DETAILED ACTION
Status of the Application
The present application, 15/145,721, was filed on May 3, 2016, and claims priority from US Provisional Applications 62/288,406 and 62/288,411, both filed on Jan. 28, 2016.
The effective filing date is after the AIA date of March 16, 2013, and so the application is being examined under the “first inventor to file” provisions of the AIA .
The domestic benefit claim to US Provisional Application 62/180,442, filed June 16, 2015, was deleted in the Application Data Sheet filed on July 6, 2016.
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 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.
Status of the Application
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and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114.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 12/15/2025 has been entered.
This Non-Final Office Action is in response to Applicant’s communication of 12/15/2025.
Claims 1, 3, 4, 6, 7, and 9-20 are pending, of which claims 1, 18, and 20 are independent.
In the present response, the independent claims 1, 18, and 20 have been amended. Claims 2, 5, and 8 were previously cancelled.
All pending claims have been examined on the merits.
Information Disclosure Statement
The Information Disclosure Statement (IDS) submitted on 12/15/2025 has been considered.
Claim Interpretation
The expressions that include “distributed ledger” (i.e. “a distributed ledger digital asset”, “a distributed ledger digital asset network subsystem”, “a distributed ledger digital asset address”) are interpreted according to paragraph [0020] of the present application’s US 2016/0371771, which provides the following description:
As one example of such a distributed ledger digital asset, a bitcoin (with a lowercase “b”) may be a unit of virtual currency that may depend on a computer protocol called Bitcoin (with a capital “B”) for its distributed global ledger. Bitcoin (the protocol) may not be administered by any central authority. That is, there may be no middleman between the sender and receiver. In fact, there may be no company or agent thereof or even an individual responsible for the administration of the Bitcoin protocol. Bitcoin may thus be referred to as a “decentralized” digital currency or a digital asset from a distributed ledger of a decentralized network.
The examiner has interpreted the expression “distributed ledger digital asset” as corresponding to any currency that is implemented by a computer-based (“digital”) “distributed ledger” protocol, and is not necessarily legal tender.
The expression “fiat money asset” is interpreted according to paragraph [0019] of the present application’s US 2016/0371771, which provides the following description:
a fiat money asset (e.g., as a real currency or real money government currency (e.g., U.S. dollars (“USD”), pesos, etc.)).
Also, paragraph [0038] of the application’s US PG-PUB defines “fiat money asset” as “(e.g., U.S. dollars or pesos)”. The examiner has broadly interpreted the expression “fiat money asset” as corresponding to any government-issued currency that is legal tender (such as U.S. Dollars, Mexican Pesos, or European Union Euros).
The expression “fiat money asset network subsystem” is interpreted according to paragraph [0038] of the present application’s US 2016/0371771, which provides the following description:
a fiat money asset network subsystem 100c associated with the customer client (e.g., credit card payment data)
The expression “fractional reserve banking” in paragraph [0202] of the Hakim reference is interpreted according to the first sentence of the Williams article “Fractional Reserve Banking in Grain”, which defines “Fractional Reserve Banks” as “enterprises being legally liable to pay some substance on demand while regularly having too little on hand to satisfy all their obligations”.
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, 3, 4, 6, 7, and 9-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. §101 because the claimed invention is directed to non-statutory subject matter. 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”. More specifically, the claimed invention is directed to an abstract idea.
In independent claim 1 below, the abstract idea is in italic font, and the technological features are in underlined italic font:
1. (Currently Amended) A method utilizing a system comprising a loan processing service subsystem and a distributed ledger digital asset network subsystem and a decentralized network and a customer client subsystem and a merchant client subsystem and a fiat money asset network subsystem and an internet communications network, the method comprising:
prior to conducting, at the loan processing service subsystem, any transaction with a particular customer client, obtaining, at a distributed ledger digital asset address accessible to the loan processing service subsystem, value of a distributed ledger digital asset from the distributed ledger digital asset network subsystem by updating at least one distributed ledger of the decentralized network, wherein the updating is verifiable by other participants of the decentralized network;
after obtaining the value of the distributed ledger digital asset, receiving, at the loan processing service subsystem, a loan request from the customer client subsystem on behalf of the particular customer client and an internet communications network, wherein the receiving the loan request is a transaction with the particular customer client, and wherein the received loan request is for a product of the merchant client subsystem;
after receiving the loan request, determining, at the loan processing service subsystem, a loan structure for the received loan request based on the product and the particular customer client, wherein the determined loan structure requires at least one loan payoff of the determined loan structure be paid in fiat money, and wherein the determined loan structure comprises information indicative of the particular customer client;
recording the information indicative of the particular customer client in the at least one distributed ledger;
after determining the loan structure, transferring at least a portion of the obtained value of the distributed ledger digital asset from the distributed ledger digital asset address accessible to the loan processing service subsystem to an address of a distributed ledger digital asset wallet of at least one of the merchant client subsystem or the customer client subsystem by updating the at least one distributed ledger without the intervention of any central authority as at least one loan payout based on the determined loan structure;
linking, at the loan processing service subsystem, the recorded information indicative of the particular customer client with the transferred at least a portion of the obtained value of the distributed ledger digital asset; and
after transferring the at least a portion of the obtained value of the distributed ledger digital asset, receiving a fiat money asset at the loan processing service subsystem from at least one of the customer client subsystem or the fiat money asset network subsystem on behalf of the particular customer client as the at least one loan payoff based on the determined loan structure, wherein at least one of the distributed ledger digital asset network subsystem or the customer client subsystem is remote from the loan processing service subsystem.
More specifically, claims 1, 3, 4, 6, 7, and 9-20 recite an abstract idea: “Certain Methods of Organizing Human Activity", specifically “Commercial or Legal Interactions (Including Agreements in the form of Contracts; Legal Obligations; Advertising, Marketing, or Sales Activities or Behaviors; Business Relations)” as discussed in MPEP §2106(a)(2) Parts (I) and (II), and in the 2019 Revised Patent Subject Matter Eligibility Guidance.
The “Commercial or Legal Interactions” elements include:
“after receiving the loan request, determining, … a loan structure for the received loan request based on the product and the particular customer client, wherein the determined loan structure requires at least one loan payoff of the determined loan structure be paid in fiat money, and wherein the determined loan structure comprises information indicative of the particular customer client”
The “additional” structural elements are: “a loan processing service subsystem”, “a distributed ledger digital asset network subsystem”, “a decentralized network”, “a customer client subsystem”, “a merchant client subsystem”, “a fiat money asset network subsystem”, and “an internet communications network”.
The following elements are either data files or data values that are not listed in the preamble of the independent claim 1, and therefore are not “additional” structural elements: “a distributed ledger”, “a distributed ledger digital asset”, “a distributed ledger digital asset address”, and “a distributed ledger digital asset wallet”.
The “additional” extra-solution elements are “obtaining … a distributed ledger digital asset from a distributed ledger digital asset network subsystem”, “updating at least one distributed ledger of a decentralized network”, “receiving … a loan request from a customer client subsystem on behalf of the particular customer client and an internet communications network”, “recording the information indicative of the particular customer client in the at least one distributed ledger”, “transferring at least a portion of the obtained value of the distributed ledger digital asset from the distributed ledger digital asset address … to an address of a distributed ledger digital asset wallet”, and “receiving a fiat money asset at the loan processing service subsystem from at least one of the customer client subsystem or a fiat money asset network subsystem”.
This abstract idea is not integrated into a practical application, because:
The claim recites an abstract idea with additional generic computer elements. The generically recited computer elements (“a loan processing service subsystem”, “a distributed ledger digital asset network subsystem”, “a decentralized network”, “a customer client subsystem”, “a merchant client subsystem”, “a fiat money asset network subsystem”, and “an internet communications network”) do not add a meaningful limitation to the abstract idea, because they amount to simply implementing the abstract idea on a computer. The claim amounts to adding the words "apply it" (or an equivalent) with the abstract idea, or mere instructions to implement an abstract idea on a computer, or merely uses a computer as a tool to perform an abstract idea.
The extra-solution activities do not add a meaningful limitation to the method, as they are insignificant extra-solution activity. These insignificant extra-solution activity activities are:
“obtaining … a distributed ledger digital asset from a distributed ledger digital asset network subsystem”,
“updating at least one distributed ledger of a decentralized network”,
“receiving … a loan request from a customer client subsystem”, “
recording the information indicative of the particular customer client in the at least one distributed ledger”,
“transferring at least a portion of the obtained value of the distributed ledger digital asset from the distributed ledger digital asset address … to an address of a distributed ledger digital asset wallet”, and
“receiving a fiat money asset at the loan processing service subsystem from at least one of the customer client subsystem or a fiat money asset network subsystem”
The combination of the abstract idea with the additional elements (generically recited computer elements), and/or with the extra-solution activities, does not integrate the abstract idea into a practical application.
The claims do not include additional elements that are sufficient to amount to significantly more than the abstract idea, because:
When considering the elements "alone and in combination", they do not add significantly more (also known as an "inventive concept") to the exception, because they amount to simply implementing the abstract idea on a computer. Instead, they merely add the words "apply it" (or an equivalent) with the abstract idea, or mere instructions to implement an abstract idea on a computer, or merely use a computer as a tool to perform an abstract idea.
In regards to the extra solution activities “obtaining … a distributed ledger digital asset from a distributed ledger digital asset network subsystem”, “updating at least one distributed ledger of a decentralized network”, “receiving … a loan request from a customer client subsystem”, “recording the information indicative of the particular customer client in the at least one distributed ledger”, “transferring at least a portion of the obtained value of the distributed ledger digital asset from the distributed ledger digital asset address … to an address of a distributed ledger digital asset wallet”, and “receiving a fiat money asset at the loan processing service subsystem from at least one of the customer client subsystem or a fiat money asset network subsystem”), these are well-understood, routine, conventional computer functions recognized by the court decisions listed in MPEP § 2106.05(d).
More specifically, in regards to the “storing”, “recording”, “transferring”, and “updating” steps, see the court cases Versata Dev. Group, Inc. v. SAP Am., Inc., 793 F.3d 1306, 1334, 115 USPQ2d 1681, 1701 (Fed. Cir. 2015) (storing and retrieving information in memory); and OIP Techs., Inc., v. Amazon.com, Inc., 788 F.3d 1359, 1363, 115 USPQ2d 1090, 1092-93 (Fed. Cir. 2015) (storing and retrieving information in memory).
More specifically, in regards to the “receiving”, “obtaining”, and “communicating” steps, see the court cases OIP Techs., Inc., v. Amazon.com, Inc., 788 F.3d 1359, 1363, 115 USPQ2d 1090, 1093 (Fed. Cir. 2015) (sending messages over a network) and (presenting offers and gathering statistics), OIP Techs., 788 F.3d at 1362-63, 115 USPQ2d at 1092-93; buySAFE, Inc. v. Google, Inc., 765 F.3d 1350, 1355, 112 USPQ2d 1093, 1096 (Fed. Cir. 2014) (computer receives and sends information over a network).
Independent claims 18 and 20 are rejected on the same grounds as independent claim 1, plus also on the grounds that independent claim 18 recites a “communications component”, and independent claim 20 recites a “computer-readable medium”, which are merely additional generic computer components.
All dependent claims are also rejected, because they merely further define the abstract idea.
Claims 3, 6, and 9 recite that “the distributed ledger digital asset network subsystem” is decentralized. This feature that is inherent to “distributed ledger digital assets”.
Claims 4 and 7 merely recite the destination of where “at least a portion of the distributed ledger digital asset” is transmitted to (“to a merchant client subsystem” in claim 4; “to the customer client subsystem” in claim 7). This is merely a designation of the intended recipient of the asset.
Claims 10 and 11 merely recite the value of the “the distributed ledger digital asset” versus the value of the “received fiat money asset” at the time of receiving the fiat money asset (the former is “no more than” the latter in claim 10; the former is “is less than” the latter in claim 11). The market value of “the distributed ledger digital asset” versus the value of the “received fiat money asset” is determined by the market-determined exchange rate. This is not a technological feature.
Claim 12 merely recites “retaining at the loan processing service subsystem the difference between the value of the at least a portion of the distributed ledger digital asset and the value of the received fiat money asset.” The market value of “the distributed ledger digital asset” versus the value of the “received fiat money asset” is determined by the market-determined exchange rate. This is not a technological feature.
Claim 13 merely recites that the receiving of the fiat money asset is initiated “after the obtaining [of the distributed ledger digital asset].” Given that this is how the loan is defined in the independent claims, this dependent claim is redundant to the independent claims.
Claims 14 and 18 merely recite that the transferring comprises “transferring the at least a portion of the distributed ledger digital asset and an identification of the customer client subsystem.” This feature merely sends a customer ID along with the digital asset. This is an abstract idea implemented on a general purpose computer.
Claim 15 merely recites that the receiving of the fiat money asset at the loan processing service subsystem is “from at least the customer client subsystem based on the determined loan structure”. This feature merely recites that the borrow repays the loan as defined in the independent claims. This is an abstract idea implemented on a general purpose computer.
Claims 16 and 17 merely recite the destination of where the “fiat money asset” is received from (“from at least a fiat money asset network subsystem” in claim 16; “partially from each one of the customer client subsystem and a fiat money asset network subsystem” in claim 17). This is merely a designation of what system the borrower uses to repay the loan. This is an abstract idea implemented on a general purpose computer.
RESPONSE TO ARGUMENTS
Re: Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112(f)
The 35 USC § 112(f) interpretations of pending claims 1, 3, 4, 6, 7, and 9-20 of the terms “subsystem” and “component” are withdrawn, because the Examiner has interpreted the “subsystem” and “component” as being hardware.
Re: Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112(a) and (b)
The 35 USC § 112(b) rejections of claims 1, 3, 4, 6, 7, and 9-17 were previously withdrawn, due to the amended expression “a decentralized network” in the independent claims 1, 18, and 20. The amendment clarifies that “a decentralized network” is different from “an internet communications network”.
The 35 USC § 112(a) rejections based on the words “subsystem” and “component” are currently withdrawn, due to the Examiner interpreting the “subsystem” and “component” as hardware.
Re: Double Patenting Rejections
The Examiner previously withdrew the provisionally double patenting rejection of independent claims 1, 18, and 20 in view of claims 1, 2, 19, and 20 of co-pending U.S. Application No. 15/697,799.
The Examiner reviewed the independent claims and found them sufficiently different from the co-pending reference to justify withdrawing the rejection.
Re: Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 101
The 35 USC § 101 rejection of claims 1, 3, 4, 6, 7, and 9-20 have been amended, as necessitated by the amendments to the independent claims.
The amendments to independent claims 1, 18, and 20 are not sufficient to overcome the 35 USC § 101 rejection. The newly added feature (“wherein the updating is verifiable by other participants of the decentralized network;”) merely further defines the abstract idea (using bitcoin for loan payments, and storing loan payment data on a blockchain), and is a well-known feature of the abstract idea (verification of data on stored on a blockchain / distributed ledger).
Re: Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
The 35 USC § 103 rejections of claims 1, 3, 4, 6, 7, and 9-20 were previously withdrawn, in response to Applicant’s amendments to independent claims 1, 18, and 20.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
US 2017/0213287 A1 to Bruno, which claims the effective priority date of 2012-03-06 due to priority claimed from US application 13/412,758. (However, the following paragraphs in Bruno do not appear in the priority application):
(See Bruno, Abstract: “A system for providing debt securities and other securities and commodity trading instruments. In particular, the system may allow for the decentralized issue and purchase of debt securities, reducing or eliminating many of the problems inherent in the centralized issue and purchase of debt securities. Such a system may include one or more decentralized data stores and a business web server operatively coupled to the one or more data stores, the business web server being configured to receive an investor request regarding a debt security instrument, match the investor to a debt security instrument using one or more identifiers, generate a transaction involving a change in the debt security instrument from the request information, recording the change in the decentralized data store, and transmitting a confirmation to the investor. A debt security instrument may be configured to mature automatically and provide an appropriate sum of virtual currency on maturity.”)
(See Bruno, para. [0093]: “In a next step, the solidus bond may be provided in a unique location on the blockchain 620. The blockchain, and by extension the solidus bond provided on the blockchain, may then be confirmed by one or more other users; such a confirmation may make the transaction “official” and unable to be reversed. The hardware device 600 may have a counter of confirmations or may otherwise track the number of confirmations 622; for example, a hardware device 600 may be configured to track confirmations by iterating 1, 2, 3 . . . and so forth. Once the transaction has reached an acceptable number of transactions, the transaction may be considered to be confirmed.”)
(See Bruno, para. [0094]: “In a next step, once an acceptable number of confirmations have been confirmed by the blockchain, this may be indicated on the graphical user interface of the hardware device 600, by, for example, text or graphics. For example, once an acceptable number of confirmations have been received, a green signal may be displayed on the graphical user interface 624.”)
Applicants are invited to contact the Office to schedule an in-person interview to discuss and resolve the issues set forth in this Office Action. Although an interview is not required, the Office believes that an interview can be of use to resolve any issues related to a patent application in an efficient and prompt manner.
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.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications should be directed to Examiner Ayal Sharon, whose telephone number is (571) 272-5614, and fax number is (571) 273-1794. The Examiner can normally be reached from Monday to Friday between 9 AM and 6 PM. If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Christine M Behncke can be reached on (571) 272-8103. The fax 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.
Sincerely,
/Ayal I. Sharon/
Examiner, Art Unit 3695
February 10, 2026