DETAILED ACTION
Acknowledgements
The amendment filed 5/12/2025 is acknowledged.
Claims 1-16 are pending.
Claims 1-16 have been examined.
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 .
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 1-2 and 4-16 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 101 because the claimed invention is directed to an abstract idea without significantly more.
In the instant case, claims 1-2 and 4-16 are directed to a system comprising a first blockchain node computing device and an access computing device. Therefore, these claims fall within the four statutory categories of invention.
The claim recite receiving a request to store information regarding a new loan associated with a personal property asset and a user, identifying whether an existing record exists for the personal property asset, and if so, updating the existing record with the loan information, and if not, creating a new record with the loan information, which is an abstract idea. Specifically, the claims recite “receive . . . a request to access the [ledger] network, the request including: (i) an asset identifier associated with a personal property asset, (ii) a user identifier of a user associated with the personal property asset, and (iii) loan information including one or more loan terms related a new loan associated with the personal property asset,” “identify . . . based upon the request and using the asset identifier, whether the [ledger] network hosts an existing [ledger] associated with the personal property asset,” “when the blockchain network hosts the existing [ledger], generate, at the first [ledger] node . . ., and store a new block in the first existing [ledger], the new block including an encryption of the loan information and a description of data stored in a preceding block,” and “when the [ledger] network does not host any existing [ledger] associated with the personal property asset, generate a first block of a new [ledger] associated with the personal property asset, the first block including the asset identifier, the user identifier, and an encryption of the loan information,” which is grouped within the “certain methods of organizing human activity” grouping of abstract ideas in prong one of step 2A of the Alice/Mayo test (MPEP 2106.04 & 2106.04(a)) because the claims describe a process for maintaining and updating financial records, which involves receiving a request to store information regarding a new loan for a user for a personal property asset, identifying whether an existing record exists for the asset, and updating the existing record with the new loan information if it a record exists, or creating a new record and storing the new loan information in it if not, which is a commercial or legal interaction. Accordingly, the claims recite an abstract idea (See MPEP 2106.04(a)).
This judicial exception is not integrated into a practical application because, when analyzed under prong two of step 2A of the Alice/Mayo test (See MPEP 2106.04(d)), the additional elements of the claims such as the use of a loan management computer system comprising a first blockchain node computing device integral to a blockchain network and an access computing device communicatively coupled to the first blockchain node computing device to access the blockchain network, as well as a blockchain network hosting a blockchain, to perform the steps, merely use(s) a computer as a tool to perform an abstract idea. Specifically, these additional elements perform the steps or functions of “receive . . . a request to access the [ledger] network, the request including: (i) an asset identifier associated with a personal property asset, (ii) a user identifier of a user associated with the personal property asset, and (iii) loan information including one or more loan terms related a new loan associated with the personal property asset,” “identify . . . based upon the request and using the asset identifier, whether the [ledger] network hosts an existing [ledger] associated with the personal property asset,” “when the blockchain network hosts the existing [ledger], generate, at the first [ledger] node . . ., and store a new block in the first existing [ledger], the new block including an encryption of the loan information and a description of data stored in a preceding block,” and “when the [ledger] network does not host any existing [ledger] associated with the personal property asset, generate a first block of a new [ledger] associated with the personal property asset, the first block including the asset identifier, the user identifier, and an encryption of the loan information.” Viewed as a whole, the use of a processor/computer as a tool to implement the abstract idea does not integrate the abstract idea into a practical application because it requires no more than a computer performing functions that correspond to acts required to carry out the abstract idea. The additional elements do not involve improvements to the functioning of a computer, or to any other technology or technical field (MPEP 2106.05(a)), and the claims do not apply or use the abstract idea in some other meaningful way beyond generally linking the use of the abstract idea to a particular technological environment, such that the claim as a whole is more than a drafting effort designed to monopolize the exception (MPEP 2106.05(e) and Vanda Memo). Therefore, the claims do not, for example, purport to improve the functioning of a computer. Nor do they effect an improvement in any other technology or technical field. Accordingly, the additional elements do not impose any meaningful limits on practicing the abstract idea, and the claims are directed to an abstract idea.
The claims do not include additional elements that are sufficient to amount to significantly more than the judicial exception because, when analyzed under step 2B of the Alice/Mayo test (See MPEP 2106.05), the additional elements of using a loan management computer system comprising a first blockchain node computing device integral to a blockchain network and an access computing device communicatively coupled to the first blockchain node computing device to access the blockchain network, as well as a blockchain network hosting a blockchain, steps to perform the steps amounts to no more than using a computer or processor to automate and/or implement the abstract idea of receiving a request to store information regarding a new loan associated with a personal property asset and a user, identifying whether an existing record exists for the personal property asset, and if so, updating the existing record with the loan information, and if not, creating a new record with the loan information. As discussed above, taking the claim elements separately, these additional elements perform the steps or functions of “receive . . . a request to access the [ledger] network, the request including: (i) an asset identifier associated with a personal property asset, (ii) a user identifier of a user associated with the personal property asset, and (iii) loan information including one or more loan terms related a new loan associated with the personal property asset,” “identify . . . based upon the request and using the asset identifier, whether the [ledger] network hosts an existing [ledger] associated with the personal property asset,” “when the blockchain network hosts the existing [ledger], generate, at the first [ledger] node . . ., and store a new block in the first existing [ledger], the new block including an encryption of the loan information and a description of data stored in a preceding block,” and “when the [ledger] network does not host any existing [ledger] associated with the personal property asset, generate a first block of a new [ledger] associated with the personal property asset, the first block including the asset identifier, the user identifier, and an encryption of the loan information.” These functions correspond to the actions required to perform the abstract idea. Viewed as a whole, the combination of elements recited in the claims merely recite the concept of receiving a request to store information regarding a new loan associated with a personal property asset and a user, identifying whether an existing record exists for the personal property asset, and if so, updating the existing record with the loan information, and if not, creating a new record with the loan information. Therefore, the use of these additional elements does no more than employ the computer as a tool to automate and/or implement the abstract idea. The use of a computer or processor to merely automate and/or implement the abstract idea cannot provide significantly more than the abstract idea itself (MPEP 2106.05 (f) & (h)). Therefore, the claim is not patent eligible.
Dependent claims 2 and 4-16 further describe the abstract idea of receiving a request to store information regarding a new loan associated with a personal property asset and a user, identifying whether an existing record exists for the personal property asset, and if so, updating the existing record with the loan information, and if not, creating a new record with the loan information. Specifically, claim 2 describes additional information included in the request, but does not require any steps or functions to be performed beyond those that recite the abstract idea. Claim 4 describes performing credit decisioning processes and transmitting the result, which is a financial or business process and thus further describes the abstract idea. Claim 5 describes the process of obtaining acceptance of the new loan from a loan applicant, which is part of the loan application process and further describes the abstract idea. Claim 6 describes the data stored in the last block, claims 12-13 describe the personal property asset and the asset identifier, and claim 16 describes the request, but these claims do not require any steps or functions to be performed beyond those that recite the abstract idea. Claims 7-9 further describe the process of accessing the existing loan information, which further describes the abstract idea as it describes a process for retrieving records associated with a loan. Claims 10-11, 14, and 15 describe the manner of updating the stored information with information about the new loan, which further describes the aspect of the abstract idea that involves updating the loan information. The dependent claims do not include additional elements that integrate the abstract idea into a practical application or that provide significantly more than the abstract idea. Therefore, the dependent claims are also not patent eligible.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 103 which forms the basis for all obviousness rejections set forth in this Office action:
A patent for a claimed invention may not be obtained, notwithstanding that the claimed invention is not identically disclosed as set forth in section 102, if the differences between the claimed invention and the prior art are such that the claimed invention as a whole would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which the claimed invention pertains. Patentability shall not be negated by the manner in which the invention was made.
Claims 1, 2, 6-7, 10-11, and 13-16 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Blackman, et al. (US 2020/0234386) (“Blackman”) in view of Newman (US 10,990,693).
Regarding claim 1, Blackman discloses a loan management (LM) computer system for managing property loan information using blockchains, the LM computer system comprising:
a first blockchain node computing device integral to a blockchain network (Blackman ¶¶ 25, 30, 35-38, 43);
an access computing device communicatively coupled to the first blockchain node computing device to access the blockchain network (Blackman ¶¶ 29-33, 39, 44-45),
wherein the LM computer system is configured to:
receive, at the access computing device a request to access the blockchain network, the request including: (i) an asset identifier associated with a personal property asset, (ii) a user identifier of a user associated with the personal property asset, and (iii) loan information including one or more loan terms related a new loan associated with the personal property asset (Blackman ¶¶ 27, 32-34, 38, 46);
identify, at the first blockchain node computing device, based upon the request and using the asset identifier, whether the blockchain network hosts an existing blockchain associated with the personal property asset (Blackman ¶¶ 27, 32-33, 35, 38-39);
when the blockchain network hosts the existing blockchain, generate, at the first blockchain node computing device, and store a new block in the first existing blockchain, the new block including the loan information and a description of data stored in a preceding block (Blackman ¶¶ 3, 35-39, 45-55); and
when the blockchain network does not host any existing blockchain associated with the personal property asset, generate a first block of a new blockchain associated with the personal property asset, the first block including the asset identifier and the loan information (Blackman ¶¶ 7, 11-14, 42-43).
Blackman does not specifically disclose that the new block includes an encryption of the information, or that the first block includes the user identifier.
Newman disclose that the new block includes an encryption of the information (Newman 8:2-4, 24-40, 59-67; 10:50-53), and that the first block includes the user identifier (Newman 7:55-59).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the effective filing date of the present application to modify the method of Blackman to include the new block including an encryption of the information, and that the first block includes the user identifier, as disclosed in Newman, in order to allow for increased security and privacy by providing greater control over a particular user’s data (Newman 8:2-16, 46-50; 8:59-9:9; 9:17-52; 10:46-53).
Regarding claim 2, Blackman discloses that the request to access the blockchain further includes (iv) an acceptance notification indicating acceptance of the loan terms by the user and a loan provider entity (Blackman ¶¶ 44, 47).
Regarding claim 6, Blackman discloses that the description of data stored in the last block comprises a hash of the last block (Blackman ¶¶ 3, 37).
Regarding claim 7, Blackman discloses that the last block in the existing blockchain includes existing loan data, and wherein the LM computer system is further configured to:
in response to receiving the request, transmit, from the access computing device to the first blockchain node computing device, a query associated with the request (Blackman ¶¶ 27, 32-33, 38, 46-47); and
in response to receiving the query, at the first blockchain node computing device, transmit the loan data to the access computing device (Blackman ¶¶ 27, 32-33, 38-39, 46-47).
Blackman does not specifically disclose that the existing loan data is an encryption of loan data, or that the query includes the asset identifier and the user identifier.
Newman discloses that the existing loan data is an encryption of loan data (Newman 7:53-8:4, 8:24-40, 59-67; 10:50-53) and the query including the asset identifier and the user identifier (Newman 7:53-8:4; 8:41-58; 9:17-39; 10:4-37).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the effective filing date of the present application to modify the method of Blackman to include the existing loan data being an encryption of loan data and the query including the asset identifier and the user identifier, as disclosed in Newman, in order to allow for increased security and privacy by providing greater control over a particular user’s data (Newman 8:2-16, 46-50; 8:59-9:9; 9:17-52; 10:46-53).
Regarding claim 10, Blackman discloses transmitting, from the access computing device to the first blockchain node computing device, an instruction including the loan information, the instruction causing the first blockchain node computing device to generate the new block or generate the first block of the new blockchain (Blackman ¶¶ 3, 35-38, 45, 55).
Blackman does not specifically disclose that the instruction is an encrypted instruction.
Newman discloses that the instruction transmitted to the first blockchain node computing device is an encrypted instruction (Newman 8:2-4; 8:2-4, 24-40, 59-67; 10:46-53).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the effective filing date of the present application to modify the method of Blackman to include an encrypted instruction being transmitted to the first blockchain node computing device , as disclosed in Newman, in order to allow for increased security and privacy by providing greater control over a particular user’s data (Newman 8:2-16, 46-50; 8:59-9:9; 9:17-52; 10:46-53).
Regarding claim 11, Blackman discloses distributing, by the first blockchain node computing device, the updated first existing blockchain to the blockchain network (Blackman ¶¶ 7, 11-14, 42-43).
Regarding claim 13, Blackman discloses that the personal property asset includes a building, and the asset identifier includes at least one of an address of the building and a Multiple Listing Service (MLS) number (Blackman ¶¶ 7, 13, 42).
Regarding claim 14, Blackman discloses receiving, at the first blockchain node computing device, a second new block for the first existing blockchain from a second blockchain node computing device of the blockchain network and updating, at the first blockchain node computing device, a locally stored copy of the first existing blockchain with the second new block (Blackman ¶¶ 3, 7, 24, 35-36, 38, 42, 45, 55).
Regarding claim 15, Blackman discloses receiving, at the first blockchain node computing device, a second new block for the new blockchain from a second blockchain node computing device of the blockchain network and updating, at the first blockchain node computing device, a locally stored copy of the new blockchain with the second new block (Blackman ¶¶ 3, 7, 24, 35-36, 38, 42, 45, 55).
Regarding claim 16, Newman discloses the request further includes a user consent to use the asset identifier and the user identifier to query the blockchain network (Newman 7:62-8:16; 8:44-50; 9:40-52; 10:4-45, 54-61).
Claims 4-5 and 12 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Blackman in view of Newman as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Kelly (US 2016/0092982).
Regarding claim 4, Blackman in view of Newman does not specifically disclose performing, by the access computing device, one or more credit decisioning processes, and transmitting, by the access computing device, new loan information to the user.
Kelly discloses performing, by the access computing device, one or more credit decisioning processes and transmitting, by the access computing device, new loan information to the user (Kelly ¶¶ 107-108, 134-144).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the effective filing date of the present application to modify the method of Blackman in view of Newman to include performing, by the access computing device, one or more credit decisioning processes and transmitting, by the access computing device, new loan information to the user, as disclosed in Kelly, in order to provide improved loan services to a customer and helps bank retain their customers (Kelly ¶¶ 13, 15-19).
Regarding claim 5, Blackman discloses that when the blockchain network hosts the existing blockchain, access, at the access computing device the preceding block, where the preceding block includes existing loan information (Blackman ¶¶ 27, 32-33, 38-39, 46-47);
receive, at the access computing device from the loan applicant, an acceptance notification indicating acceptance of the loan information for the new loan (Blackman ¶¶ 44, 47);
in response to the acceptance notification, automatically transmit, from the access computing device to the first blockchain node computing device, an update instruction, the update instruction including the loan information for the new loan (Blackman ¶¶ 36, 38, 44, 47-48, 55);
and
in response to the update instruction, generate, at the first blockchain node computing device, the new block of the existing blockchain (Blackman ¶¶ 36, 38, 44, 47-48, 55).
Blackman does not specifically disclose accessing a public key to decrypt the preceding block, or transmitting, from the access computing device to a loan applicant, the loan information for the new loan based at least in part upon the existing loan information, the loan information for the new loan superseding the existing loan information.
Newman discloses accessing a public key to decrypt the preceding block (Newman 8:2-4, 24-40, 59-67).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the effective filing date of the present application to modify the method of Blackman to include accessing a public key to decrypt the preceding block, as disclosed in Newman, in order to allow for increased security and privacy by providing greater control over access to a particular user’s data (Newman 8:2-16, 46-50; 8:59-9:9; 9:17-52; 10:46-53).
Blackman in view of Newman does not specifically disclose transmitting, from the access computing device to a loan applicant, the loan information for the new loan based at least in part upon the existing loan information, the loan information for the new loan superseding the existing loan information.
Kelley discloses transmitting, from the access computing device to a loan applicant, the loan information for the new loan based at least in part upon the existing loan information, the loan information for the new loan superseding the existing loan information (Kelley ¶¶ 47-48, 55-56, 86-89, 113, 134-144).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the effective filing date of the present application to modify the method of Blackman in view of Newman to include transmitting, from the access computing device to a loan applicant, the loan information for the new loan based at least in part upon the existing loan information, the loan information for the new loan superseding the existing loan information, as disclosed in Kelley, in order to provide more flexibility to a borrower and allow banks to retain their customers by allowing them to more easily modify their loans (Kelley 13, 15-19).
Regarding claim 12, Blackman in view of Newman does not specifically disclose that the personal property asset includes a vehicle, and the asset identifier includes a vehicle identification number (VIN).
Kelley discloses that the personal property asset includes a vehicle, and the asset identifier includes a vehicle identification number (VIN) (Kelley ¶¶ 100, 106, 108, 113).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the effective filing date of the present application to modify the method of Blackman in view of Newman to include the personal property asset including a vehicle, and the asset identifier includes a vehicle identification number, as disclosed in Kelley, in order to allow for managing or modifying information related to an auto loan (Kelley ¶¶ 100, 106, 108, 113).
Claims 8-9 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Blackman in view of Newman as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of Blake (US 2018/0115538).
Regarding claim 8, Blackman does not specifically disclose accessing, by the access computing device, a public key from the first blockchain node computing device and decrypting the encrypted loan information using the public key.
Newman discloses accessing, by the access computing device, a public key and decrypting the encrypted loan information using the public key (Newman 8:2-4, 24-40, 59-67; 10:50-53).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the effective filing date of the present application to modify the method of Blackman to include accessing, by the access computing device, a public key and decrypting the encrypted loan information using the public key, as disclosed in Newman, in order to allow for increased security and privacy by providing greater control over a particular user’s data (Newman 8:2-16, 46-50; 8:59-9:9; 9:17-52; 10:46-53).
Blackman in view of Newman does not specifically disclose that accessing the public key comprises accessing the public key from the first blockchain node computing device.
Blake discloses accessing a public key from the first blockchain node computing device (Blake ¶ 55).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the effective filing date of the present application to modify the method of Blackman in view of Newman to include accessing a public key from the first blockchain node computing device, as disclosed in Blake, in order to allow each blockchain node to decrypt and authenticate new blocks in a blockchain ledger.
Regarding claim 9, Blackman in view of Newman does not specifically disclose providing, by the first blockchain node computing device to the access computing device, the public key in response to the query.
Blake discloses providing, by the first blockchain node computing device to the access computing device, the public key in response to the query (Blake ¶ 55).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the effective filing date of the present application to modify the method of Blackman in view of Newman to include providing, by the first blockchain node computing device to the access computing device, the public key in response to the query, as disclosed in Blake, in order to allow each blockchain node to decrypt and authenticate new blocks in a blockchain ledger.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 3 is objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, but would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
Regarding the prior art, claim 3 includes the limitations of claims 1 and 2, and a further includes the LM computer system being further configured to determine, at the access computing device, that the request includes the acceptance notification; based on determining that the request includes the acceptance notification, automatically execute a smart contract, wherein executing the smart contract comprises: transferring, using the smart contract, funds to or from the loan provider entity; and updating, using the smart contract, a title associated with the personal property asset.
As cited above with respect to claim 1, the closest prior art reference of Blackman discloses a loan management (LM) computer system for managing property loan information using blockchains, the LM computer system comprising: a first blockchain node computing device integral to a blockchain network (Blackman ¶¶ 25, 30, 35-38, 43); an access computing device communicatively coupled to the first blockchain node computing device to access the blockchain network (Blackman ¶¶ 29-33, 39, 44-45), wherein the LM computer system is configured to: receive, at the access computing device a request to access the blockchain network, the request including: (i) an asset identifier associated with a personal property asset, (ii) a user identifier of a user associated with the personal property asset, and (iii) loan information including one or more loan terms related a new loan associated with the personal property asset (Blackman ¶¶ 27, 32-34, 38, 46); identify, at the first blockchain node computing device, based upon the request and using the asset identifier, whether the blockchain network hosts an existing blockchain associated with the personal property asset (Blackman ¶¶ 27, 32-33, 35, 38-39); when the blockchain network hosts the existing blockchain, generate, at the first blockchain node computing device, and store a new block in the first existing blockchain, the new block including the loan information and a description of data stored in a preceding block (Blackman ¶¶ 3, 35-39, 45-55); and when the blockchain network does not host any existing blockchain associated with the personal property asset, generate a first block of a new blockchain associated with the personal property asset, the first block including the asset identifier and the loan information (Blackman ¶¶ 7, 11-14, 42-43). Blackman further discloses that the request to access the blockchain further includes (iv) an acceptance notification indicating acceptance of the loan terms by the user and a loan provider entity (Blackman ¶¶ 44, 47).
Newman additionally discloses that the new block includes an encryption of the information (Newman 8:2-4, 24-40, 59-67; 10:50-53), and that the first block includes the user identifier (Newman 7:55-59).
However, the prior art does not disclose, neither singly nor in combination, that after receiving a request to access the blockchain network that includes an asset identifier, a user identifier, loan information related to a new loan, and an acceptance notification, determining that the request includes the acceptance notification and then, based on this determination, automatically executing a smart contract, wherein executing the smart contract comprises: transferring, using the smart contract, funds to or from the loan provider entity; and updating, using the smart contract, a title associated with the personal property asset, wherein after the funds are transferred and title is updated, either an existing blockchain associated with the personal property asset is identified and updated by storing a new block with an encryption of the loan information and a description of data stored in the preceding block, or a first block of a new blockchain associated with the personal property asset is generated, the first block including the asset identifier, the user identifier, and an encryption of the loan information.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Mohammad A. Nilforoush whose telephone number is (571)270-5298. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 12pm-7pm.
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, John W. Hayes can be reached at 571-272-6708. 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.
/Mohammad A. Nilforoush/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3697
Prosecution Insights