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and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114.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 Oct. 09, 2019 has been entered.
Status of Claims
This office action is in response to the claim amendments filed on December 22, 2025.
Claims 3-9, 11-19, 23-24, and 26 have been canceled.
Claims 1, 2, 10, 20-22, 25, and 27-28 are pending.
Claims 1, 2, 10, 20-22, 25, and 27-28 have been examined.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed on December 22, 2025 have been fully considered, but are not persuasive due to the following reasons:
With respect to Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 101
Applicant argues: With regard to the claims being directed to an "abstract idea" of "transferring currency", Applicant submits that the claims are directed to something much more than merely "transferring currency." The method defined by claim 1 is directed to a specific computer architecture that enforces atomic, cross-rail settlement between two heterogeneous value systems (traditional banking rails and a public blockchain) without custodial wallets, and using a dedicated bank account directly associated with the host computer (e.g., secure storage location). This is not merely "organising human activity; it is a technical solution to the longstanding computer-security problem of escrow hacks and settlement fraud that have plagued such systems. Conventional methods and systems for exchanging assets between two parties in a single transaction generally require a network of corresponding banks or other financial institutions to facilitate the transfer. Such conventional systems generally employ a custodial wallet in which the private keys are held by a third party, namely the banking institution, and as such the third party typically has full control over the funds while the parties involved in the interaction only have to give permission to send or receive payments.
Thus, in prong one of step 2A of the Alice/Mayo test, the presently claimed invention seeks to provide a specific improvement in computer functionality associated with such transactions that provides a new and improved interaction between a buyer, a seller, and a "transaction facilitator or processor", that facilitates cross-rail settlement between different systems in a non-custodial manner. This is not simply an "abstract idea" of "transferring currency," but a unique methodology and system architecture for doing so in an improved and enhanced manner. See Applicant's arguments page 9.
Examiner respectfully disagrees. The reasoning for this rejection is the same as was laid out in the Office Action Final Rejection, dated 06/23/2025 (hereinafter, “Office Action”).
Additionally, under Step 2A: Prong 1, Examiner respectfully notes that claim 1, as amended, is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 101 because the claimed invention is directed to an abstract idea of transferring currency; without significantly more. The series of steps recited in claim 1, as amended, describe the abstract idea of transferring currency, which correspond to “Certain Methods of Organizing Human Activity”: commercial interactions. Furthermore, a host computer (i.e., computer) does not necessarily restrict the claim from reciting an abstract idea.
Moreover, Examiner respectfully notes that the claims are first analyzed in the absence of technology to determine if it recites an abstract idea. The additional limitations of technology are then considered to determine if it restricts the claim from reciting an abstract idea. In this case, and as discussed in the 2024 Guidance Update on Patent Subject Matter Eligibility, it is determined that the additional limitations of technology do not necessarily restrict the claim from reciting an abstract idea. Furthermore, Examiner respectfully notes that the recited features in the limitations: “acknowledging a request received, via a network, from either or both of the first user and the second user to register as an authenticated user of the transaction processor and receiving from the first user and the second user identification data identifying the first user and the second user, said identification data is then transmitted to one or more third parties to verify the identification data supplied by the first user and the second user and upon verification of the information data the first user and the second user are authenticated by the host […] to be authenticated users of the transaction processor and granted access to use the transaction processor; providing an interaction platform comprising a transaction user interface hosted by the transaction processor of the host […] and enabling the authenticated second user to input data in relation to a financial transaction required by the authenticated second user; displaying on a user interface of the interaction platform a listing of the at least one financial transaction required by the authenticated second user as well as any other financial transaction required by any other authenticated users of the transaction processor, the listing of the at least one financial transaction required by the authenticated second user comprising a cryptocurrency payment offered by the authenticated second user of the second computer; obtaining an authenticated second user electronic storage address of the cryptocurrency payment offered by the authenticated second user of the second computer and verifying that the authenticated second user electronic storage address of, the cryptocurrency payment offered by the second user of the second […] is owned by the second user prior to transaction and that the cryptocurrency payment offered by the authenticated second user of the second […] is located at the authenticated second user electronic storage address obtained by the transaction processor; detecting a request by the authenticated first user of the first […] of an interest in accepting the cryptocurrency payment offered by the authenticated second user of the second […]; updating a status of the at least one financial transaction required by the authenticated second user on the listing displayed on the user interface to show that the at least one financial transaction required by the authenticated second user is under request and transmitting notification of the request of interest of the authenticated first user of the first […] in the at least one transaction listed for display on the transaction user interface of the interaction platform offered by the authenticated second user of the second […]; generating a dedicated bank account directly associated with the host computer for the at least one financial transaction and transmitting the location of the dedicated bank account to the authenticated first user to receive an electronic deposit of a fiat currency payment from the authenticated first user of the first […], the fiat currency payment being based on the at least one transaction requested by the authenticated first user; initiating a periodic interrogation of the dedicated bank account by the transaction processor of the host […] over a predetermined time period to detect receipt of the fiat currency payment from the authenticated first user of the first […]; upon detection of the receipt of the fiat currency payment from the authenticated first user of the first computer into the dedicated bank account, downloading an authenticated first user electronic storage address from the authenticated first user's identification data for receiving the cryptocurrency payment from the authenticated second user of the second […] and transmitting the authenticated first user electronic storage address to the authenticated second user for transfer of the cryptocurrency payment, and upon transfer of the cryptocurrency payment by the authenticated second user to the authenticated first user electronic storage address, monitoring a public audit chain associated with the cryptocurrency payment to identify a transaction reference issued by the public audit chain as confirmation of the transfer of the cryptocurrency payment; and upon detecting the transaction reference issued by the public audit chain to confirm that the cryptocurrency payment has been transferred by the authenticated second user into the first user electronic storage address, controlling the dedicated bank account to release the fiat currency payment from the dedicated bank account to the authenticated second user of the second computer” are simply making use of a computer and the computer limitations do not necessarily restrict the claim from reciting an abstract idea as discussed below under Step 2A-Prong 1 of the 35 U.S.C. 101 rejection.
Hence, Examiner has also considered each and every arguments under Step 2A-Prong 1 and concludes that these arguments are not persuasive. For example, under Step 2A-Prong 1, Examiner considers each and every limitation to determine if the claim recites an abstract idea. In this case, it is determined that the claim recites an abstract idea and the additional limitations of a computer (i.e., host computer, first computer and second computer) does not necessarily restrict the claim from reciting an abstract idea. The recited steps, as amended, are abstract in nature as there are no technical/technology improvements as a result of these steps. Thus, the claim recites an abstract idea. Whether the claim integrates the abstract idea into a practical application by providing technical/technology improvements are considered under Step 2A-Prong 2.
Applicant argues that: With regard to prong two of step 2A of the Alice/Mayo test, Applicant respectfully asserts that the claims of the present invention provide a practical, technological implementation of the method via at least four aspects.
1. The claims employ a Bank-API polling engine in the form of the transaction processor of the host computer, that constantly monitors or periodically checks the bank account for said fiat currency payment. And provides a method whereby rather than a passive process, there is an event-driven process employed by the claimed methodology that enables ongoing detection of fiat deposits to initiate the transfer.
2. The claims employ a blockchain listener in the form of the transaction processor receiving a transaction reference from the second user of the second computer and using the transaction reference to retrieve information from a public audit chain associated with the cryptocurrency payment to confirm transfer of the cryptocurrency payment. And functions to actively query the public audit chain to determine the direct transfer of the cryptocurrency payment from the second user to the first user.
3. The claims employ a correlation/atomic-release engine in the form of:
(a) verifying receipt of a the fiat currency payment from the first user of the first computer to the bank account; and
(b) verifying the transfer of the cryptocurrency payment has been made by the second user to the first user; and only when both independent events are true does the processor instruct the transaction processor to disburse the fiat currency payment.
4. The claims employ a wallet-agnostic transport layer as the cryptocurrency payment is performed directly between the wallets of the first user and the second user and never enters a custodial exchange wallet of the transaction processor. Thus, the system architecture of the presently claimed invention eliminates an entire class of hot-wallet exploits.
Examiner respectfully disagrees.
Under Step 2A: Prong II, Examiner respectfully notes that there is no improved technology in simply, a Bank-API polling engine in the form of the transaction processor of the host computer, that constantly monitors or periodically checks the bank account for said fiat currency payment. A blockchain listener in the form of the transaction processor receiving a transaction reference from the second user of the second computer and using the transaction reference to retrieve information from a public audit chain associated with the cryptocurrency payment to confirm transfer of the cryptocurrency payment. Verifying receipt of a fiat currency and verifying the transfer of the cryptocurrency payment. The disclosed invention simply cannot be equated to improvement to technological practices or computers. There is no technical improvement at all. Instead, Applicant recites “acknowledging a request received, via a network, from either or both of the first user and the second user to register as an authenticated user of the transaction processor and receiving from the first user and the second user identification data identifying the first user and the second user, said identification data is then transmitted to one or more third parties to verify the identification data supplied by the first user and the second user and upon verification of the information data the first user and the second user are authenticated by the host computer to be authenticated users of the transaction processor and granted access to use the transaction processor; providing an interaction platform comprising a transaction user interface hosted by the transaction processor of the host computer and enabling the authenticated second user to input data in relation to a financial transaction required by the authenticated second user; displaying on a user interface of the interaction platform a listing of the at least one financial transaction required by the authenticated second user as well as any other financial transaction required by any other authenticated users of the transaction processor, the listing of the at least one financial transaction required by the authenticated second user comprising a cryptocurrency payment offered by the authenticated second user of the second computer; obtaining an authenticated second user electronic storage address of the cryptocurrency payment offered by the authenticated second user of the second computer and verifying that the authenticated second user electronic storage address of, the cryptocurrency payment offered by the second user of the second computer is owned by the second user prior to transaction and that the cryptocurrency payment offered by the authenticated second user of the second computer is located at the authenticated second user electronic storage address obtained by the transaction processor; detecting a request by the authenticated first user of the first computer of an interest in accepting the cryptocurrency payment offered by the authenticated second user of the second computer; updating a status of the at least one financial transaction required by the authenticated second user on the listing displayed on the user interface to show that the at least one financial transaction required by the authenticated second user is under request and transmitting notification of the request of interest of the authenticated first user of the first computer in the at least one transaction listed for display on the transaction user interface of the interaction platform offered by the authenticated second user of the second computer; generating a dedicated bank account directly associated with the host computer for the at least one financial transaction and transmitting the location of the dedicated bank account to the authenticated first user to receive an electronic deposit of a fiat currency payment from the authenticated first user of the first computer, the fiat currency payment being based on the at least one transaction requested by the authenticated first user; initiating a periodic interrogation of the dedicated bank account by the transaction processor of the host computer over a predetermined time period to detect receipt of the fiat currency payment from the authenticated first user of the first computer; upon detection of the receipt of the fiat currency payment from the authenticated first user of the first computer into the dedicated bank account, downloading an authenticated first user electronic storage address from the authenticated first user's identification data for receiving the cryptocurrency payment from the authenticated second user of the second computer and transmitting the authenticated first user electronic storage address to the authenticated second user for transfer of the cryptocurrency payment, and upon transfer of the cryptocurrency payment by the authenticated second user to the authenticated first user electronic storage address, monitoring a public audit chain associated with the cryptocurrency payment to identify a transaction reference issued by the public audit chain as confirmation of the transfer of the cryptocurrency payment; and upon detecting the transaction reference issued by the public audit chain to confirm that the cryptocurrency payment has been transferred by the authenticated second user into the first user electronic storage address, controlling the dedicated bank account to release the fiat currency payment from the dedicated bank account to the authenticated second user of the second computer.” The recited features in the limitations do not result in computer functionality or technical improvement. Examiner respectfully notes that Applicant is simply using a computer to input, process, and output data. The recited features in the limitations does not disclose a technical solution to technical problem, but simply a business solution. Specifically, the recited steps, as amended, are merely managing/processing data/transactions (MPEP 2106.05(d)(II)) and does not result in computer functionality or technical improvement. Thus, Applicant has simply provided a business method practice of processing data (e.g., managing currency transfers data), and no technical solution or improvement has been disclosed.
Moreover, there is no technology/technical improvement as a result of implementing the abstract idea. The recited limitations in the pending claims simply amount to the abstract idea of transferring currency. There is no computer functionality improvement or technology improvement. The claim does not provide a technical solution to a technical problem. If there is an improvement, it is to the abstract idea and not to technology. Additionally, Examiner notes that it is important to keep in mind that an improvement in the judicial exception itself (e.g., commercial interaction) is not an improvement in technology (See, MPEP 2106.05(a)(II)). Thus, the claim does not integrate the abstract idea into a practical application; and these arguments are not persuasive.
Claim 1, as amended, recites steps at a high level of generality, and thus are insignificant extra-solution activity. See MPEP 2106.05(g). In addition, all uses of the recited judicial exceptions require such data gathering and outputting, and, as such, these limitations do not impose any meaningful limits on the claim. These limitations amount to necessary data gathering and output. See MPEP 2106.05. The claim simply makes use of a computer as a tool to apply the abstract idea without transforming the abstract idea into a patent eligible subject matter. Thus, these arguments are not persuasive.
Furthermore, these steps, as amended, are recited as being performed by a computer (i.e., host computer, first computer and second computer). The computer (i.e., host computer, first computer and second computer) are recited at a high level of generality, and are used as a tool to perform the generic computer function of receiving, processing, and outputting data. See MPEP 2106.05(f). Similar to 2024 Guidance Update on Patent Subject Matter Eligibility. Amended claim 1 recites a computer (i.e., host computer, first computer and second computer), which are simply used to perform an abstract idea, as discussed above in Step 2A, Prong 1, such that it amounts to no more than mere instructions to apply the exception using a generic computer. See MPEP 2106.05(f). Specifically, the recitation of a computer (i.e., host computer, first computer and second computer) in the limitations merely indicates a field of use or technological environment in which the judicial exception is performed. The claims, as amended, merely confines the use of the abstract idea to a particular technological environment; and thus, fails to add an inventive concept to the claims. See MPEP 2106.05(h). Even when viewed in combination, these additional elements do not integrate the recited judicial exception into a practical application (Step 2A, Prong Two: NO), and the claim is directed to the judicial exception. Hence, claim 1, as amended, do not integrate the abstract idea into a practical application. Thus, these arguments are not persuasive.
Applicant argues: With regard to step 2B of the Alice/Mayo test, Applicant respectfully submits that the claimed steps are non-conventional and non-generic, and therefore the claim amounts to significantly more than the abstract idea. No routine, conventional system and method for transaction management continuously polled a bank account, continuously monitored a public blockchain, and executed an automatic, conditional fiat release on correlation of those feeds using a dedicated bank account associated with the host computer. This ordered combination is therefore far more than merely "using a computer or processor to automate and/or implement the abstract idea of transferring currency"…
It is simply not possible to perform such a management overseeing role by "pen and paper" as it requires a dedicated bank account (e.g., secure storage location dedicated to the host computer) in addition to interrogating multiple third party systems (first user/second user/host and public audit chain). This is an improvement over existing computer management systems in the manner in which the host computer is able to verify each step of interaction between the buyer and seller to ensure that the seller has something to sell and the buyer has finances to support the purchase, and implemented using a dedicated bank account directly associated with the host computer rather than either of the users. In this regard, we would refer to the Federal Circuit in McRO, Inc. V. Bandai Namco Games America, Inc. which held that claims reciting a specific and ordered combination of rules that enhanced existing technological processes were patentable. Even if the method of the claimed invention were to be theoretically performed by a human using "pen and paper" as suggested by the Examiner, it could not be done in the same secure manner using a dedicated bank account directly related to the host computer and with the same interaction between parties. On this basis, it should not be treated as an abstract idea.
Examiner respectfully disagrees.
Under Step 2B, Examiner respectfully notes that all of Applicant's arguments have been reviewed, and the inventive concept cannot be furnished by a judicial exception. The improvements argued are to the abstract idea and not to technology. The technical limitations are simply utilized as a tool to implement the abstract idea without adding significantly more. Thus, the claim is directed to an abstract idea, and hence these arguments are not persuasive. The presence of a computer does not make the claimed solution necessarily rooted in computer technology. Furthermore, Examiner notes that the courts have determined that processing data (e.g., currency transactions) is well-understood, routine, and conventional functions of a computer when they are claimed in a merely generic manner (see MPEP 2106.05(d)(II)). Thus, the recited combination of steps in claim 1 operate in a well-understood, routine, conventional and generic way. As noted above, the claims do not include additional elements that are sufficient to amount to significantly more than the judicial exception because the additional elements of a computer (i.e., host computer, first computer and second computer) limitations are recited at a high level of generality in that it results in no more than simply applying the abstract idea using generic computer elements. The additional elements when considered separately and as an ordered combination do not amount to add significantly more as these limitations provide nothing more than to simply apply the exception in a generic computer environment.
Applying the 2024 Guidance Update on Patent Subject Matter Eligibility here, and as explained with respect to Step 2A, Prong 2, the additional elements: a computer (i.e., host computer, first computer and second computer), are at best mere instructions to “apply” the abstract idea, which cannot provide an inventive concept. See MPEP 2106.05(f). The additional elements: a computer (i.e., host computer, first computer and second computer), were found to be insignificant extra-solution activity in Step 2A, Prong Two, because they were determined to be insignificant limitations as necessary for data gathering, processing, and outputting. The evaluation of the insignificant extra-solution activity consideration takes into account whether or not the extra-solution activity is well understood, routine, and conventional in the field. See MPEP 2106.05(g). As discussed in Step 2A, Prong Two above, the claims’ limitations are recited at a high level of generality. These elements simply amount to receiving and outputting data and are well-understood, routine, conventional activity. See MPEP 2106.05(d), subsection II. As discussed in Step 2A, Prong Two above, the recitation of a computer/processor to perform recited limitations, as amended, amounts to no more than mere instructions to apply the exception using a generic computer component. Even when considered in combination, these additional elements represent mere instructions to implement an abstract idea or other exception on a computer and insignificant extra-solution activity, which do not provide an inventive concept. (Step 2B: NO).
Hence, Examiner respectfully declines Applicant’s request to withdraw the 35 U.S.C. 101 rejection of claims 1, 2, 10, 20-22, 25, and 27-28.
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, 10, 20-22, 25, and 27-28 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 101 because the claimed invention is directed to an abstract idea of transferring currency without significantly more.
In the instant case, claims 1, 2, 10, 20-22, 25, and 27-28 are directed to a method. Therefore, these claims fall within the four statutory categories of invention. (Step 1: YES).
Claim 1 is directed to a computer-implemented method of facilitating transactions between users using a transaction processor of a host computer, the transaction processor being configured to facilitate at least one transaction between a first user of a first computer and a second user of a second computer, which performs a series of steps: “acknowledging a request received, via a network, from either or both of the first user and the second user to register as an authenticated user of the transaction processor and receiving from the first user and the second user identification data identifying the first user and the second user, said identification data is then transmitted to one or more third parties to verify the identification data supplied by the first user and the second user and upon verification of the information data the first user and the second user are authenticated by the host computer to be authenticated users of the transaction processor and granted access to use the transaction processor; providing an interaction platform comprising a transaction user interface hosted by the transaction processor of the host computer and enabling the authenticated second user to input data in relation to a financial transaction required by the authenticated second user; displaying on a user interface of the interaction platform a listing of the at least one financial transaction required by the authenticated second user as well as any other financial transaction required by any other authenticated users of the transaction processor, the listing of the at least one financial transaction required by the authenticated second user comprising a cryptocurrency payment offered by the authenticated second user of the second computer; obtaining an authenticated second user electronic storage address of the cryptocurrency payment offered by the authenticated second user of the second computer and verifying that the authenticated second user electronic storage address of, the cryptocurrency payment offered by the second user of the second computer is owned by the second user prior to transaction and that the cryptocurrency payment offered by the authenticated second user of the second computer is located at the authenticated second user electronic storage address obtained by the transaction processor; detecting a request by the authenticated first user of the first computer of an interest in accepting the cryptocurrency payment offered by the authenticated second user of the second computer; updating a status of the at least one financial transaction required by the authenticated second user on the listing displayed on the user interface to show that the at least one financial transaction required by the authenticated second user is under request and transmitting notification of the request of interest of the authenticated first user of the first computer in the at least one transaction listed for display on the transaction user interface of the interaction platform offered by the authenticated second user of the second computer; generating a dedicated bank account directly associated with the host computer for the at least one financial transaction and transmitting the location of the dedicated bank account to the authenticated first user to receive an electronic deposit of a fiat currency payment from the authenticated first user of the first computer, the fiat currency payment being based on the at least one transaction requested by the authenticated first user; initiating a periodic interrogation of the dedicated bank account by the transaction processor of the host computer over a predetermined time period to detect receipt of the fiat currency payment from the authenticated first user of the first computer; upon detection of the receipt of the fiat currency payment from the authenticated first user of the first computer into the dedicated bank account, downloading an authenticated first user electronic storage address from the authenticated first user's identification data for receiving the cryptocurrency payment from the authenticated second user of the second computer and transmitting the authenticated first user electronic storage address to the authenticated second user for transfer of the cryptocurrency payment, and upon transfer of the cryptocurrency payment by the authenticated second user to the authenticated first user electronic storage address, monitoring a public audit chain associated with the cryptocurrency payment to identify a transaction reference issued by the public audit chain as confirmation of the transfer of the cryptocurrency payment; and upon detecting the transaction reference issued by the public audit chain to confirm that the cryptocurrency payment has been transferred by the authenticated second user into the first user electronic storage address, controlling the dedicated bank account to release the fiat currency payment from the dedicated bank account to the authenticated second user of the second computer.” These series of steps describe the abstract idea of transferring currency (with the exception of the italicized terms above), which correspond to “Certain Methods of Organizing Human Activity”: commercial interactions. The computer (i.e., host computer, first computer and second computer) do not necessarily restrict the claim from reciting an abstract idea. Thus, claim 1 recites an abstract idea. (Step 2A-Prong 1: YES).
This judicial exception is not integrated into a practical application because the additional elements of claim 1 such as a computer (i.e., host computer, first computer and second computer) are no more than simply applying the abstract idea using generic computer elements. Specifically, the computer (i.e., host computer, first computer and second computer) performs the steps or functions of: “acknowledging a request received, via a network, from either or both of the first user and the second user to register as an authenticated user of the transaction processor and receiving from the first user and the second user identification data identifying the first user and the second user, said identification data is then transmitted to one or more third parties to verify the identification data supplied by the first user and the second user and upon verification of the information data the first user and the second user are authenticated by the host computer to be authenticated users of the transaction processor and granted access to use the transaction processor; providing an interaction platform comprising a transaction user interface hosted by the transaction processor of the host computer and enabling the authenticated second user to input data in relation to a financial transaction required by the authenticated second user; displaying on a user interface of the interaction platform a listing of the at least one financial transaction required by the authenticated second user as well as any other financial transaction required by any other authenticated users of the transaction processor, the listing of the at least one financial transaction required by the authenticated second user comprising a cryptocurrency payment offered by the authenticated second user of the second computer; obtaining an authenticated second user electronic storage address of the cryptocurrency payment offered by the authenticated second user of the second computer and verifying that the authenticated second user electronic storage address of, the cryptocurrency payment offered by the second user of the second computer is owned by the second user prior to transaction and that the cryptocurrency payment offered by the authenticated second user of the second computer is located at the authenticated second user electronic storage address obtained by the transaction processor; detecting a request by the authenticated first user of the first computer of an interest in accepting the cryptocurrency payment offered by the authenticated second user of the second computer; updating a status of the at least one financial transaction required by the authenticated second user on the listing displayed on the user interface to show that the at least one financial transaction required by the authenticated second user is under request and transmitting notification of the request of interest of the authenticated first user of the first computer in the at least one transaction listed for display on the transaction user interface of the interaction platform offered by the authenticated second user of the second computer; generating a dedicated bank account directly associated with the host computer for the at least one financial transaction and transmitting the location of the dedicated bank account to the authenticated first user to receive an electronic deposit of a fiat currency payment from the authenticated first user of the first computer, the fiat currency payment being based on the at least one transaction requested by the authenticated first user; initiating a periodic interrogation of the dedicated bank account by the transaction processor of the host computer over a predetermined time period to detect receipt of the fiat currency payment from the authenticated first user of the first computer; upon detection of the receipt of the fiat currency payment from the authenticated first user of the first computer into the dedicated bank account, downloading an authenticated first user electronic storage address from the authenticated first user's identification data for receiving the cryptocurrency payment from the authenticated second user of the second computer and transmitting the authenticated first user electronic storage address to the authenticated second user for transfer of the cryptocurrency payment, and upon transfer of the cryptocurrency payment by the authenticated second user to the authenticated first user electronic storage address, monitoring a public audit chain associated with the cryptocurrency payment to identify a transaction reference issued by the public audit chain as confirmation of the transfer of the cryptocurrency payment; and upon detecting the transaction reference issued by the public audit chain to confirm that the cryptocurrency payment has been transferred by the authenticated second user into the first user electronic storage address, controlling the dedicated bank account to release the fiat currency payment from the dedicated bank account to the authenticated second user of the second computer.” The additional elements listed above are all recited at a high level of generality and under their broadest reasonable interpretation comprises a generic computing arrangement. The presence of a generic computer arrangement is nothing more than to implement the claimed invention (MPEP 2106.05(f)). Therefore, the recitations of additional elements do not meaningfully apply the abstract idea and hence do not integrate the abstract idea into a practical application. Thus, claim 1 does not integrate the abstract idea into a practical application. (Step 2A-Prong 2: NO).
Claim 1 does not include additional elements that are sufficient to amount to significantly more than the judicial exception because the additional elements of a computer (i.e., host computer, first computer and second computer) limitations are recited at a high level of generality in that it results in no more than simply applying the abstract idea using generic computer elements. The additional elements when considered separately and as an ordered combination do not amount to add significantly more as these limitations provide nothing more than to simply apply the exception in a generic computer environment. Thus, claim 1 is not patent eligible. (Step 2B: NO).
Regarding dependent claims 2, 10, 20-22, 25, and 27-28
Claim 2 recites: The computer-implemented method according to claim 1, wherein the audit chain is a block chain.
Claim 10 recites: wherein transferring, by the transaction processor of the host computer, the cryptocurrency payment offered by the second user of the second computer to the first user of the first computer, comprises the transaction processor of the host computer facilitating transfer of information relating to assignment of an access right of the cryptocurrency payment from the second user of the second computer to the first user of the first computer, wherein the information relating to the assignment of the access right of the cryptocurrency payment includes a public address key.
Claim 20 recites: wherein the transaction processor is configured to carry out the steps of the method according to claim 1.
Claim 21 recites: wherein the transaction reference is in the form of a transaction confirmation reference to a transaction that has been recorded on the audit chain.
Claim 22 recites: wherein the transaction confirmation reference is a transaction hash.
Claim 25 recites: wherein monitoring of the audit chain comprises constant monitoring and/or periodic monitoring.
Claim 27 recites: the dedicated bank account not being associated with the first user or the second user.
Claim 28 recites: the dedicated bank account being a secure storage location that is not directly accessible by the first or second user.
The dependent claims 2, 10, 20-22, 25, and 27-28 have further defined the abstract idea that is present in their respective independent Claim 1; and thus, correspond to “Certain Methods of Organizing Human Activity”: commercial interactions and hence are abstract in nature for the reason presented above.
The dependent claims 2, 10, 20-22, 25, and 27-28 do not include any additional elements that integrate the abstract idea into a practical application or are sufficient to amount to significantly more than the judicial exception when considered both individually and as an ordered combination. Therefore, 2, 10, 20-22, 25, and 27-28 are directed to an abstract idea without significantly more.
Thus, claims 1, 2, 10, 20-22, 25, and 27-28 are not patent-eligible.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(b):
(b) CONCLUSION.—The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph:
The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the applicant regards as his invention.
Claims 1, 2, 10, 20-22, 25, and 27-28 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor, or for pre-AIA the applicant regards as the invention.
Claim 1 recites the limitation: displaying on a user interface of the interaction platform a listing of the at least one financial transaction required by the authenticated second user as well as any other financial transaction required by any other authenticated users of the transaction processor, the listing of the at least one financial transaction required by the authenticated second user comprising a cryptocurrency payment offered by the authenticated second user of the second computer. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
Claim 1 recites the limitation: updating a status of the at least one financial transaction required by the authenticated second user on the listing displayed on the user interface to show that the at least one financial transaction required by the authenticated second user is under request and transmitting notification of the request of interest of the authenticated first user of the first computer in the at least one transaction listed for display on the transaction user interface of the interaction platform offered by the authenticated second user of the second computer.
Claim 1 recites the limitation: generating a dedicated bank account directly associated with the host computer for the at least one financial transaction and transmitting the location of the dedicated bank account to the authenticated first user to receive an electronic deposit of a fiat currency payment from the authenticated first user of the first computer, the fiat currency payment being based on the at least one transaction requested by the authenticated first user.
Allowable Over Prior Art for claims 1, 2, 10, 20-22, 25, and 27-28
Denis Letourneau (US 20160092988 A1) generally discloses, systems and methods for transferring digital assets amongst a network of distributed users without the need to transfer the assets to an external party, such as an escrow agent, are provided. The transferring of assets may be in the form of electronic transactions between pluralities of currencies or assets. Temporary and localized escrow services may be created on a user terminal for safely overseeing the process of transferring digital assets. The trade instructions and execution orders for the transfer of assets may be validated over a de-centralized network of user terminals, such as the user terminals of traders. This type of network allows secure peer-to-peer electronic transactions to occur between distributed and anonymous users or participants, which are assumed to be trustless. In such networks, the transactions may be handled by cryptographic mathematical algorithms and which are known to be identical across all users or participants of the same network.
Castinado et al. (US 20180240112 A1) generally discloses, a system that includes a device with a processor is configured to receive a first set of data elements and to obtain an encryption key from a memory. The processor is further configured to encrypt the first set of data elements using the encryption key, to embed the first set of encrypted data elements within a first block for the block chain, and to generate a first encrypted element map identifying the locations of the first set of encrypted data elements within the first block. The processor is further configured to combine the encryption key with the first encrypted element map to generate a creator tag, to encrypt the creator tag, to embed the creator tag within the first block, and to publish the first block to a block chain.
Song et al. (US 20170330179 A1) generally discloses, a method for issuing authentication information is provided. The method includes steps of: (a) a managing server, if identification information of a specific user is acquired from a user device in response to a request for issuing the authentication information and the identification information is determined to be registered, creating a transaction whose output includes: (i) the specific user's public key and (ii) a hash value of the identification information or its processed value to thereby record or support other device to record it on a blockchain; and (b) the managing server acquiring a transaction ID representing location information of the transaction recorded on the blockchain.
ORTIZ et al. (US 20160210626 A1) generally discloses, systems (100), methods, and machine-executable data structures for the processing of data for the secure creation, administration, manipulation, processing, and storage of electronic data useful in the processing of electronic payment transactions and other secure data processes. Aspects of such systems (100) include trusted platforms (120) by which networked communication devices (110) and merchant systems (130) may registered as trusted entities 110′, 130. Information associated with particular payment means, such as accounts or payment tokens, can be stored on device(s) secure data sets known as virtual or electronic wallets (112), or in the form of secure payment tokens. Common application programming interfaces executed by devices (110) may facilitate push and pull processes between electronic wallets (112) and other secure data stores (136, 120, 160). Users (190) may thereby initiate and complete electronic transactions directly from within applications on trusted devices (110′).
Thomas et al. (US 20160342982 A1) generally discloses, Systems and techniques are provided for a resource transfer system. An instruction to transfer a first quantity of a resource from a first resource pool to a second resource pool may be received. A hold may be placed on a second quantity of the resource in the first resource pool. The held second quantity of the first resource may not be transferred from the first resource pool until the hold is released. Responsive to receiving a message that fulfills a condition on the hold and an instruction to execute the transfer, the hold may be released. A register that is in the first resource pool and is associated with the resource may decremented by the first quantity, and a register that is in the second resource pool and is associated with the resource may be incremented by the first quantity.
However, prior art does not disclose, neither singly nor in combination all of the specific combination of claims limitations which includes:
acknowledging a request received, via a network, from either or both of the first user and the second user to register as an authenticated user of the transaction processor and receiving from the first user and the second user identification data identifying the first user and the second user, said identification data is then transmitted to one or more third parties to verify the identification data supplied by the first user and the second user and upon verification of the information data the first user and the second user are authenticated by the host computer to be authenticated users of the transaction processor and granted access to use the transaction processor;
providing an interaction platform comprising a transaction user interface hosted by the transaction processor of the host computer and enabling the authenticated second user to input data in relation to a financial transaction required by the authenticated second user;
displaying on a user interface of the interaction platform a listing of the at least one financial transaction required by the authenticated second user as well as any other financial transaction required by any other authenticated users of the transaction processor, the listing of the at least one financial transaction required by the authenticated second user comprising a cryptocurrency payment offered by the authenticated second user of the second computer;
obtaining an authenticated second user electronic storage address of the cryptocurrency payment offered by the authenticated second user of the second computer and verifying that the authenticated second user electronic storage address of, the cryptocurrency payment offered by the second user of the second computer is owned by the second user prior to transaction and that the cryptocurrency payment offered by the authenticated second user of the second computer is located at the authenticated second user electronic storage address obtained by the transaction processor;
detecting a request by the authenticated first user of the first computer of an interest in accepting the cryptocurrency payment offered by the authenticated second user of the second computer;
updating a status of the at least one financial transaction required by the authenticated second user on the listing displayed on the user interface to show that the at least one financial transaction required by the authenticated second user is under request and transmitting notification of the request of interest of the authenticated first user of the first computer in the at least one transaction listed for display on the transaction user interface of the interaction platform offered by the authenticated second user of the second computer;
generating a dedicated bank account directly associated with the host computer for the at least one financial transaction and transmitting the location of the dedicated bank account to the authenticated first user to receive an electronic deposit of a fiat currency payment from the authenticated first user of the first computer, the fiat currency payment being based on the at least one transaction requested by the authenticated first user;
initiating a periodic interrogation of the dedicated bank account by the transaction processor of the host computer over a predetermined time period to detect receipt of the fiat currency payment from the authenticated first user of the first computer;
upon detection of the receipt of the fiat currency payment from the authenticated first user of the first computer into the dedicated bank account, downloading an authenticated first user electronic storage address from the authenticated first user's identification data for receiving the cryptocurrency payment from the authenticated second user of the second computer and transmitting the authenticated first user electronic storage address to the authenticated second user for transfer of the cryptocurrency payment, and upon transfer of the cryptocurrency payment by the authenticated second user to the authenticated first user electronic storage address, monitoring a public audit chain associated with the cryptocurrency payment to identify a transaction reference issued by the public audit chain as confirmation of the transfer of the cryptocurrency payment; and
upon detecting the transaction reference issued by the public audit chain to confirm that the cryptocurrency payment has been transferred by the authenticated second user into the first user electronic storage address, controlling the dedicated bank account to release the fiat currency payment from the dedicated bank account to the authenticated second user of the second computer.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to JAHED ALI whose telephone number is (571)270-1085. The examiner can normally be reached 8:00 - 5:00 M-F.
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, Neha Patel can be reached on (571) 270-1492. 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.
/JAHED ALI/
Examiner, Art Unit 3699
/NEHA PATEL/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3699