DETAILED ACTION
Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status
The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
Continued Examination Under 37 CFR 1.114
A request for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, including the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e), was filed in this application after final rejection. Since this application is eligible for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114. Applicant's submission filed on 03/24/2025 has been entered.
Response to Amendment
The following detailed action acknowledges the amendments of the response filed on 03/24/2025. The amendments in the filed response have been entered.
Claims 48-67 have been added.
Claims 1-47 are confirmed to have been cancelled.
Claims 48-67 are pending in the application and the status of the application is currently pending.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments, filed 03/24/2025, with respect to the rejection under 35 USC §101 have been fully considered.
Regarding the rejection under 35 USC 101, the Applicant argues: Claims 21-24, 31,34, 36-39, and 45-47 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 101 as allegedly being directed to an abstract idea without significantly more. Office Action, pp. 12-16.
Claims 21-24, 31,34, 36-39, and 45-47 are cancelled, which renders the rejections to these claims moot. Accordingly, it is respectfully requested that the rejections of claims under 35 U.S.C. § 101 be withdrawn.
In response: The canceled claims are no longer rejected under 35 USC 101. However, a new ground of rejection is introduced for claims 48-67. The results of the test for subject matter eligibility are shown below. Claims 21-24, 31,34, 36-39, and 45-47 are cancelled, thus the rejection under 35 USC 101 has been withdrawn for these claims. However, new claims 48-67 are reviewed under the Guidance for Subject Matter Eligibility and are considered for a rejection under 35 USC 101.
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 48-67 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 101 because the claimed invention is directed to an abstract idea without significantly more.
The analysis of the claims is based on the subject matter eligibility test that is detailed in the 2024 Patent Subject Matter Eligibility (SME) Guidance Update Including Artificial Intelligence (2024 AI SME Update)(July 2024), the 2019 Revision to the SME Guidance (2019 PEG)(January 2019) and the October 2019 SME Guidance Update (October 2019). The current guidance is referenced in the Manual of Patent Examining Procedure (MPEP) sections 2103 through 2106.07.
In Step 1 of the test, the claims were found to be directed to one of the four statutory categories, which is a process. Claims 48-62 are directed to a system, comprising an incentive protocol platform and at least one participant electronic device communicatively coupled to the incentive protocol platform, that executes the steps of the process. Claims 63-67 are directed to a method of steps to execute the process. Therefore, the result of Step 1 is the claims are directed to at least one statutory category.
In Step 2A(1), the claims were found to recite an abstract idea. Independent claims 48 and 63 have similar language, and claim 63 is used for analysis. Claim 63 recites:
obtaining, by at least one participant electronic device, biometric data from a participant, wherein the obtained biometric data is transmitted to an incentive protocol platform as biometric data;
receiving, by an incentive transaction communication module of the incentive protocol platform, the biometric data from the at least one participant electronic device;
generating, by an incentive transaction module of the incentive protocol platform, an incentive unit transaction based on the biometric data by using one or more incentive protocol system rules to determine a type or amount of an incentive unit that is to be distributed for non-transactional behavior of the participant associated with the biometric data;
receiving, by an incentive distribution module of the incentive protocol platform, incentive unit transaction data from the incentive transaction module, and distributing, by an incentive distribution module, the incentive unit to a wallet associated with the participant; and
broadcasting, by the incentive distribution module, the incentive unit transaction data to an incentive protocol network for inclusion in a distributed ledger to confirm the incentive unit transaction including the incentive unit transmitted to the wallet associated with the participant,
wherein the incentive protocol platform further includes a white-label service that is configured to issue white-label tokens on top of a coalition distributed ledger as a stand-alone program, wherein the white-label tokens function as the incentive unit.
The emphasized limitations define elements that are part of the abstract idea. Certain elements are descriptive and non-functional, which can be interpreted to be performed by hand or by a use of a computer. The limitation
generating, by an incentive transaction module of the incentive protocol platform, an incentive unit transaction based on the biometric data by using one or more incentive protocol system rules to determine a type or amount of an incentive unit that is to be distributed for non-transactional behavior of the participant associated with the biometric data
recites the creation of a digital token as a mathematical calculation, where the biometric data are physiological values such as heartbeat, blood pressure and blood sugar levels of the participant, and the calculation of an incentive unit of value is based on the physiological values, a mathematical calculation. The other elements emphasize managing the activities of sales, such as a reward system, support the abstract idea. The concept of a
white-label service that is configured to issue white-label tokens,
as recited in the emphasized limitations is describing a cryptographic process, which is under the concept of the abstract idea of securing transactions. This is further reciting the use of a distributed ledger but is not affecting the ledger to perform a function of the ledger. Thus, these elements are supportive of the abstract idea to perform sales activities.
It is concluded that the emphasized limitations are functions that can be performed as part of sales activities involving the purchase and distribution of incentive tokens, part of an abstract idea in the grouping of Certain Methods of Organizing Human Activity.
The dependent claims 49-62 and 64-67 further support the interpretation of the abstract idea, including elements that are part of the incentive unit that was acquired as part of a transaction. The elements that are functional further recite elements that support the abstract idea. Therefore, the result of Step 2A(1) is the claims recite an abstract idea.
In Step 2A(2), the claims that recite the abstract idea do not integrate the abstract idea into a practical application. The non-emphasized limitations recite the technical elements or the additional elements. The limitations include
at least one participant electronic device; and an incentive protocol platform.
The elements are shown to be used in a transaction, performing sales activities. The participant device including a program to secure physiological biometric data. The incentive protocol platform includes modules to receive the biometric data, calculate the incentive value and transmit to a wallet. The additional elements perform the functions as by generic devices. The elements as recited fail to show an improvement in the technology. The recited distributed ledger is shown as non-functional in reference to the claimed invention, thus the distributed ledger and any cryptographic elements are recited as “extra-solution activity”. The electronic device is recited to receive biometric data, where the Specification and claim 58 define as physiological behavior events, and transmitting them to an incentive protocol platform, functions that are performed by taking measurements on a schedule and sending to a server. Such monitoring devices are not an improvement to a data incentivizing reward program. The claims 48 and 63 do not provide details that show an improvement to the technology and thus are describing the abstract idea implemented by a generic computer system.
The dependent claims 49-62 and 64-67 attempt to generally link the use of the abstract idea to a particular technological environment or field of use. However, the claims do not support the implementation of the abstract idea into a practical application. Therefore, the result of Step 2A(2) is the claims do not integrate the abstract idea into a practical application.
In Step 2B, the claims do not include additional elements that are sufficient to amount to significantly more than the abstract idea. The claims recite an incentive protocol platform; and at least one participant electronic device communicatively coupled to the incentive protocol platform. The electronic device is merely providing numeric data to the incentive protocol platform, values which are calculated as incentives or points in a wallet program. As a whole, the claim is merely showing the functions of a point-based reward system, where the claim does not recite any improvements to the technology. The use of the coalition distributed ledger is recited as “extra solution activity” but not part of the steps of the process and does not improve the technology.
While the additional elements limit the abstract idea to a specific field of technology, there is no improvement to the functions of the recited technology, nor is there an improvement to another technology or technical field. Thus, the additional elements merely recite instructions to execute the abstract idea. Considering the additional elements individually, the claims do not include elements that are sufficient to amount to significantly more than the abstract idea. Considering the additional elements in combination, the steps do not add any meaningful limits on practicing the abstract idea more than the elements analyzed individually and thus do not add significantly more to the claimed invention. Therefore, the result of Step 2B is the claims do not add significantly more to the abstract idea. Claims 48-67 are patent ineligible.
Conclusion
THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a).
A shortened statutory period for reply to this final action is set to expire THREE MONTHS from the mailing date of this action. In the event a first reply is filed within TWO MONTHS of the mailing date of this final action and the advisory action is not mailed until after the end of the THREE-MONTH shortened statutory period, then the shortened statutory period will expire on the date the advisory action is mailed, and any extension fee pursuant to 37 CFR 1.136(a) will be calculated from the mailing date of the advisory action. In no event, however, will the statutory period for reply expire later than SIX MONTHS from the mailing date of this final action.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to EDGAR R. MARTINEZ-HERNANDEZ whose telephone number is (571)270-0658. The examiner can normally be reached M-F from 9:00 am - 5:00 pm.
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 on 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.
/ERM/Examiner, Art Unit 3685
/JOHN W HAYES/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3697
Prosecution Insights