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 . This Office Action is in response to the Applicant’s Amendment filed June 12, 2025. Claims 1-2, 4-9, 11-15, 17-18, 20, and 22-26 are pending and under examination in this case. Claims 3, 10, 16, 19, and 21 were previously canceled. We note no amendments to the claims.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments, see REMARKS, filed June 12, 2025, with respect to the 35 U.S.C. 112, first paragraph, rejection of claim 12, as currently amended, have been fully considered and are persuasive. The 35 U.S.C. 112, first paragraph, rejection of claim 12, as currently amended, has been withdrawn.
Applicant's further arguments filed June 12, 2025, have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
Applicant argues, regarding the claims as currently amended, that the claims recite statutory subject matter.
Examiner respectfully disagrees.
Specifically, Applicant argues that no abstract idea has been identified, and that the claims do not recite an abstract idea.
Examiner respectfully disagrees.
In the instant case, the claims are directed to depositing money (cryptocurrency) payment corresponding to a withholding amount withheld from a wage payment to group members or depositing money into members account from their paychecks and use the funds later when members have a claim (i.e., medical claim, insurance claim, car repair, etc.) as part of system of commerce, which is considered an abstract idea.
Applicant further argues that, under 2A, Prong 2, that even assuming the claims recite an abstract idea (which Applicant does not concede), the claims recite patent-eligible subject matter at least because the alleged abstract idea is integrated into a practical application under Step 2A, Prong 2. See, e.g., 2019 Revised Guidance; see also 2019 Update at Fig. 2 and pp. 10-12. Applicant further argues that for example, Applicant's claims “reflect an improvement in the functioning of a computer, or an improvement to another technology or technical field”.
Examiner respectfully disagrees.
We find that, in the instant case, the claims are not integrated into a practical application because the use of computer or technology merely serves as a tool to implement the abstract idea. The technology here only automates the abstract idea of depositing money (cryptocurrency) or payment corresponding to a withholding amount withheld from a wage payment to group members or depositing money into members account from their paychecks and use the funds later when members have a claim (i.e. medical claim, insurance claim, car repair, etc.). The other part of claim 1 refers only to an approved benefit claim for the group member, where there is an authorization for the member to receive a benefit claim payment of a certain amount. This is nothing more than the member requesting funds from the system to pay a claim (for example, funds to pay for a medical bill/medical claim). The members deposit money into this fund from their paychecks and use the funds later when they have a claim (i.e., medical claim, insurance claim, car repair, etc.). The last limitation of claim 1 deals with communicating an instruction to an application on the user device, instructing the user device to sign a transaction request. The rest of that limitation recites actions completed by other devices outside the scope of the claimed device.
Considering all of the limitations of claim 1, it does not appear to be an improvement to technology or technical field. The claims do not involve improvements to the functioning of a computer, or to any other technology or technical field (MPEP 2106.05(a)), the claims do not apply or use the abstract idea to effect a particular treatment or prophylaxis for a disease or medical condition (Vanda Memo), the claims do not apply the abstract idea with, or by use of, a particular machine (MPEP 2106.05(b)), the claims do not effect a transformation or reduction of a particular article to a different state or thing (MPEP 2106.05(c)), and the claims do not apply or use the abstract idea in some other meaningful way beyond generally linking the use of the abstract idea to a particular technological environment, such that the claim as a whole is more than a drafting effort designed to monopolize the exception (MPEP 2106.05(e) and Vanda Memo).
Applicant argues, regarding claims 1 and 22, that nothing in the cited references, teaches, discloses, or suggests, the first private key being hidden at a user interface level of the user device to restrict an ability of the first group member to transfer funds from the first cryptocurrency address of the first group member.
Examiner respectfully disagrees.
Note that, while useful, the said recitation (“to restrict . . . member”) constitutes intended use, and therefore does not serve to distinguish from the prior art. MPEP 2103 I C
Applicant argues, regarding claims 1 and 22, that nothing in the cited references, teaches, discloses, or suggests, communicating . . . a claim award notification to a computer-implemented hub, . . . ; and communicating, . . . an instruction to an application stored on each user device.
Examiner respectfully disagrees.
Attention is directed to Lalani at, e.g., col. 10, lines 1-14, reciting that “if the number of votes to validate a claim exceeds a predetermined amount or proportion of the jury box votes 117, the claim is validated and the claimant is awarded the claim payout 121.”
Applicant further argues regarding claims 1 and 22, as currently amended, that Lalani does not teach or disclose receiving an approved benefit claim request for a requesting group member of the plurality of group members, the approved benefit claim request authorizing the requesting group member to receive a benefit claim payment of a total benefit award amount, the benefit claim payment to be crowdfunded using funds from the respective first cryptocurrency addresses of the group members of the plurality of group members.
Examiner respectfully disagrees.
Attention is directed to Lalani at, e.g., claim 1, disclosing receiving a claim request for a claim payout from a claimant participating in the risk-sharing pool, said claimant being a member of the risk-sharing pool and having experienced a loss; receiving information from the claimant corresponding with the claim; responsive to the predetermined portion of the jury box jurors having voted to validate the claim, paying out recovery to the claimant. See Lalani at Claim 1.
Applicant further argues that Lalani does not teach or disclose that “the benefit claim payment to be crowdfunded using funds from the respective first cryptocurrency addresses of the group members of the plurality of group members”.
Examiner respectfully disagrees.
Note that the said recitation (“to be crowdfunded . . .”) constitutes intended use, and therefore does not serve to distinguish from the prior art. MPEP 2103 I C
Applicant argues, regarding the claims, that nothing in the cited prior art teaches, discloses, or suggests communicating, in response to the approved benefit claim request, an instruction to an application stored on each user device, the instruction to cause the application to automatically sign, in response to the instruction, a transaction request using the first private key stored on the user device to automatically initiate a transfer of a partial benefit claim payment from the first cryptocurrency address of the group member associated with the user device to the computer-implemented hub for depositing to a second cryptocurrency address associated with the requesting group member according to a ruleset enforced by the computer-implemented hub in accordance with the configuration information and the claim award notification, such that a sum of the partial benefit claim payments fund some or all of the total benefit award amount of the benefit claim payment.
Examiner respectfully disagrees.
Attention is directed to Shamai at par 10, reciting “[0012] Code instructions to transmit one or more transactions to transfer a predefined overall value of cryptocurrency from an account associated with the limited access cryptocurrency wallet to the one or more provisional accounts. The one or more transactions are recorded in a blockchain maintained by a plurality of networked computing nodes. [0013] Code instructions to generate a plurality of signed transactions for transferring a plurality of predefined partial values of cryptocurrency from the one or more provisional accounts to one or more receiving accounts associated with the respective one or more recipients.”
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, 4-9, 11-15, 17-18, 20, and 22-26, are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 101 because the claimed invention is directed to non-statutory subject matter.
Regarding claims 1-2, 4-9, 11-15, 17-18, 20, and 22-26–
Claims 1-2, 4-9, 11-15, 17-18, 20, and 22-26 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 101 because the claimed invention is directed to an abstract idea without significantly more.
In the instant case, claims 1-2, 4-9, 11, and 25 are directed to a system, while claims 12-15, 17-18, 20, and 26 are directed to a nontransitory computer-readable medium, and claims 22-24 are directed to a method. Therefore, these claims fall within the four statutory categories of invention.
The claims recite depositing cryptocurrency payment corresponding to a withholding amount withheld from a wage payment to group members. Specifically, the claims 1 and 12 recite “depositing cryptocurrency payment corresponding to a withholding amount withheld from a wage payment to group members, receiving approved benefits and communicating transfer of the approved benefits to each member of the group. These steps constitutes the abstract idea of organizing human activity which falls under the commercial or legal interactions (including agreements in the form of contracts; legal obligations; advertising, marketing or sales in prong one of step 2A of the Alice/Mayo test (See MPEP 2106). Accordingly, the claims recite an abstract idea (See pages 7, 10, Alice Corporation Pty. Ltd. v. CLS Bank International, et al., US Supreme Court, No. 13-298, June 19, 2014; MPEP 2106).
This judicial exception is not integrated into a practical application because, when analyzed under prong two of step 2A of the Alice/Mayo test (See MPEP 2106), the additional elements of the claim such as “one or more processors”, “computer-implemented hub”, “user device”, merely uses a computer as a tool to perform the abstract idea. The use of “one or more processors”, “computer-implemented hub”, “user device”, does no more than generally link the abstract idea to a particular field of use, the use of “one or more processors”, “computer-implemented hub”, “user device”, do not improve the functioning or performance of the processor/computer and the use of a processor/computer as a tool to implement the abstract idea does not integrate the abstract idea into a practical application because it requires no more than a computer performing functions that correspond to acts required to carry out the abstract idea. Accordingly, the additional elements do not impose any meaningful limits on practicing the abstract idea, and the claims are directed to an abstract idea.
The claims do not include additional elements that are sufficient to amount to significantly more than the judicial exception because, when analyzed under step 2B of the Alice/Mayo test (See MPEP 2106), the additional elements of one or processors”, “computer-implemented hub”, “user device”, do not amount to significantly more than the abstract idea. As discussed above, taking the claim elements separately, the use of “one or more processors”, “computer-implemented hub”, “user device”, does not improve the functioning or performance of the processor/computer and the use of a processor/computer does no more than use a processor/computer to implement the abstract idea.
Viewed as a whole, the combination of elements recited in the claims merely recites the concept of “depositing cryptocurrency payment corresponding to a withholding amount withheld from a wage payment to group members” using a computer. Therefore, the use of these additional elements does no more than employ the computer as a tool to automate and/or implement the abstract idea. The use of a computer or processor to merely automate and/or implement the abstract idea cannot provide significantly more than the abstract idea itself (MPEP 2106.05(1)(A)(f) & (h)). Therefore, the claim is not patent eligible.
Dependent claims 2, 4-11, 14-15, 17-20 and 23-26 further recite characteristics of data or continue to perform similar actions on data to perform the abstract idea. The dependent claims do not include additional elements that integrate the abstract idea into a practical application or that provide significantly more than the abstract idea. Dependent claims 2, 4-11, 14-15, 17-20 and 23-26 merely extend the abstract idea of claims 1, 12 and 22 by describing the use of computer device or processor to “depositing cryptocurrency payment corresponding to a withholding amount withheld from a wage payment to group members, receiving approved benefits claim request.... and communicating transfer of the approved benefits to each member of the group......... "and only serve to add additional layers of abstraction to the abstract idea of claims 1, 12, and 22. Therefore, the dependent claims are also not patent eligible.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 103 which forms the basis for all obviousness rejections set forth in this Office action:
A patent for a claimed invention may not be obtained, notwithstanding that the claimed invention is not identically disclosed as set forth in section 102, if the differences between the claimed invention and the prior art are such that the claimed invention as a whole would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which the claimed invention pertains. Patentability shall not be negated by the manner in which the invention was made.
Claims 1-2, 4-9, 11 and 22-25, are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Wright et al (US 2019/0050832) in view of Lalani (US 10,515,418) and further in view of Shamai et al (US 2022/0051240).
Regarding claims 1 and 22 -
Wright discloses a system, comprising: one or more processors; and a non-transitory computer-readable medium storing instructions that, when executed by the one or more processors, cause the one or more processors to perform operations comprising:
communicating, to a computer-implemented hub comprising a self-executing agreement implemented in a computer-implemented distributed ledger system, configuration information, the configuration information comprising, for each group member of a plurality of group members of a group, a first public key of a first public-private key pair for a first cryptocurrency address for the group member (par 28, “The method may further comprise a first node master public key associated with the first node, wherein the first node master public key forms a cryptographic pair with a first node master private key”, also par 137);
depositing, for each group member of the plurality of group members, a first cryptocurrency payment to the first cryptocurrency address for the group member, the first cryptocurrency payment corresponding to a withholding amount withheld from a wage payment to the group member, each group member of the plurality of group members being associated with a respective user device storing a first private key of the first public-private key pair for the first cryptocurrency address for the group member to restrict an ability of each group member to transfer funds from the first cryptocurrency address of the group member (see fig. 3, which discloses “sending over a communication network a first data output to a peer to peer distributed ledger based on an indication of the first transfer from the first node to the second node and the first output script, wherein the first output script is associated with the first quantity of cryptocurrency”);
Wright does not specifically disclose receiving an approved benefit claim request for a requesting group member of the plurality of group members, the approved benefit claim request authorizing the requesting group member to receive a benefit claim payment of a total benefit award amount, the benefit claim payment to be crowdfunded using funds from the respective first cryptocurrency addresses of the group members of the plurality of group members;
communicating, in response to the approved benefit claim request, a claim award notification to the computer-implemented hub the claim award notification configured to configure the self-executing agreement to process the benefit claim payment, the claim award notification being a message that is digitally signed according to a private key that authorizes configuration of the computer implemented hub; and communicating, in response to the approved benefit claim request, an instruction to an application stored on each user device, the instruction to cause the application to automatically sign, in response to the instruction, a transaction request using the first private key stored on the user device to automatically initiate a transfer of a partial benefit claim payment from the first cryptocurrency address of the group member associated with the user device to the computer-implemented hub for depositing to a second cryptocurrency address associated with the requesting group member for the group member associated with the user device to partially crowdfund the benefit claim payment, according to a ruleset enforced by the computer-implemented hub in accordance with the configuration information and the claim award notification, such that a sum of the partial benefit claim payments fund some or all of the total benefit award amount of the benefit claim payment.
However, Lalani, in analogous art discloses receiving an approved benefit claim request for a requesting group member of the plurality of group members, the approved benefit claim request authorizing the requesting group member to receive a benefit claim payment of a total benefit award amount, the benefit claim payment to be crowdfunded using funds from the respective first cryptocurrency addresses of the group members of the plurality of group members (see claim 1, which discloses receiving a claim request for a claim payout from a claimant participating in the discloses receiving a g risk-sharing pool, said claimant being a member of the risk-sharing pool and having experienced a loss; receiving information from the claimant corresponding with the claim;... responsive to the predetermined portion of the jury box jurors having voted to validate the claim; paying out recovery to the claimant;..... ”).
Shamai discloses, in analogous art and as Wright combined with Lalani does not, communicating, in response to the approved benefit claim request, an instruction to an application stored on each user device, the instruction to cause the application to automatically sign, in response to the instruction, a transaction request using the first private key stored on the user device to automatically initiate a transfer of a partial benefit claim payment from the first cryptocurrency address of the group member associated with the user device to the computer-implemented hub for depositing to a second cryptocurrency address associated with the requesting group member according to a ruleset enforced by the computer-implemented hub in accordance with the configuration information and the claim award notification, such that a sum of the partial benefit claim payments fund some or all of the total benefit award amount of the benefit claim payment (0010, which discloses “[0012] Code instructions to transmit one or more transactions to transfer a predefined overall value of cryptocurrency from an account associated with the limited access cryptocurrency wallet to the one or more provisional accounts. The one or more transactions are recorded in a blockchain maintained by a plurality of networked computing nodes. [0013] Code instructions to generate a plurality of signed transactions for transferring a plurality of predefined partial values of cryptocurrency from the one or more provisional accounts to one or more receiving accounts associated with the respective one or more recipients.”)
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at time of applicant’s invention to modify the system of Wright and incorporate a system further comprising: receiving an approved benefit claim request for a requesting group member of the plurality of group members, the approved benefit claim request authorizing the requesting group member to receive a benefit claim payment of a total benefit award amount; communicating, in response to the approved benefit claim request, a claim award notification to the computer-implemented hub, the claim award notification being a message that is digitally signed according to a private key that authorizes configuration of the computer implemented hub and communicating, in response to the approved benefit claim request, an instruction to an application stored on each user device, the instruction to cause the application to automatically sign, in response to the instruction, a transaction request using the first private key stored on the user device to automatically initiate a transfer of a partial benefit claim payment from the first cryptocurrency address of the group member associated with the user device to the computer-implemented hub for depositing to a second cryptocurrency address associated with the requesting group member for the group member associated with the user device to partially crowdfund the benefit claim payment, according to a ruleset enforced by the computer-implemented hub in accordance with the configuration information and the claim award notification, such that a sum of the partial benefit claim payments fund some or all of the total benefit award amount of the benefit claim payment as disclosed by Lalani and Shamai in order to facilitate distribution of benefit claims and enhance security of the transaction.
Regarding claim 2 –
Wright further discloses the system, wherein the operations comprise depositing the first cryptocurrency payment to the first cryptocurrency address at a plurality of instances, the plurality of instances corresponding the pay periods that occur at substantially regular intervals (Wright par 0102, 0108)
Regarding claim 4 –
Wright discloses the system, wherein the configuration information comprises information indicating the group members of the plurality of group members (see fig. 2, employees); and the operations comprises signing a message that includes the configuration information using first management private key that allows the computer-implemented hub to be configured using the configuration information of the message (see fig. 3).
Regarding claim 5 –
Wright discloses the system, wherein the instruction communicated to the application stored on each user device comprises: a benefit claim identifier ( par 7; 107); and
a proposed apportioned benefit award amount for the benefit claim request, as approved (par 107).
Regarding claim 6 –
Wright discloses the system, wherein the operations further comprise communicating, in response to the approval of the benefit claim request, a claim award notification to the computer-implemented hub, the claim award notification comprising: the benefit claim identifier (par 107); an indication of the requesting group member as a benefit award recipient (par 106; 128); and an indication of the total benefit award amount of the benefit claim payment for the benefit claim request, as approved (par 102; 174).
Regarding claims 7 and 24 –
Wright discloses the system, wherein the operations further comprise receiving, following payment in a fiat currency of the total benefit award to the requesting group member, a reimbursement notification indicating deposit of cryptocurrency from the second cryptocurrency address of the requesting group member to a reimbursement cryptocurrency address to at least partially reimburse an entity for payment in the flat currency of the total benefit award to the requesting group member (par 135; 179; 189).
Regarding claim 8 –
Wright discloses the system, wherein the entity is an employer of the plurality of group members (par 26, 91).
Regarding claim 9 –
Wright discloses the system, wherein the operations further comprise receiving, following payment in a fiat currency of the total benefit award amount to the requesting group member, a confirmation notification from the user device of the requesting group member confirming that the requesting group member received the payment in the fiat currency of the total benefit award amount (par 135; 179; 189).
Regarding claim 11 –
Wright discloses the system, wherein the benefit claim request is a request for: paid sick leave (par 2); health benefits (par 2; 91); or workers compensation (par 2; 91).
Regarding claim 23 –
Wright discloses the method, wherein: the method further comprises communicating, by the processing system to the computer-implemented hub, configuration information, the configuration information comprising, for each group member of the group, a first public key of a first public-private key pair for the first cryptocurrency address for the group member, the first public-private key pair for the first cryptocurrency address for the group member comprising the first public key and the first private key for the first cryptocurrency address for the group member (par 15; 29; 52); and
communicating, by the processing system to the computer-implemented hub, the configuration information comprises signing a message that comprises the configuration information using a first management private key that allows the computer-implemented hub to be configured using the configuration information of the message (par 86; 188).
Regarding claim 25 –
Wright further discloses the system, wherein each respective user device of the group members of the plurality of group members stores a plurality of private keys that comprise; the first private key for the first cryptocurrency address for the group member, the first cryptocurrency address being specific to the group member and for storing an accumulation, over time, of the withholding amount withheld from wage payments to the group member (par 52; 96; 103);
a second private key for a second cryptocurrency address for the group member, the second cryptocurrency address for storing a benefit claim payment to the group member (par 52; 96; 103); and
a third private key for a third cryptocurrency address for the group member, the third cryptocurrency address for storing a withdrawal of all cryptocurrency from the first cryptocurrency address of the group member (par 52; 96; 103).
Claims 12-15 and 17-19, /are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Wright et al ( US 2019/0050832) in view of Shamai et al (US. 2022/0051240).
Regarding claim 12 –
Wright discloses a non-transitory computer-readable medium storing instructions that, when executed by one or more processors, cause the one or more processors to perform operations comprising: receiving, by a user device associated with a first group member of a plurality of group members of a group, an instruction from a device associated with a trusted intermediary to transfer a first cryptocurrency payment from a first cryptocurrency address to a benefit cryptocurrency address of a benefit award recipient (see fig. 3, which discloses that “receiving a first request to transfer a first quantity of cryptocurrency associated with the first transfer from the first node to the second node. ”),
the instruction associated with an approval of a benefit claim request of the benefit award recipient, the first cryptocurrency address configured for storing first cryptocurrency funds for funding a benefit award associated with a benefit claim (see fig. 3, which discloses that “receiving a first request to transfer a first quantity of cryptocurrency associated with the first transfer from the first node to the second node.”), the first cryptocurrency address associated with a first private key stored on a user device of the first group member the first private key being hidden at a user interface level of the user device (0028, which discloses that “The method may further comprise a first node master public key associated with the first node, wherein the first node master public key forms a cryptographic pair with a first node master private key.”); and
initiating, by the user device associated with the first group member automatically in response to receiving the instruction, the transfer, via a computer-implemented hub, of the first cryptocurrency payment from the first cryptocurrency address to the benefit cryptocurrency address of the benefit award recipient (see fig. 3, which discloses “sending over a communication network a first data output to a peer to peer distributed ledger based on an indication of the first transfer from the first node to the second node and the first output script, wherein the first output script is associated with the first quantity of cryptocurrency”).
Wright does not specifically disclose the transfer of the first cryptocurrency payment being signed according to the first private key with which the first cryptocurrency address is associated, wherein a combination of the instruction received from the device associated with the trusted intermediary and the first private key stored on the user device of the first group member provide an ability to initiate the transfer, via a computer-implemented hub, of the first cryptocurrency payment from the first cryptocurrency address to the benefit cryptocurrency address of the benefit award recipient due at least in part to the private key being hidden at a user interface level of the user device and the device associated with the trusted intermediary lacking access to the first private key, the computer-implemented hub comprising a self- executing agreement implemented by a distributed ledger system, the distributed ledger system comprising a plurality of decentralized processing nodes each configured to execute the self- executing agreement and that operate according to a consensus mechanism, the self-executing agreement comprising computer instructions configured to, when executed by a processing node, execute the transfer according to one or more rules.
Wright however discloses at fig. 3, which discloses sending over a communication network a first data output to a peer to peer distributed ledger based on an indication of the first transfer from the first node to the second node and the first output script, wherein the first output script is associated with the first quantity of cryptocurrency”; 0084, which discloses that “These public keys may be indicative of, and associated with, the sender and recipient of the cryptocurrency. A script can be considered as a list of instructions recorded with each transaction record on the Blockchain that describes how a user may gain access to the cryptocurrency specified in the transaction record ”.
Shamai discloses the non-transitory computer-readable medium storing instructions that, when executed by one or more processors, cause the one or more processors to perform operations comprising: the transfer of the first cryptocurrency payment being signed according to the first private key with which the first cryptocurrency address is associated, the computer-implemented hub comprising a self- executing agreement implemented by a distributed ledger system, the distributed ledger system comprising a plurality of decentralized processing nodes each configured to execute the self- executing agreement and that operate according to a consensus mechanism, the self-executing agreement comprising computer instructions configured to, when executed by a processing node, execute the transfer according to one or more rules (par 10, which discloses “[0012] Code instructions to transmit one or more transactions to transfer a predefined overall value of cryptocurrency from an account associated with the limited access cryptocurrency wallet to the one or more provisional accounts. The one or more transactions are recorded in a blockchain maintained by a plurality of networked computing nodes. [0013] Code instructions to generate a plurality of signed transactions for transferring a plurality of predefined partial values of cryptocurrency from the one or more provisional accounts to one or more receiving accounts associated with the respective one or more recipients”);
wherein a combination of the instruction received from the device associated with the trusted intermediary and the first private key stored on the user device of the first group member provide an ability to initiate the transfer, via a computer-implemented hub, of the first cryptocurrency payment from the first cryptocurrency address to the benefit cryptocurrency address of the benefit award recipient due at least in part to the private key being hidden at a user interface level of the user device and the device associated with the trusted intermediary lacking access to the first private key (“par 10, which discloses “[0012] Code instructions to transmit one or more transactions to transfer a predefined overall value of cryptocurrency from an account associated with the limited access cryptocurrency wallet to the one or more provisional accounts. The one or more transactions are recorded in a blockchain maintained by a plurality of networked computing nodes. [0013] Code instructions to generate a plurality of signed transactions for transferring a plurality of predefined partial values of cryptocurrency from the one or more provisional accounts to one or more receiving accounts associated with the respective one or more recipients”).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at time of applicant’s invention to modify the non-transitory computer readable medium of Wright and incorporate a non-transitory computer readable medium further comprising: the transfer of the first cryptocurrency payment being signed according to the first private key with which the first cryptocurrency address is associated, the computer-implemented hub comprising a self-executing agreement implemented by a distributed ledger system, the distributed ledger system comprising a plurality of decentralized processing nodes each configured to execute the self- executing agreement and that operate according to a consensus mechanism, the self-executing agreement comprising computer instructions configured to, when executed by a processing node, execute the transfer according to one or more rules as disclosed by Shamai in order to facilitate distribution of benefit claims and enhance security of the transaction.
Regarding claim 13 –
Wright discloses the system, wherein the instruction communicated to the application stored on each user device comprises:
a benefit claim identifier (par 7; 107); and
a proposed apportioned benefit award amount for the benefit claim request, as approved (par 107).
Regarding claim 14 –
Wright discloses the non-transitory computer-readable medium, wherein the first cryptocurrency payment from the first cryptocurrency address to the benefit cryptocurrency address of the benefit award recipient via the computer-implemented hub is less than the proposed apportioned benefit award amount for the benefit claim request, as approved (par 102; 174).
Regarding claim 15 –
Wright discloses the non-transitory computer-readable medium, wherein the first cryptocurrency payment is one of a plurality of first cryptocurrency payments made by the plurality of group members, each group member of the plurality of group members associated with a corresponding first cryptocurrency payment, the computer-implemented hub configured to transfer an aggregate of the first cryptocurrency payments to the benefit cryptocurrency address, the aggregate of the first cryptocurrency payments covering at least a portion of a benefit award associated with the approval of the benefit claim request (par 30; 159; 161).
Regarding claim 18 –
Wright discloses the non-transitory computer-readable medium, wherein: the benefit award recipient is the first group member (see fig. 2); and
the operations further comprise:
receiving a payment indication that the first group member received, in a fiat currency, the benefit award paid by entity (par 135; 187); and
initiating, in response to receiving the payment indication, a transfer of a second cryptocurrency payment from the second cryptocurrency address to a reimbursement cryptocurrency address associated with the entity to at least partially reimburse the entity for payment in the fiat currency of the benefit award to the benefit award recipient, the second cryptocurrency address being the benefit cryptocurrency address, the second cryptocurrency address associated with a second private key stored on the user device of the first group member, the transfer of the second cryptocurrency payment being signed according to the second private key with which the second cryptocurrency address is associated (par 28; 86; 188).
Claim 26 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Wright et al (US 2019/0050832) in view of Lalani (US 10,515,418) and further in view of Shamai et al ( US 2022/0051240), and Govindarajan et al (US 2019/0095907).
Wright, in view of Lalani and Shamai teaches as above.
Regarding claim 26 –
Govindarajan discloses wherein the operations comprise:
accessing, in response to the instruction, the first private key for the first cryptocurrency address; (par 44, 51)
determining a current balance associated with the first cryptocurrency address using the first private key; (par 21, 51)
Shamai discloses determining whether the proposed apportioned benefit award amount exceeds the current balance associated with the first cryptocurrency address; (par 21) and
determining, in response to determining that the proposed apportioned benefit award amount exceeds the current balance associated with the first cryptocurrency address, that the first cryptocurrency payment is equal to the current balance associated with the first cryptocurrency address rather than the proposed apportioned benefit award amount. (par 63,68, 92,122-124)
Lalami discloses determining a proposed apportioned benefit award amount for the benefit claim request, as approved. (claim 1)
It would be obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to combine Wright with the key access of Govindarajan with Lalami as well as the partial payments of Shamai in order to obtain a more flexible method of paying claims.
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 nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) 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 CRISTINA OWEN SHERR whose telephone number is (571)272-6711. The examiner can normally be reached 8:30 - 5:30.
Examiner interviews are available via telephone, in-person, and video conferencing using a USPTO supplied web-based collaboration tool. To schedule an interview, applicant is encouraged to use the USPTO Automated Interview Request (AIR) at http://www.uspto.gov/interviewpractice.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, John W Hayes can be reached at 571-272-6708. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300.
Information regarding the status of published or unpublished applications may be obtained from Patent Center. Unpublished application information in Patent Center is available to registered users. To file and manage patent submissions in Patent Center, visit: https://patentcenter.uspto.gov. Visit https://www.uspto.gov/patents/apply/patent-center for more information about Patent Center and https://www.uspto.gov/patents/docx for information about filing in DOCX format. For additional questions, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000.
/Cristina Owen Sherr/Examiner, Art Unit 3697
/JOHN W HAYES/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3697