IP Library › Granted Patent US 12,505,416
Granted Patent B2
US 12,505,416 · App. 16/274,756 · Granted Dec 23, 2025

System, method, and computer program product for a distributed, cryptographically secured proof-of-intent transaction network

Inventor: Christopher Walter Surdak (Redlands, CA)
Assignee: ReLeaf Financial, Incorporated
G06Q20/0658G06Q20/02G06Q20/3674G06Q20/3678G06Q20/401H04L9/0637
View Patent ↗
Loading inventors, assignments & file history…
Monitor This Case
Get email alerts when status or documents change.
Order Certified Copies
Most orders are placed with the USPTO same day — all within 24 business hours.
Order via The Patent Place →
Pre-filled with this patent's details
Quick Facts
Patent No.
US 12,505,416
App. No.
16/274,756
Granted
Dec 23, 2025
Kind
B2
Abstract

Provided is a computer implemented method of authorizing transactions in a blockchain network of participant systems including a first system that sends transaction data to a second system that generates a notary request including the transaction data, at least one notary system and at least one witness system. The method includes the notary system: accepting the notary request from the second system; transmitting the transaction data to the witness systems; determining a subset of responsive witness systems; determining that a required number of affirmative responses has been received from the responsive witness systems; generating a block based on the transaction data; and publishing the block to a ledger of the blockchain network.

Claims (28)

1 . A computer-implemented method of authorizing a transaction in a decentralized blockchain network, wherein the blockchain network comprises a plurality of notary systems configured to exclusively host and maintain a distributed ledger on a verified network, a first system, a second system, and a plurality of witness systems, wherein the first system is a sending system for a transaction, wherein the second system is a receiving system for the transaction, and wherein the first system, the second system, and the plurality of witness systems can neither host nor maintain the distributed ledger, wherein the first system is configured to send transaction data associated with the transaction to the second system, wherein the transaction data consists of a transaction amount and a public encryption key that corresponds to a private encryption key that is exclusively maintained by the first system, and wherein the second system is configured to generate a notary request comprising the transaction data, the method comprising:

accepting, by a notary system of the plurality of notary systems, the notary request from the second system of the plurality of account holder systems;

transmitting, by the notary system, the transaction data to the plurality of witness systems;

determining, by the notary system, a required number of affirmative responses from a responding witness system of the plurality of witness systems based, at least in part, on the transaction amount;

determining, by the notary system, that the required number of affirmative responses has been received, wherein each affirmative response comprises a confirmation from the responding witness system that the public key was approved by the first system;

in response to determining that the required number of responses has been received, generating, by the notary system, at least one block based, at least in part, on the transaction data; and

publishing, by the notary system, the at least one block to the distributed ledger.

2 . The computer-implemented method of claim 1 , wherein the verified network is inaccessible to the first system, the second system, and the plurality of witness systems, and wherein the determination that the required number of affirmative responses has been received, generation of the at least one block, and publication of the at least one block to the distributed ledger occurs exclusively on the verified network.

3 . The computer-implemented method of claim 2 , wherein the notary system is randomly selected from the plurality of notary systems, and wherein the notary system is not a notary system that last published a block to the blockchain network.

4 . The computer-implemented method of claim 2 , wherein the notary system is selected by determining whether the notary system is managing a current number of transactions that is less than a maximum allowable number of transactions.

5 . The computer-implemented method of claim 2 , wherein the notary system is selected by determining that a bid accompanying an acceptance of the notary system is lower than another bid accompanying another acceptance of another notary system of the plurality of notary systems.

6 . The computer-implemented method of claim 1 , wherein the determination of the required number of affirmative responses from a responding witness system of the plurality of witness systems is further based, at least in part, on a sender balance percentage based on the transaction amount and an account balance of the first system, and a receiver balance percentage based on the transaction amount and an account balance of the second system.

7 . The computer-implemented method of claim 1 , wherein the notary request further comprises additional data associated with the second system, bundled with the transaction data by the second system.

8 . The computer-implemented method of claim 7 , wherein the additional data comprises at least one of the following: an account identifier of the second system, a public encryption key of the second system, a starting account balance of the second system, an ending account balance of the second system, or any combination thereof.

9 . The computer-implemented method of claim 8 , wherein each affirmative response received by the notary system further comprises data including at least one of: a key, a timestamp, a transaction amount associated with the transaction data, or any combination thereof.

10 . The computer-implemented method of claim 1 , wherein the transaction data is cryptographically integrated into the at least one block.

11 . The computer-implemented method of claim 10 , wherein the cryptographic integration is based on at least one hash function.

12 . The computer-implemented method of claim 1 , wherein the notary system receives a fee in response to publishing the at least one block to the blockchain network.

13 . The computer-implemented method of claim 1 , wherein the subset of responsive witness systems receives a fee in response to publishing the at least one block to the blockchain network.

14 . The computer-implemented method of claim 1 , wherein at least one of the plurality of witness systems comprises a smart phone.

15 . A system for authorizing transactions in a decentralized blockchain network comprising a plurality of notary systems configured to exclusively host and maintain a distributed ledger and a first system, a second system, and a plurality of witness systems, wherein the first system is a sending system for a transaction, wherein the second system is a receiving system for the transaction, and wherein the first system, the second system, and the plurality of witness systems can neither host nor maintain the distributed ledger, wherein the first system is configured to send transaction data associated with the transaction to the second system, wherein the transaction data comprises a transaction amount and a public encryption key that corresponds to a private encryption key that is exclusively maintained by the first system, and wherein the second system generates a notary request comprising the transaction data, wherein a notary system of the plurality of notary systems comprises at least one processor configured to:

accept a notary request from a second system, the notary request comprising the transaction data received from the first system;

transmit at least a portion of the transaction data to the plurality of witness systems;

determine a required number of affirmative responses from a responding witness system of the plurality of witness systems;

determine that the required number of affirmative responses has been received, wherein each affirmative response confirms that the public key was approved by the first system;

generate at least one block at least partially based on the transaction data, in response to determining that the required number of responses from each of the subset of responsive witness systems is received; and

publish the at least one block to the blockchain network.

16 . The system of claim 15 , wherein the transaction data further comprises at least one of the following: data associated with an account identifier of the first system; a public encryption key of the first system; a starting account balance of the first system; an ending account balance of the first system; a transaction amount; an account identifier of the second system; a public encryption key of the second system; a starting account balance of the second system; an ending account balance of the second system; or any combination thereof.

Assignments (1)
ASSIGNMENT OF ASSIGNOR'S INTEREST Recorded Oct 15, 2025
From: SURDAK, CHRISTOPHER WALTER
To: RELEAF FINANCIAL, INCORPORATED
Reel/Frame 072577/0029 →
Continuity (2)
Provisional Application 62630727 · Feb 14, 2018
Related Publication 20190251527A1 · Aug 15, 2019
References Cited (26)
US 6470448B1 · Kuroda · 2002 [cited by examiner]
US 20170116608A1 · Forzley · 2017 [cited by examiner]
US 20170301047A1 · Brown · 2017 [cited by examiner]
US 20170323392A1 · Kasper · 2017 [cited by examiner]
US 20170352012A1 · Hearn · 2017 [cited by examiner]
US 20180025435A1 · Karame · 2018 [cited by examiner]
US 20180097779A1 · Karame · 2018 [cited by examiner]
US 20180109541A1 · Gleichauf · 2018 [cited by examiner]
US 20180114218A1 · Konik · 2018 [cited by examiner]
US 20180337769A1 · Gleichauf · 2018 [cited by examiner]
US 20180337882A1 · Li · 2018 [cited by examiner]
US 20190102163A1 · Witherspoon · 2019 [cited by examiner]
US 20190130394A1 · Stollman · 2019 [cited by examiner]
US 20190251007A1 · Mac Brough · 2019 [cited by examiner]
US 20190251199A1 · Klianev · 2019 [cited by examiner]
US 20190253240A1 · Treat · 2019 [cited by examiner]
US 20200242593A1 · Deshpande · 2020 [cited by examiner]
US 20200242602A1 · Jiang · 2020 [cited by examiner]
WO WO2018089815A1 · 2018 [cited by examiner]
WO WO2019232789A1 · 2019 [cited by examiner]
Armknecht, F. et al. Ripple Overview and Outlook. TRUST 2015, LNCS 9229, pp. 163-180, 2015. M. Conti et al. (Eds.) Springer International Publishing Switzerland 2015. (Year: 2015). [cited by examiner]
Gruber, Damian & Li, Wenting & Karame, Ghassan. (2018). Unifying Lightweight Blockchain Client Implementations. available via https://www.researchgate.net/publication/326833126_Unifying_Lightweight_Blockchain_Client_Imp… [cited by examiner]
K. Li, H. Li, H. Hou, K. Li and Y. Chen, “Proof of Vote: A High-Performance Consensus Protocol Based on Vote Mechanism & Consortium Blockchain,” 2017 IEEE 19th International Conference on High Performance Computing and … [cited by examiner]
C. Decker and R. Wattenhofer, “Information propagation in the Bitcoin network,” IEEE P2P 2013 Proceedings, Trento, Italy, 2013, pp. 1-10, doi: 10.1109/P2P.2013.6688704. (Year: 2013). [cited by examiner]
Li et al., “Proof of Vote: A High-Performance Consensus Protocol Based on Vote Mechanism& Consortium Blockchain,” 2017 IEEE 19th International Conference on High Performance Computing and Communications, Bangkok, Thaila… [cited by examiner]
Antonopoulos, Andreas, “Mastering Bitcoin: Unlocking Digital Crypto-Currencies,” O'Reilly Media, Inc., all pages. (Year: 2014). [cited by examiner]