node, comprising: one or more processors; and a storage medium configured to store one or more computer programs, the one or more computer programs, when executed by the one or more processors, causing the one or more processors to implement: determining a smart contract configured for processing a transaction; determining a target resident contract process according to flag values corresponding to resident contract processes recorded in a maintenance array, each of the flag values indicating an execution state of a corresponding resident contract process , and a maximum number of resident contract processes recorded in the maintenance array being a maximum number of contract processes supported by a docker deployed in the block chain node ; replacing, in the maintenance array, the target resident contract process with a target contract process corresponding to the smart contract , and modifying a target flag value corresponding to the target contract process to a first value, the first value characterizing that a corresponding contract process is in an executed state; and transmitting the transaction to the target contract process for processing. Claim 14 recites: wherein the one or more processors are further configured to implement: determining whether the target contract process is one of the resident contract processes ; and performing, in response to that the target contract process is not one of the resident contract processes , the operation of determining the target resident contract process according to the flag values corresponding to the resident contract processes recorded in the maintenance array. Claim 15 recites: wherein the one or more processors are further configured to implement: transmitting, in response to that the target contract process is one of the resident contract processes , after the target flag value corresponding to the target contract process in the maintenance array is modified to the first value, the transaction to the target contract process for processing. Claim 16 recites: wherein the one or more processors are further configured to implement: acquiring a number of current resident contract processes in the docker ; and performing, in response to that the number of current resident contract processes in the docker is not less than the maximum number of contract processes supported by the docker , the operation of determining the target resident contract process according to the flag values corresponding to the resident contract processes recorded in the maintenance array. Claim 17 recites: wherein the one or more processors are further configured to implement: using, in response to that the number of current resident contract processes in the docker is less than the maximum number of contract processes supported by the docker, the target contract process as the resident contract process, and recording the target contract process in the maintenance array; and modifying, in the maintenance array, the target flag value corresponding to the target contract process to the first value, and using a next element position of an element position where the target contract process is located as a cursor position, the cursor position characterizing an element position at which detection of the target resident contract process starts. Claim 18 recites: wherein the determining a target resident contract process according to flag values corresponding to resident contract processes recorded in a maintenance array comprises: acquiring a flag value of a cursor position in the maintenance array, the cursor position characterizing an element position in the maintenance array at which detection of the target resident contract process starts; and determining, in response to that the flag value of the cursor position is a second value, a resident contract process corresponding to the cursor position as the target resident contract process, the second value characterizing that a corresponding contract process is in a non- executed state; and the one or more processors are further configured to implement: determining, after the target flag value corresponding to the target contract process is modified to the first value, a next element position located in the target contract process in the maintenance array as a new cursor position. Claim 19 recites: wherein the one or more processors are further configured to implement: modifying, in response to that the flag value of the cursor position is not the second value, the flag value of the cursor position to the second value, and determining a next element position of the cursor position as the new cursor position; and jumping to the operation of acquiring the flag value of the cursor position in the maintenance array. \ Claim 20 recites: determining a smart contract configured for processing a transaction; determining a target resident contract process according to flag values corresponding to resident contract processes recorded in a maintenance array, each of the flag values indicating an execution state of a corresponding resident contract process , and a maximum number of resident contract processes recorded in the maintenance array being a maximum number of contract processes supported by a docker deployed in the block chain node ; replacing, in the maintenance array, the target resident contract process with a target contract process corresponding to the smart contract , and modifying a target flag value corresponding to the target contract process to a first value, the first value characterizing that a corresponding contract process is in an executed state; and transmitting the transaction to the target contract process for processing. Here, the claimed concept falls into the category of functions of organizing human activities such as mental processes, including concepts performed in the human mind (including an observation, evaluation, judgment or opinion). The BRI of the claimed limitations of claims 1, 13 and 20 describes functions for determining a target resident contract process according to flag values corresponding to resident contract processes recorded in a maintenance array, each of the flag values indicating an execution state of a corresponding resident contract process, and a maximum number of resident contract processes recorded in the maintenance array being a maximum number of contract processes supported by a docker deployed in the block chain node, and replacing, in the maintenance array, the target resident contract process with a target contract process corresponding to the smart contract, and modifying a target flag value corresponding to the target contract process to a first value, the first value characterizing that a corresponding contract process is in an executed state. Step 2A, Prong Two : The judicial exception is not integrated into a practical application. In particular, the clams recite the above noted and bolded limitations as the additional elements. These limitations performing steps of determining a smart contract according to flag values corresponding to resident contract processes recorded in a maintenance array…and replacing in the maintenance array a target resident contract process with a target contract process corresponding to the smart contract merely amount to instructions to implement an abstract idea on a computer or merely using a computer as a tool to perform an abstract idea (see MPEP 2106.05(1) ). Also see applicant's specification for guiding interpretation of these claim features, describing implementation with generic commercially available devices or any machine capable of executing a set of instructions, similarly describing usage of general and special purpose computer and “any kind of digital computer” including generic commercially available devices. The processors and smart contract are similarly understood in light of applicant's specification as mere usage of any arrangement of computer software or hardware intermediate components potentially using a processor in a network to transmit a transaction to a target process. Performing steps by a generic machine or computer processor or a generic neural network absent of how the functions are being processed, merely limit the abstraction to a computer field by execution by generic computers. See MPEP 2106.05¢h). As noted in MPEP 2106.04(d), limitations which amount to instructions to implement an abstract idea on a computer or merely using a computer as a tool, limitations which amount to insignificant extra-solution activity, and limitations which amount to generally linking to a particular technological environment do not integrate a practical exception into a practical application. Receiving and transmitting or sending data using an input port within a machine or processor is similar to Alappat, which as noted in MPEP 2106. 05(b)(1) is superseded, and the correct analysis is to look whether the added elements integrate the exception into a practical application or provide significantly more than the judicial exception. The claims in the instant application are performed by a processing unit including a processor which determine data, replace data and transmit data. Consideration of these steps as a combination does not change the analysis as they do not add anything compared to when the steps are considered separately. The claims recite a particular sequence of functions to determine data, transmit transaction data to a target contract process. Performance of these steps or functions technologically may present a meaningful limit to the scope of the claim but does not reasonably integrate the abstraction into a practical application. Determining data and modifying data and calculating of data as recited in the claims also involve mental/manual processes with a minimum generic computer functions if necessary. The transmitting of data involves insignificant post solution activity. Step 2B: The elements discussed above with respect to the practical application in Step 2A, prong 2 are equally applicable to consideration of whether the claims amount to significantly more. Accordingly, the clams fail to recite additional elements which, when considered individually and in combination, amount to significantly more. Reconsideration of these elements identified as insignificant extra-solution activity as part of Step 2B does not change the analysis. Determining data by electronic means or hardware amounts to receiving and transmitting or sending information over a network has been recognized by the courts as well- understood, routine, and conventional (See MPEP 2106.05(d)(II), citing Symantec, 835 F.3d at 1321, 120 OSPQ2d at 1362 (Utilizing an intermediary computer to forward information); TL Communications LEC v. AV Auto. LLC, 823 F.3d 607, G10, L18 USPO2d 1744, 1748 (ed. Cir. 2016) Casing a telephone for image transmission); OFF Techs., fac. v. Amazon.com, fic., 788 B.Ad 1359, 1363, LiS USPO2d 1090, 1093 (ed, Cir. 2015) (sending messages over a network}, buySAFE, fic. v. Google, Inc.. 768 F.3d 1350, 1355, 112 USPQ2d 1093, 1996 (Pod, Cyr. 2014) (computer receives and sends information over a network). Positively reciting a smart contract, contract process or processor or a trained neural network does not change the analysis as these aspects are properly considered as additional elements which amount to instructions to apply it with a computer. These claimed elements also as found in the dependent claims are also recited at a high level of generality such that they amount to no more than mere instructions to apply the exception using a generic component. In processing the claims, it is noted that the recitation of these additional elements does not impact the analysis of the claims because these elements in combination are noted only to be a general purpose computer for performing basic or routine computer functions. These additional elements do not overcome the analysis as these elements are merely considered as additional elements which amount to instructions to be applied to the generic computer. The judicial exception is not integrated into a practical application. In particular, the claimed “processor”, “docker”, “contract process”, “smart contract” and “block chain” are recited at a high level of generality such they amount to no more than mere instructions to apply the exception using a generic component. Accordingly, the additional elements do not integrate the abstract idea into a practical application because they do not impose any meaningful limits on practicing the abstract idea. Accordingly, claims 1, 13 and 20 are directed to an abstract idea. The dependent claim(s) when analyzed and each taken as a whole are held to be patent ineligible under 35 U.S.C. 101 because the additional recited limitation(s) fail(s) to establish that the claim(s) is/are not directed to an abstract idea. The prior art taken alone or in combination failed to teach or suggest: “determining a target resident contract process according to flag values corresponding to resident contract processes recorded in a maintenance array, each of the flag values indicating an execution state of a corresponding resident contract process, and a maximum number of resident contract processes recorded in the maintenance array being a maximum number of contract processes supported by a docker deployed in the block chain node, and replacing, in the maintenance array, the target resident contract process with a target contract process corresponding to the smart contract, and modifying a target flag value corresponding to the target contract process to a first value, the first value characterizing that a corresponding contract process is in an executed state” as recited in independent claim 1 and similarly recited in independent claims 13 and 20. Wei, Chang-Zheng et al (TW 202113645 A) discloses a smart contract using non-deterministic external data to be deterministically executed in a blockchain network. A first node 101 generates a new block from one or a plurality of transactions accumulated in a memory pool (S 201 ). Concerning a transaction that invokes a smart contract, the first node 101 refers to an external system for non-deterministic external data used therein and stores the acquired data in the block (S 202 ). The generated block is transmitted as a proposal to a plurality of nodes participating in consensus formation (S 203 ) and undergoes validation in each node (S 204 ). Here, the validation is performed with respect to the external data in addition to the transaction. Subject to the satisfaction of a prescribed condition in the validation process, each node adds the block to the blockchain of each node (S 205 ). Green et al ( US 20210288814 A1) disclose a block chain-based system for multi-party, multistage process verification has a server in operable communication with a plurality of electronic client terminals. The server has a database which may have user data and implement a process verification controller. The system further has a block chain ledger. Fora multistage process involving multiple users, for each stage, the system is configured for receiving a function ID selected from a set of available functions via user interfaces of respective client terminals, generating a function hash comprising the function ID and associated function data and creating a function block chain transaction comprising the function hash which is added to the block chain ledger. Conclusion Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to FRANTZY POINVIL whose telephone number is (571)272-6797. The examiner can normally be reached M-Th 7:00AM to 5:30PM. Examiner interviews are available via telephone, in-person, and video conferencing using a USPTO supplied web-based collaboration tool. To schedule an interview, applicant is encouraged to use the USPTO Automated Interview Request (AIR) at http://www.uspto.gov/interviewpractice. If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Michael Anderson can be reached at 571-270-0508. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300. Information regarding the status of published or unpublished applications may be obtained from Patent Center. Unpublished application information in Patent Center is available to registered users. To file and manage patent submissions in Patent Center, visit: https://patentcenter.uspto.gov. Visit https://www.uspto.gov/patents/apply/patent-center for more information about Patent Center and https://www.uspto.gov/patents/docx for information about filing in DOCX format. For additional questions, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000. /FRANTZY POINVIL/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3693 Application/Control Number: 19/197,079 Page 2 Art Unit: 3693 Application/Control Number: 19/197,079 Page 3 Art Unit: 3693 Application/Control Number: 19/197,079 Page 4 Art Unit: 3693 Application/Control Number: 19/197,079 Page 5 Art Unit: 3693 Application/Control Number: 19/197,079 Page 6 Art Unit: 3693 Application/Control Number: 19/197,079 Page 7 Art Unit: 3693 Application/Control Number: 19/197,079 Page 8 Art Unit: 3693 Application/Control Number: 19/197,079 Page 9 Art Unit: 3693 Application/Control Number: 19/197,079 Page 10 Art Unit: 3693 Application/Control Number: 19/197,079 Page 11 Art Unit: 3693 Application/Control Number: 19/197,079 Page 12 Art Unit: 3693 Application/Control Number: 19/197,079 Page 13 Art Unit: 3693 Application/Control Number: 19/197,079 Page 14 Art Unit: 3693 Application/Control Number: 19/197,079 Page 15 Art Unit: 3693 Application/Control Number: 19/197,079 Page 16 Art Unit: 3693 Application/Control Number: 19/197,079 Page 17 Art Unit: 3693
Prosecution Insights