DETAILED ACTION
Status of Claims
This communication is a non-final action on the merits in response to the amendments and arguments filed on October 15, 2025. Claims 1, 9, and 15 were amended. Claims 1-6, 9-17, and 19-20 are currently pending and have been examined.
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and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114.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 October 15, 2025 has been entered.
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 1-6, 9-17, and 19-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 101 because the claimed invention is directed to an abstract idea without significantly more.
Step 1
Claims 1-6 are directed to a process. Claims 9-14 are directed to a machine. Claims 15-17 and 19-20 are directed to an article of manufacture. As such, each claim is directed to a statutory category of invention.
Step 2A Prong 1
The examiner has identified independent Claim 1 as the claim that represents the claimed invention for analysis and is similar to independent Claims 9 and 15.
Independent Claim 1 recites the following abstract ideas: “A method for aggregating user content and presenting the user content upon satisfying one or more conditions , the method comprising: receiving account information from a user, the account information comprising at least identification information corresponding to the user; storing both public and private content uploaded by the user , wherein a unique identifier for both the public and the private content of each user includes a categorical symbol indicating whether content is the public content or the private content and the stored private content is accessible only to the user until the death of the user; creating, based on user input, a will that is stored to ensure that the will is accessible only to the user until the death of the user; querying the user for user input for one or more content preferences; and updating the content preferences based on the user input, wherein the private content stored is not accessible for viewing and the user defines options specifying how the stored private content is eventually distributed; monitoring or continuously searching for one or more death confirmations associated with one or more deceased users from a plurality of users; publishing the private content uploaded by the one or more deceased users after identifying the death confirmations corresponding to the one or more deceased users.”
The limitations, as drafted, are a process that, under its broadest reasonable interpretation, relates to managing personal behavior or relationships or interactions between people (i.e., A method for aggregating user content and presenting the user content upon satisfying one or more conditions, the method comprising: receiving account information from a user, the account information comprising at least identification information corresponding to the user; storing both public and private content uploaded by the user, wherein a unique identifier for both the public and the private content of each user includes a categorical symbol indicating whether content is the public content or the private content and the stored private content is accessible only to the user until the death of the user; creating, based on user input, a will that is stored to ensure that the will is accessible only to the user until the death of the user; querying the user for user input for one or more content preferences; and updating the content preferences based on the user input, wherein the private content stored is not accessible for viewing and the user defines options specifying how the stored private content is eventually distributed; monitoring or continuously searching for one or more death confirmations associated with one or more deceased users from a plurality of users; publishing the private content uploaded by the one or more deceased users after identifying the death confirmations corresponding to the one or more deceased users), but for the recitation of generic computer components (i.e., a non-transitory computer readable memory, a processor, a blockchain, one or more databases, and a platform). If a claim limitation, under its broadest reasonable interpretation, relates to managing personal behavior or relationships or interactions between people, but for the recitation of generic computer components, then it falls within the “Certain Methods of Organizing Human Activity” grouping of abstract ideas.
Accordingly, the claim recites an abstract idea.
Step 2A Prong 2
This judicial exception is not integrated into a practical application. Limitations that are not indicative of integration into a practical application include: (1) Adding the words “apply it” (or an equivalent) with the judicial exception, or mere instructions to implement an abstract idea on a computer, or merely uses a computer as a tool to perform an abstract idea (MPEP 2106.05(f)), (2) Adding insignificant extra-solution activity to the judicial exception (MPEP 2106.05(g)), (3) Generally linking the use of the judicial exception to a particular technological environment or field of use (MPEP 2106.05(h)). In particular, the claim recites the additional elements of a non-transitory computer readable memory, a processor, a blockchain, one or more databases, and a platform. The computer hardware is recited at a high level of generality (i.e., generic computer receiving, generating, and providing data, generic databases for retrieving data, and generic blockchain storing data) such that it amounts to no more than mere instructions to apply the exception using generic computer components. Accordingly, these additional elements, when considered separately and as an ordered combination, do not integrate the abstract idea into a practical application, since they do not involve improvements to the functioning of a computer or to any other technology or technical field (MPEP 2106.05(a)), they do not apply the abstract idea with, or by use of, a particular machine (MPEP 2106.05(b)), they do not effect a transformation or reduction of a particular article to a different state or thing (MPEP 2106.05(c)), and they do not apply or use the abstract idea in some other meaningful way beyond generally linking its use 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)). Therefore, the claim is directed to an abstract idea without a practical application.
Step 2B
The claim does not include additional elements that are sufficient to amount to significantly more than the judicial exception because, when considered separately and as an ordered combination, they do not add significantly more (also known as an “inventive concept”) to the exception. The additional elements of using computer hardware (a non-transitory computer readable memory, a processor, a blockchain, one or more databases, and a platform) amounts to no more than mere instructions to apply the exception using generic computer components. Mere instructions to apply an exception using generic computer components cannot provide an inventive concept. Therefore, the claim is not patent-eligible.
Dependent claims 2-6, 10-14, 16-17, and 19-20 do not include any additional elements beyond those identified above. They further define the abstract idea that is present in their respective independent claims and hence are abstract for at least the reasons presented above. As such, they do not integrate the abstract idea into a practical application, nor are they sufficient to amount to significantly more than the abstract idea when considered both individually and as an ordered combination.
Thus, the aforementioned claims are not patent-eligible.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
Claims 1-6, 9-16, and 19-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Nowell et al. (US-20150256608) in view of Schwartz (US-20210150622), Morales, JR. (US-20160306816), and Lam et al. (US-20200052903).
Claim 1 (and Similarly Claims 9 and 15)
Nowell teaches the following limitations:
A method for aggregating user content and presenting the user content upon satisfying one or more conditions ([0011] a user generates a profile, adds content such as images, videos and text to the profile, and then gives complete access including altering capabilities to another user as a gift to that user. In some embodiments, the other user is given access upon detecting an event such as the death of the creator of the profile. Similar to a will, a beneficiary (or beneficiaries) of a profile is able to be designated. For example, upon determining that the creator has passed away, the beneficiary is given access to the profile (and does not have access before)) implemented on a non-transitory computer readable memory, the method comprising, executing on a processor ([0028] the multimedia content sharing applications 430 are programmed in a memory and executed using a processor):
receiving account information from a user, the account information comprising at least identification information corresponding to the user ([0031] In the step 500, a multimedia content sharing profile is generated and populated. In some embodiments, instead of or in addition to generating a multimedia content sharing profile, a legacy profile is generated. Generating the multimedia content sharing profile is performed in any manner such as a user inputting in personal information (e.g., name, address, other profile information));
storing… private content uploaded by the user… wherein… the stored private content is accessible only to the user until the death of the user ([0011] the other user is given access upon detecting an event such as the death of the creator of the profile. Similar to a will, a beneficiary (or beneficiaries) of a profile is able to be designated. For example, upon determining that the creator has passed away, the beneficiary is given access to the profile (and does not have access before));
querying the user for user input for one or more content preferences ([0011] the creator is able to specify the amount of access (e.g., full, limited) which determines the capabilities of the beneficiary); and
updating the content preferences based on the user input ([0011] the creator is able to specify the amount of access (e.g., full, limited) which determines the capabilities of the beneficiary. In some embodiments, different beneficiaries are able to be given different levels of access (e.g., main beneficiary has full access including editing capabilities, but other beneficiaries have limited access such as viewing capabilities). Beneficiaries are able to be designated for any type of profile such as a multimedia content sharing profile or a legacy profile. In some embodiments, a profile is an archive or includes an archive. A profile is a private, password protected, internet storage module in which a user (creator) is able to place multimedia content (pictures, videos, written journals, stories, music, family trees and others) with the intention of generating the profile as a gift to be shared with one or more recipients. The recipient may or may not be able to alter the profile depending on the creator's choice), wherein the private content stored… is not accessible for viewing ([0011] the other user is given access upon detecting an event such as the death of the creator of the profile. Similar to a will, a beneficiary (or beneficiaries) of a profile is able to be designated. For example, upon determining that the creator has passed away, the beneficiary is given access to the profile (and does not have access before). In some embodiments, the creator is able to specify the amount of access (e.g., full, limited) which determines the capabilities of the beneficiary. In some embodiments, different beneficiaries are able to be given different levels of access (e.g., main beneficiary has full access including editing capabilities, but other beneficiaries have limited access such as viewing capabilities)) and the user defines options specifying how the stored private content is eventually distributed ([0011] the creator is able to specify the amount of access (e.g., full, limited) which determines the capabilities of the beneficiary. In some embodiments, different beneficiaries are able to be given different levels of access (e.g., main beneficiary has full access including editing capabilities, but other beneficiaries have limited access such as viewing capabilities). Beneficiaries are able to be designated for any type of profile such as a multimedia content sharing profile or a legacy profile. In some embodiments, a profile is an archive or includes an archive. A profile is a private, password protected, internet storage module in which a user (creator) is able to place multimedia content (pictures, videos, written journals, stories, music, family trees and others) with the intention of generating the profile as a gift to be shared with one or more recipients. The recipient may or may not be able to alter the profile depending on the creator's choice);
monitoring or continuously searching one or more databases for one or more death confirmations associated with one or more deceased users from a plurality of users ([0017] Determining access and living/deceased status are able to be performed in any manner such as by searching source information social security databases, social networking status updates, and/or any other information);
publishing, to a platform, the private content uploaded by the one or more deceased users after identifying the death confirmations corresponding to the one or more deceased users ([0011] the other user is given access upon detecting an event such as the death of the creator of the profile. Similar to a will, a beneficiary (or beneficiaries) of a profile is able to be designated. For example, upon determining that the creator has passed away, the beneficiary is given access to the profile (and does not have access before). In some embodiments, the creator is able to specify the amount of access (e.g., full, limited) which determines the capabilities of the beneficiary. In some embodiments, different beneficiaries are able to be given different levels of access (e.g., main beneficiary has full access including editing capabilities, but other beneficiaries have limited access such as viewing capabilities)).
However, Nowell does not explicitly teach the following limitations:
storing both public and private content… in a blockchain,
a unique identifier for both the public and the private content of each user includes a categorical symbol indicating whether content is the public content or the private content and
creating, based on user input, a will that is stored in the blockchain, wherein the blockchain is configured to ensure that the will is accessible only to the user until the death of the user;
[private content stored] in the blockchain [is not accessible]
Schwartz, in the same field of endeavor, teaches the following limitations:
storing both public and private content… in a blockchain ([0050] a user creates an account 310 within the system. The user is a person creating a trust. During the account creation process, the user specifies a plan 312, identifies one or more plan controllers 314, specifies one or more accounts 315 to be accessed, identifies one or more advisors 316, and identifies one or more recipients 318. During this process, the system creates a block for the blockchain for this transaction 319. The user can also designates whether any of the identified accounts are, or will be, associated with the trust 317. The plan controller 314 is a trust administrator responsible for performing duties associated with disposing of an estate for the user once the user is deceased; [0054] the plan and distribution details are finalized and the plan controller executes the contract 342. The plan controller can have limited or restricted permissions. Permissions for the plan controller can be set to change upon the occurrence of one or more defined events (e.g., incapacity or death of the user); [0055] In FIG. 3B, a process of the user identifying recipients 318 is provided in further detail. Once one or more recipients are identified by the user in the trust distribution system, the user specifies an amount for each recipient 350. A notification can be sent to each recipient at the time the user creates the trust, or upon the occurrence of a qualifying event, indicating that they are identified in the trust distribution system and requesting the recipient confirm contact details; [0031] The blockchain systems 50, and the components therein, may be one or more private blockchains, one or more public blockchains, and/or one or more hybrid blockchains; [0047] In various aspects, the event, or information for the event, is stored and executed from one or more systems and is not placed on the public blockchain itself, and instead is located on a private portion of the blockchain. In some aspects, the event, or information for the event, is only stored and executed from a subset of the nodes of the blockchain, which, in some aspects, are synonymous with validator nodes and in other aspects are not synonymous with the validator nodes. In some aspects, placeholder(s) for the event (e.g., resource transfers, or the like) indicating that the event exists and/or a description of the event, is accessible from private blockchains and may be placed on the public blockchain. The placeholder(s) may be identifiers (e.g., characters, or the like) and/or a description of the event. In some cases, the event may be executed only by the designated one or more systems (e.g., on the private blockchain, or on a private portion of a blockchain). Such systems may utilize a key or other security mechanism(s) in order to ensure only certain nodes are allowed access to the information related to the private blockchain portion. In some cases, this configuration may result in additional security instead of placing the event on the public blockchain for any node to execute),
private content stored in the blockchain is not accessible ([0054] the plan and distribution details are finalized and the plan controller executes the contract 342. The plan controller can have limited or restricted permissions. Permissions for the plan controller can be set to change upon the occurrence of one or more defined events (e.g., incapacity or death of the user); [0031] The blockchain systems 50, and the components therein, may be one or more private blockchains, one or more public blockchains, and/or one or more hybrid blockchains; [0047] In some cases, the event may be executed only by the designated one or more systems (e.g., on the private blockchain, or on a private portion of a blockchain). Such systems may utilize a key or other security mechanism(s) in order to ensure only certain nodes are allowed access to the information related to the private blockchain portion);
creating, based on user input, a [will] that is stored in the blockchain, wherein the blockchain is configured to ensure that the [will] is accessible only to the user until the death of the user ([0050] The plan controller 314 is a trust administrator responsible for performing duties associated with disposing of an estate for the user once the user is deceased; [0054] the plan and distribution details are finalized and the plan controller executes the contract 342. The plan controller can have limited or restricted permissions. Permissions for the plan controller can be set to change upon the occurrence of one or more defined events (e.g., incapacity or death of the user); [0048] FIG. 2 illustrates an exemplar flow of information from a donor 200 (e.g., the person or user establishing a trust) and a trust 220. The donor 200 creates the trust and transfers initial assets 230 (e.g., cash and real property) to the trust. A letter of wishes is provided to the trustee 210. The trust owns the assets 230. Where cash or stocks are involved, an investment company 240 can hold the assets 230 for the trust. Upon occurrence of an event, the trust 220 distributes assets 230 from the trust 220 to the beneficiaries 250 (or recipients) of the trust; [0031] The blockchain systems 50, and the components therein, may be one or more private blockchains, one or more public blockchains, and/or one or more hybrid blockchains; [0047] In some cases, the event may be executed only by the designated one or more systems (e.g., on the private blockchain, or on a private portion of a blockchain). Such systems may utilize a key or other security mechanism(s) in order to ensure only certain nodes are allowed access to the information related to the private blockchain portion);
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, to have modified the legacy system of Nowell with the limitations taught by Schwartz. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to make this modification for the benefit of transparency and immutability (Schwartz – [0029]), ensuring accurate mapping and validation of event information, and providing a secured network over which information may be validated (Schwartz – [0036]).
However, Nowell, in combination with Schwartz, does not explicitly teach the following limitations:
a unique identifier for both the public and the private content of each user includes a categorical symbol indicating whether content is the public content or the private content and
creating… a will… the will is accessible only to the user until the death of the user;
Morales, JR., in the same field of endeavor, teaches the following limitations:
a unique identifier for both the public and the private content of each user includes a categorical symbol indicating whether content is the public content or the private content ([0023] In the detailed mode, the exemplary user interface displays the one or more posts in a table with rows corresponding to the posts. Each row in the exemplary interface has one or more columns for displaying one or more features of its corresponding post. In an embodiment, features of a post may include the post's author, title, size, tag(s), category(ies), comment(s), date posted, whether there is at least one attachment, the privacy setting such as whether it is public or private and/or who else can view it, and so forth. Features may be displayed by texts, graphics, or both. For instance, in a preferred embodiment where the title of a post is shown in text and whether the post is public or private is indicated by an icon, the author of the post is shown by an image next to the author's system ID) and
This known technique is applicable to the system of Nowell, in combination with Schwartz, as they both share characteristics and capabilities, namely, they are directed to sharing content online. One of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, would have recognized that applying the known technique of Morales, JR. would have yielded predictable results and resulted in an improved system. It would have been recognized that applying the technique of Morales, JR. to the teachings of Nowell, in combination with Schwartz, would have yielded predictable results because the level of one of ordinary skill in the art would have known to incorporate such features (i.e., a symbol identifying a certain type of content) into similar systems.
However, Nowell, in combination with Schwartz and Morales, JR., does not explicitly teach the following limitations:
creating… a will… the will is accessible only to the user until the death of the user;
Lam, in the same field of endeavor, teaches the following limitations:
creating, based on user input, a will that is stored… the will is accessible only to the user until the death of the user ([0052] In response to a successful authentication of the identity of user 101, executed commitment engine 108 may perform operations that generate and present, within the digital interface, additional interface elements that prompt user 101 to provide input data, e.g., user input 202, that identifies and characterizes a testamentary instrument, such as a will, drafted on behalf of and executed user 101. By way of example, the testamentary instrument may include information that identifies and characterizes one or more assets held by user 101; [0162] the data exchange may facilitate a distribution of assets in accordance with a testamentary instrument (e.g., a will) generated by, or one behalf of, a user that operates client device 102, e.g., user 101; [0126] In response to a detected occurrence of a triggering event associated with user 101's testamentary instrument, such as user 101's death, user 121 may provide input to client device 122, e.g., via a corresponding input unit, that triggers an execution of one or more locally maintained application programs, which generate and present a corresponding digital interface, e.g., on a corresponding display unit. Based on the presented digital interface, user 121 may provide additional input to client device 122 that specifies user 101, identifies the occurrence of the triggering event (e.g., user 101's death), and identifies one or more locally maintained digital copies of documents capable of verifying the occurrence of the triggering event (e.g., a digital copy of a death certificate, a digital copy of a probate order issued by a court or governmental entity of competent jurisdiction, etc.));
Lam shows that a will was known in the prior art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention. Since each individual element and its function are shown in the prior art, albeit shown in separate references, the difference between the claimed subject matter and the prior art rests not on any individual element or function, but in the very combination itself; that is, in the substitution of the will of Lam for the trust of Schwartz. Thus, the simple substitution of one known element for another producing a predictable result renders the claim obvious.
Claim 2
Nowell further teaches the following limitations:
further comprising: receiving additional content ([0019] The legacy profile includes many features such as password protected, able to be added to day after day and year after year); and
However, Nowell does not explicitly teach the following limitations:
storing the additional content in the blockchain.
Schwartz, in the same field of endeavor, teaches the following limitations:
storing the additional content in the blockchain ([0006] receiving a request to create a trust from a requestor; creating a trust blockchain; obtaining recipient information from the requestor; appending the recipient information to a trust blockchain; obtaining one or more trust source information from the requestor; appending the one or more trust source information to the trust blockchain; obtaining an advisor information from the requestor; appending the advisor information to the trust blockchain; generating the trust wherein the trust comprises a control logic configured to control access to the trust based on obtaining verification of a condition for trust and the control logic is executed using the hardware processor configured to receive a first instruction to administer the trust; and appending the trust to the trust blockchain).
This known technique is applicable to the system of Nowell as they both share characteristics and capabilities, namely, they are directed to the initiation of sharing a user’s data subsequent to the death of the user. One of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, would have recognized that applying the known technique of Schwartz would have yielded predictable results and resulted in an improved system. It would have been recognized that applying the technique of Schwartz to the teachings of Nowell would have yielded predictable results because the level of one of ordinary skill in the art would have known to incorporate such features (i.e., storing additional content in a blockchain that already includes content) into similar systems. Further, adding such a feature to Nowell would have been recognized by those of ordinary skill in the art as resulting in an improved system that would allow a user to modify, or add, post-death-related documents in a secure manner, thus providing a user-friendly and comprehensive platform.
Claim 3
Nowell further teaches the following limitations:
wherein the identification information comprises at least a name, date of birth, and an identifier unique to the user ([0031] In the step 500, a multimedia content sharing profile is generated and populated. In some embodiments, instead of or in addition to generating a multimedia content sharing profile, a legacy profile is generated. Generating the multimedia content sharing profile is performed in any manner such as a user inputting in personal information (e.g., name, address, other profile information); [0033] In the step 504, a user generates a PR code. The user generates the PR code by selecting an image (e.g., taking a picture of him/herself), and providing the image to a PR code generator; [0034] information (e.g., telephone number, ID number, social security number) about a user accessing the content is also analyzed/compared when the PR code is analyzed).
Claim 4
Nowell further teaches the following limitations:
wherein the identifier unique to the user is a Social Security number and the method further comprises: constantly monitoring and searching an external database for the Social Security number of the user ([0017] Determining access and living/deceased status are able to be performed in any manner such as by searching source information social security databases); and
confirming the death of the user by locating the Social Security number on the external database ([0017] Determining access and living/deceased status are able to be performed in any manner such as by searching source information social security databases).
Claim 5
Nowell further teaches the following limitations:
wherein the content preferences comprise a list of intended recipients, a publication time after death, and a public access level ([0011] a user generates a profile, adds content such as images, videos and text to the profile, and then gives complete access including altering capabilities to another user as a gift to that user. In some embodiments, the other user is given access upon detecting an event such as the death of the creator of the profile. Similar to a will, a beneficiary (or beneficiaries) of a profile is able to be designated. For example, upon determining that the creator has passed away, the beneficiary is given access to the profile (and does not have access before). In some embodiments, the creator is able to specify the amount of access (e.g., full, limited) which determines the capabilities of the beneficiary. In some embodiments, different beneficiaries are able to be given different levels of access (e.g., main beneficiary has full access including editing capabilities, but other beneficiaries have limited access such as viewing capabilities)).
Claim 6
Nowell further teaches the following limitations:
wherein the user content comprises a video created by the user ([0011] A profile is a private, password protected, internet storage module in which a user (creator) is able to place multimedia content (pictures, videos, written journals, stories, music, family trees and others) with the intention of generating the profile as a gift to be shared with one or more recipients).
Claim 10
Nowell further teaches the following limitations:
further comprising: identifying a location associated with a plurality of location-tracked users from the plurality of users, associating the corresponding user content with the location, and presenting the user content based on the location of the plurality of location-tracked users ([0022] Footprints is an application that allows the user to tag photos and videos by location and date, onto a global map using exact map coordinates (Geo-Placement map). The Geo-tagged photos are able to be added to a legacy profile or a multimedia content shared profile and viewed as either the media itself or as a pin on a globe. The viewer of the Geo-tagged photos is able to revisit the exact spot of their ancestors, standing in their "footprints"; [0035] Each time a user takes, uploads, scans or shares photos, videos, text entry with the Footprints mobile application, the content selected is placed as a pin onto a spinning 3D world globe (or other map/graphical representation) based on the exact coordinates of the content. The coordinates are able to be determined by GPS or any other coordinate determination system. In some embodiments, the device generating the content (e.g., camera taking a photo) generates the coordinates and time/date information automatically. A small icon of the photo, coordinates of the photo, video, or text entry, time, date and a creator-generated heading appear when the user's cursor is dragged over each pin. The user/creator or a viewer is able to zoom in on the globe enabling the user to easily see each individual pin and its description).
Claim 11
Nowell further teaches the following limitations:
further comprising: an ancestry log, wherein user content is uploaded to the ancestry log and organized based on one or more familial relationships between users ([0036] The private social media network enables the user to submit posts in forums of family members and friends... The user is able to generate the forums so that the posts the user is sharing are appropriate for each group of relatives/friends).
Claim 12
Nowell further teaches the following limitations:
wherein the platform is publicly accessible ([0021] The user decides what in their legacy profile is able to be viewed publicly with the PR code; [0025] The PR code is able to be physically generated and placed anywhere such as on a tombstone, a plaque on a tree, a park bench, a memorial pathway or anywhere. The physical PR code is able to be made of any material such as metal, glass, plastic, ceramic, stone, paper, plastic, wood, cards, brochures, magazines, other materials applicable to the type of environment the PR code will be placed, or a combination thereof. For example, a pixelated picture is printed on a metal plate and a coded frame also made of metal are joined (e.g., welded together), and are embedded within a tombstone. The picture and coded frame (although made of metal) are able to be scanned using a reader app on a device which provides access to the online profile).
Claim 13
Nowell further teaches the following limitations:
wherein the platform is only accessible to one or more recipients identified by the user in the content preferences ([0011] the creator is able to specify the amount of access (e.g., full, limited) which determines the capabilities of the beneficiary. In some embodiments, different beneficiaries are able to be given different levels of access (e.g., main beneficiary has full access including editing capabilities, but other beneficiaries have limited access such as viewing capabilities). Beneficiaries are able to be designated for any type of profile such as a multimedia content sharing profile or a legacy profile).
Claim 14
Nowell further teaches the following limitations:
further comprising removing the published user content after a predetermined period of time ([0017] a legacy profile implementation is specifically configured to remain active after a user's passing such that their friends, relatives, and/or other specified users are still able to access their profile. In some embodiments, a user is able to select which users are able to access the profile, and as long as those users are living, the account remains active (e.g., periodically, information about the listed users is checked to determine their living/deceased status)).
Claim 16
Nowell further teaches the following limitations:
wherein after the publishing module publishes the user content, the system is further configured to send an electronic message to one or more clients comprising the published user content and/or a link to the published user content ([0032] In the step 502, the multimedia content sharing profile is shared to other users and interacted with. Sharing is able to be implemented in any manner such as by sending an email or social networking message with access information to the multimedia content sharing profile, so that other users are able to view and/or interact with the content stored in the multimedia content sharing profile).
Claim 19
Nowell further teaches the following limitations:
wherein the creation module is further configured to create a video ([0013] Users are able to perform daily written journaling, video journaling).
Claim 20
Nowell further teaches the following limitations:
wherein the browsing module is further configured to display user content from the publishing module based on location of the user or based on text within the user content ([0022] Footprints is an application that allows the user to tag photos and videos by location and date, onto a global map using exact map coordinates (Geo-Placement map). The Geo-tagged photos are able to be added to a legacy profile or a multimedia content shared profile and viewed as either the media itself or as a pin on a globe. The viewer of the Geo-tagged photos is able to revisit the exact spot of their ancestors, standing in their "footprints").
Claim 17 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Nowell et al. (US-20150256608) in view of Schwartz (US-20210150622), Morales, JR. (US-20160306816), and Lam et al. (US-20200052903), and further in view of Esparza (US-20160335456).
Claim 17
Nowell, in combination with Schwartz, Morales, JR., and Lam, does not explicitly disclose the following limitations:
wherein the creation module further comprises: a plurality of tutorial videos and instructions for creating user content.
Esparza, in the same field of endeavor, teaches the following limitations:
wherein the creation module further comprises: a plurality of tutorial videos and instructions for creating user content ([0109] 23. Tutorial: When a user clicks on this toolbar he or she will be able to open a new window that will give the user the option to pick from a variety different tutorial videos or instructions on how to use and navigate on our site).
This known technique is applicable to the system of Nowell, in combination with Schwartz, Morales, JR., and Lam, as they all share characteristics and capabilities, namely, they are directed to the initiation of sharing a user’s data subsequent to the death of the user. One of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention, would have recognized that applying the known technique of Esparza would have yielded predictable results and resulted in an improved system. It would have been recognized that applying the technique of Esparza to the teachings of Nowell, in combination with Schwartz, Morales, JR., and Lam, would have yielded predictable results because the level of one of ordinary skill in the art would have known to incorporate such features (i.e., tutorial videos for using an online platform) into similar systems. Further, adding such a feature to Nowell, in combination with Schwartz, Morales, JR., and Lam, would have been recognized by those of ordinary skill in the art as resulting in an improved system that would allow a user to easily and quickly navigate and utilize an online platform, thus saving the user time and effort.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s Argument Regarding 35 USC 101 Rejection of Claims 1-6, 9-17, and 19-20:
Claim 1 recites: "storing both public and private content uploaded by the user in a blockchain, wherein a unique identifier for both the public and the private content of each user includes a categorical symbol indicating whether content is the public content or the private content and the stored private content is accessible only to the user until the death of the user" (emphasis added). Similar subject matter appears in claims 9 and 15. In the Specification, paragraphs [0013], [0016], [0020], and [0021] for example provide support. Contrary to the Examiner's allegations, no relationships between people are claimed because the content is accessible only to the user. The public content is displayed on the platform, so it also does not involve managing a personal relationship.
On page 4, the final Office Action alleged that this subject matter relates to "to managing personal behavior or relationships or interactions between people." In response, the broadest reasonable interpretation of this claim language cannot cover interactions between people. As emphasized above, the content is accessible only to the user, so storing content cannot be viewed as either managing personal behavior or relationships or interactions between people. Similarly, the querying step is necessarily an interaction between the user and the computer system. Publication of the content after the user's death, as described below, is related to the practical application of the claimed subject matter.
On page 26, the Examiner further alleged the steps are "clearly managing both personal behavior as well as interactions between people." In response, "inputting content preferences and uploading content" cannot be regarded as "managing personal behavior." Instead, this subject matter involves interaction between a user and a computer system.
The Examiner further alleged that "deciding how the content will be distributed to other users, even if it's after the death of the user, is directed to managing interactions between people." In response, the claims are directed to "publishing, to a platform." The recited platform is part of a computer system.
As set forth in M.P.E.P. § 2106.05(a)-II, consideration of improvements is relevant to the eligibility analysis regardless of the technology of the claimed invention. Here, the claimed blockchain ensures that the content remains inaccessible until release upon the death of a user or a person whom the content is tailored. See paragraph [0013]. Hence, the claims are directed to the practical application of improved security of the content on the blockchain.
On page 27, the Examiner alleged that "this is what [sic] blockchain is supposed to do." In response, the Examiner has not established that blockchains provide security in the claimed context, which is achieving the practical application of improved security on the computer system.
Examiner’s Response: Applicant’s arguments have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
The storing of both public and private content by a user, wherein a unique identifier for both the public and the private content of each user includes a categorical symbol indicating whether content is the public content or the private content and the stored private content is accessible only to the user until the death of the user, are steps that are directed to the abstract idea, and they do fall within the Certain Methods of Organizing Human Activity grouping of abstract ideas, and within the managing personal behavior or relationships or interactions between people subgrouping. In simple terms, a user is uploading content to be stored, and labeling content indicating whether it’s private or public content, and keeping private content inaccessible to others until the user’s death. This is reciting steps that are clearly managing both personal behavior as well as interactions between people; a user uploading content to be stored is directed to managing personal behavior, and deciding how the content will be distributed to other users, even if it’s after the death of the user, is directed to managing interactions between people. The public content being displayed also falls under the abstract idea, where in simple terms, a user is providing public content to other users. The blockchain and the platform are recited in a generic manner, used as tools to implement the abstract idea.
Regarding the querying step, a user inputting content preferences is part of the abstract idea, and the computer is used as a mere tool to implement the abstract idea. The publication of the content after the user’s death is also part of the abstract idea, and again, the computer and platform are used as tools to implement the abstract idea. The claims do not provide any improvements to the functioning of the computer itself, nor do they provide any technical improvements in blockchain technology or any other technology, and thus, the abstract idea is not integrated into a practical application.
The recited blockchain in the claims is used in its ordinary capacity, and further, the blockchain ensuring that the content remains inaccessible until release upon the death of a user, and the “improved security of the content on the blockchain” is a recitation of an improvement to the abstract idea itself, and is not a recitation of any technical improvement to blockchain technology itself, and thus, it does not integrate the abstract idea into a practical application.
Applicant’s Argument Regarding 35 USC 103 Rejections of Claims 1-6, 9-17, and 19-20:
Schwartz does not disclose a will. Instead, paragraph [0049] of Schwartz refers to a variety of trusts, such as revocable and irrevocable trusts. Such trusts are not equivalent to wills. Hence, the examiner's rejection has unreasonably broadened the scope of dependent claim 18. The Examiner's interpretation of the claim language is overly broad and inconsistent with the interpretation that those having ordinary skill in the art would reach.
The Examiner subsequently cited Lam and relied upon "the substitution of the will of Lam for the trust of Schwartz." However, Lam requires the use of a distributed ledger with a homomorphic commitment scheme, such as a homomorphic Pedersen commitment. See paragraph [0026] of Lam. This scheme requires the use of digitally signed transaction data, thereby allowing computation on the committed values without revealing the original values themselves. Hence, Lam teaches away from the claimed use of blockchain technology which does not rely upon a homomorphic commitment scheme. In particular, Lam teaches away from a unique identifier for both the public and the private content of each user includes a categorical symbol indicating whether content is the public content or the private content because Lam relies upon the homomorphic commitment scheme instead of the recited mixture of public and private content. All of Lam's material is private due to the concealment of the committed values.
Examiner’s Response: Applicant’s arguments have been considered but they are not persuasive.
Though Schwartz does teach a will under broadest reasonable interpretation, as clearly explained in the response to arguments in the previous office action, Lam was relied upon to teach a will. Further, Lam was not relied upon to teach a distributed ledger or a blockchain, it was only relied upon to teach a will as a simple substitution for the “trust” of Schwartz, and again, though Schwartz does reasonably teach a will, Examiner used Lam, as a simple substitution, for clarity, to teach the will. Thus, Lam does not teach away from the claims.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon, considered pertinent to applicant’s disclosure or directed to the state of art, is listed on the enclosed PTO-892.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to KARMA EL-CHANTI whose telephone number is (571)272-3404. The examiner can normally be reached T-Sa 10am-6pm ET.
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, Sarah Monfeldt can be reached at (571)270-1833. 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.
/KARMA A EL-CHANTI/Examiner, Art Unit 3629 /SARAH M MONFELDT/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3629